3/6 stat after 30k hands

[rzk]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm no statician and don't no anything about standard deviation but if I had this WR after 30K hands that wouldn't comfort me. I think it's more likely that OP needs to improve his game that lean back and hope that it's just a bad run.

[/ QUOTE ]

it's both. nobody would ever suggest him to "lean back".

[ QUOTE ]
I can't be sure that he folds to much postflop, but there is a possibility. I don't know what W@aSD figures good 35% WtSD players have but it must be at least 55% I guess? The low WtSD approach is hard since you have to make a lot of good folds to make up for one bad fold. I have 41 WtSD BTW...

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm not sure either, but from the few players in my DB who have that wtsd 20k+ i think it's less than 55%. i would guess that with the OP's wtsd almost 36% his w$sd is about right (especially considering the uncertainty in this limited sample).

with your wtsd=41, what's your w$sd? actually it would be pretty cool if more good players posted their wtsd/w$sd numbers after at least 100k hands so we can figure out what the relationship between these two numbers is.

[Gurravasa]

[ QUOTE ]
with your wtsd=41, what's your w$sd?

[/ QUOTE ]

51.5%

[rzk]

is that filtered for 5-6 handed? that's pretty impressive i think, though it could depend on the site you play. in my ftp database none of the tags with 20k+ hands have wtsd above 38.i have two decent tags with wtsd 37 (37.2 and 37.4), one of them has w$sd 50.8, the other has 49.7.

[Gurravasa]

[ QUOTE ]
is that filtered for 5-6 handed? that's pretty impressive i think, though it could depend on the site you play. in my ftp database none of the tags with 20k+ hands have wtsd above 38.i have two decent tags with wtsd 37 (37.2 and 37.4), one of them has w$sd 50.8, the other has 49.7.

[/ QUOTE ] yeah only 5-6 handed hands

[MitchL]

Over 130K hands I am 36.4 wtsd and 51.5 W$@sd w/ a wr of 1.7bb/100. I am also 34/24, so go figure. My stats are just a little different than his, but my wr is demonstrably different.

His sample is kind of small, but if I were to give advice I would say that if he hasnt been playing too long he probably lacks hand reading experience, in which case his wtsd should be higher and he should probably be playing a little tighter pf. I will also say that I have like a 40k breakeven swing in that sample and have heard of alot worse.

[admiralfluff]

This might be true [ QUOTE ]
so it's quite possible to be a 1bb/100+ winner and still run as bad as the OP.


[/ QUOTE ], but this [ QUOTE ]
the standard deviation in the winrate after 30k hands is around 1bb/100

[/ QUOTE ] is way off. stdev/100 should be around 20, so you can do the math from there.

It's hard to guess from stats alone, but likely places to look:

-you're folding too much in steal situations.

-you're table selection is poor. Rake contribution at 3/6 is huge. If you took a standard profitable lineup at 30/60 and moved it to a 3/6 table, there's a good chance you wouldn't be beating the rake. It's not enough to simply be better then your opponents, you have to be much better.

[Sidomija]

[ QUOTE ]
Rakeback is excluded right? So all in all u still made a profit, didnt u?

[/ QUOTE ]

With bonuses and rakeback I have about +2,5BB/100 and -0,89BB/100 with playing! So overall it is about +1,6BB/100

[rzk]

[ QUOTE ]
but this [ QUOTE ]
the standard deviation in the winrate after 30k hands is around 1bb/100

[/ QUOTE ] is way off. stdev/100 should be around 20, so you can do the math from there.


[/ QUOTE ]

you misunderstood. stdev of winrate/100hands is around 15-16bb/100hands for a 100 hand sample, which translates to about 1bb/100hands for a 30k sample.

[6471849653]

So, the 50% W$SD looks like the aim? Though I don't understand it as mine has been between 50 and 60 since 0.5-1 and the 0.5 (and half of my 1-2) games were loose games. My other number has similarly been about 35% (at 5 and 6 max).

It might look to me like the W$SD would be enough and easier as it looks like more balanced.

When playing heads up the numbers can be different (and they can be the same as when playing shorthanded but one is then in heads up games doing stuff like raising every pair and draw), e.g. one might get like 50% from both numbers, or vs. a passive opponent one won't need to see the SD more often than some 40% of the time.

But it seems that the W$SD might still have the aim at the 50%, no matter if it's a 6-max or a heads up game. Though it looks like around the 55% is the more usual one but it doesn't mean it's the right one, and the way one plays has some (minor) effect to that number, though mainly to the other number.

If the W$SD is under the 50% one should maybe fold more, or maybe raise more/less (depending of what one has), and if it's over the 50% one might be folding too much, or maybe one is not being passive/aggressive enough.

[rzk]

[ QUOTE ]
So, the 50% W$SD looks like the aim?

[/ QUOTE ]

i seriously doubt that.