Re: Every [censored] time
 

[ QUOTE ]
I just pulled up some tables and examined agg. freq. vs AF + WTSD and after 100 hands they actually seem to agree most of the time. If someone has a low aggression factor (say 0.5), they tend to have agg. freq. around 20. If someone is 60/2/1.4/40 or 25/18/1.8/32, they tend to have agg. freq. around 45, which makes sense. If someone is 23/21/2.75/50, they have an agg. freq. around 65. So, aggression factor seems to do a good job of predicting the aggressiveness of a player, but you need to have it in the context of the other numbers, whereas agg. freq. seems to sum it all up nicely in one number.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ya I am experiencing the same.

Altho it does seem like the Agg freq depends on VPIP. Which makes sense. If your vpip is 0.5% because you only play AA then your agg freq should increase as you are betting or raising almost every postflop street you play.


It does seem as if 22/19 TAGs have agg freq around 60. LAGTAGs around 50-55 and LAGs around 50.


I am gonna start using this stat instead. It does a better job describing the aggroness and it converges faster.

Re: Every [censored] time
 

50-55 seems to be the number for decent players and you're right, 60 and above seems to be the number for spewy players. The street-by-street agg. freq. is nice as well. I noticed one guy with a turn agg. freq. of 70%. That could be very useful. It would be nice to profile some different players based on this stat. though. Here's an example:

36.9/25.6/44.29 over 160 hands. That low agg. freq., but overaggressive pre-flop tells you right there that he is a showdown monkey and probably reasonable with his raises. So, he's actually more of a calling station post-flop and an action junkie pre-flop.

Re: Every [censored] time
 

[ QUOTE ]
I hate when threads degenerate into debates about interpretations of poker tracker stats. Basically my read is that villain is clearly on the passive side, my sample size is about 300-400 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then you should fold the turn.

Re: Every [censored] time
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I hate when threads degenerate into debates about interpretations of poker tracker stats. Basically my read is that villain is clearly on the passive side, my sample size is about 300-400 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then you should fold the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

My questions are basically
(1) do I have enough outs to peel and
(2) If I call the turn and the river is a blank i'll be getting ~10-1 to call, is that enough to pick off random retardation that he might have?