[Noam Chomsky]

[ QUOTE ]
maybe its not a problem. but its a fact that you are losing in them though. i dont see how that can ever be a good thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, I mean, intuitively it's not but when you really start thinking about the number of factors you need to consider to gain anything meaningful from the numbers you'll realize that it doesn't say all that much.

I play very tight from the blinds, hence, I'm losing like 5 pots that don't go to showdown every three orbits.

Double Eagle already posted about this and offered a reasonable filter to correct that data which makes a lot more sense than taking the data un-filtered. Your going to lose money in the blinds unless you're God over any reasonable sample and that seems to be what those numbers reflect as much as anything.

There are a ton of other factors too though having to do with style of play, table selection, opponents style of play and on and on.

Jman has had a ton of success. Watching his cr video though, he talks about how he tends to play more passive than lots of high stakes players, which presumably means inducing a lot of bets and making big calls a lot. This style, though obviously a successful one for him is one that will guarantee his 'green line' be well below the others.

Also, the laggier you play in general the more important small pots that don't show down will become. Nittier players rely on showing down the best hand a lot rather than slicing and dicing a bunch of smaller pots. There's so much more that needs to be looked at in conjunction with these graphs to make them meaningful.