What does this mean?

[ggbman]

Today at 30-60 my went to showdown was 41% and my w$@SD was 58%. I was still down money. Obviously those showdown numbers are good, so what can i infer from that, if anything?

[Enon]

You lost a lot of big pots and won a lot of smaller ones.

[ggbman]

Approximatley how many hands with decent showdown numbers can you have where your WR is significantly off where you can still attirbute to mostly to just losing more big pots than you should? Is there even a consensus about this?

[krishan]

also your W$WSF could by really low.

Krishan

[PokerBob]

you win small pots.

[Evan]

Other than winning small pots and losing big ones, you could have just played really tight. If you only play aces your WtSD and W@SD would be super high and you'd lose a ton of money.

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
Other than winning small pots and losing big ones, you could have just played really tight. If you only play aces your WtSD and W@SD would be super high and you'd lose a ton of money.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly right ... in terms of near term fluctuations the number of hands that you play is going to have a lot of influence.

[solidswede]

I would be very concerned with those # if you are still losing after 2,000 hands. I'm assuming this is 10handed.

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
Today at 30-60 my went to showdown was 41% and my w$@SD was 58%. I was still down money. Obviously those showdown numbers are good, so what can i infer from that, if anything?

[/ QUOTE ]

You may have been too passive postflop. Often times high wtsd stats come from not winning enough pots without a showdown, and given your high W$SD, you may have been checking/calling with the best hand too often.

[Jeff W]

[ QUOTE ]
What does this mean?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nada.