W$SF stat

[Mendacious]

I used to use this stat when I rated players then I decided to use total aggression instead because I thought it gave me a better indication of HOW a player plays, even though W$SF seems to me to be a good indicator of the strength of a player.

Out of curiousity, what do you think of this stat, and what is your number?

For reference, mine is 31.78

(full ring players only).

[niss]

I never put much value in this stat, as it does not reflect how well one plays post-flop. One can see a lot of flops (particularly in pot limit), not win $ a significant % of the time, and still be a pretty damn profitable player.

[EffenDolts]

Players who see a lot of flops with one-way hands and take backdoor draws are going to improve their W$SF percentage. They may stay too long are get quartered with lows fairly often. I think stronger players will fold post-flop with more speculative two-way hands that didn't hit the flop really hard. For example, A4K6 ds.

Also, like any low-frquency stat, it takes a long time to get a reasonable statistical uncertainty. If someone is taking 25% of flops and winning with 30%, this is only 75 events per 1000 hands. the std. dev. is still +/- 4% on the W$SF after 1000 observed hands.

Effen

[Mendacious]

Please clarify something. I assumed that W$SF meant actual profit-- as is the case with W$SD. If you get quartered for this stat, it counts as a minus not a plus.

Assuming that to be the case, I don't follow what you are saying about one-way hands improving your W$SF stat.

I agree that it takes a lot more hands then 1000 for these stats to really become reliable. This is why I was asking people for their self-stats, because peoples stats on themselves are much greater than 1000 hands.

I am still of the belief that this stat IS a relatively good indicator of ability.

My take on PL08 is that a high percentage of money is made on a few hands-- such as when you have the complete nuts and a fish calls you, or you get someone to shove with you and you come out on top. This is something that should even out amongst players who play "by the book". However these types of events occur sometimes once a session-- which means that the amount and frequency that a player wins while they are "treading water" so to speak a very is a very relevant difference between players, and something that contributes to table image which also impacts winrate.

[Mendacious]

Clearly a lot of styles work in PL08, so to a certain extent I agree with you, but I think a LAG player's W$SF will still be relatively hi because he will hammer so many people out of pots. The player who sees a lot of flops and is not winning with frequency is still, in my mind, contributing a lot of "dead money" and is not a player I fear-- irrespective of whether he can make a profit.

I think if a player is seeing a lot of flops and not taking down a relatively hi percentage of pots too, that he is also likely to be a predictable player whom I can easily fold to. This player is never going to make his money off of me unless I try to bluff him more than once in a hand, or disregard when he is showing strength.

[Phil153]

This statistic is absolutely worthless:

[Mendacious]

[ QUOTE ]
This statistic is absolutely worthless:



[/ QUOTE ]

This reply is worthless...

Only one of these samples has a sufficient number of hands to start to be meaningful, that is the 26k at the $25 tables, and the stat bears out exactly what I would expect, a reasonably tight player VPIP of 25 is not much of a threat at the easiest limits...probably is not very aggressive. Yes this player makes money, but he is no threat whatsoever.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
Only one of these samples has a sufficient number of hands to start to be meaningful, that is the 26k at the $25 tables

[/ QUOTE ]
So you're saying it's not useful for rating until you have at least 25K hands of data on the player?