6th Sense Rules for 6 handed

[CASSHERN]

- These rules are a first draft and do not factor in postflop aggression for now. This will be added in a future release
- For 6-handed tables
- Names will be improved over time as AF is added to the rules
- Please suggest changes in this post
- Version alpha 0.01

Feel free to suggest modifications or improvements in this post.

Rules are at : http://overcards.com/wiki/moin.cgi/6thSenseRules6Handed

[xGREGORx]

awesome - I was hoping we would get something going like this. I tried in the massive SS thread, but not much luck.

Are these for limit or NL? Or do we care?
Anybody more capable than I want to start a thread for NL full ring?

[CASSHERN]

Well, the longer thing is to do the "structure" of the rules ... each group and each conditions for each of them. Once we come up with a good one for SH, applying it to full ring will only be a matter of changing percentages.

I think it would be the exact same structure, only the % will change. The same will be true for higher limits. I'm not sure there are many players with a VPIP > 70% in NL400+ limits ...

For example, I defined "very tight" as 19% & - for the VPIP. If in full ring you decide it's 22%, you'll just need to change all instances of "19%". I think that could be done very easily with a seach and replace ...

- BTW, if my % are wrong, feel free to let me know.
- How can we add Agression to the rules ?! Should we give +1pts for passive players, 0 for "normal" and 0 for "agressive" players ?

[Dennisa]

[ QUOTE ]
awesome - I was hoping we would get something going like this. I tried in the massive SS thread, but not much luck.

Are these for limit or NL? Or do we care?
Anybody more capable than I want to start a thread for NL full ring?

[/ QUOTE ]
I certainly would like to help. Shall we start a discussion of numbers and fields to target. Bet the pot had a good discussion on pt numbers of fr nl games, but the article is almost 2 years old. I would imagine target numbers have changed since then.

[xGREGORx]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, the longer thing is to do the "structure" of the rules ... each group and each conditions for each of them. Once we come up with a good one for SH, applying it to full ring will only be a matter of changing percentages.

I think it would be the exact same structure, only the % will change. The same will be true for higher limits. I'm not sure there are many players with a VPIP > 70% in NL400+ limits ...

For example, I defined "very tight" as 19% & - for the VPIP. If in full ring you decide it's 22%, you'll just need to change all instances of "19%". I think that could be done very easily with a seach and replace ...

- BTW, if my % are wrong, feel free to let me know.
- How can we add Agression to the rules ?! Should we give +1pts for passive players, 0 for "normal" and 0 for "agressive" players ?

[/ QUOTE ]

sounds good - just change maybe some %'s later to adapt to FR. For aggression, did you mean -1 for aggressive players?

[xGREGORx]

don't know if this helps, but here are some NL FR autorate rules for PokerTracker found in the FAQ of the SSNL forum
http://www.spitflames.com/NLAutoRate.txt

[CASSHERN]

[ QUOTE ]
sounds good - just change maybe some %'s later to adapt to FR. For aggression, did you mean -1 for aggressive players?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know.Should aggressive player get a -1 ? They can be profitable as well if they are too agressive, I guess ?! Then again, what is "too" aggressive, vs just enough to be worth 0 points ...

I have no idea as how the scoring should work for the AF ,,, but an aggressive AF varies depending on the VPIP ...
http://overcards.com/art-AF.php

For each of my existing rules, should I come up with 3 subsets ;
Passive (+1)
Normally aggressive (0)
Too Aggressive (-1, or 0)

or maybe something like ;
Passive (+1)
Normally aggressive (0)
Aggressive but not too much (-1)
Ridiculously aggressive (+1)

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[xGREGORx]

I like the 4 subset idea myself - "too aggressive" villians can be profitable

[Dennisa]

I just did an analysis of FR NL25 players with over 200 hands. This is from a pt database I have over the last 3 months. I have 900 players with 200 hands or more. I divided the groups based on Standard Deviations from the bb/100 field. Here goes. I wish I could change to a fixed font....argh.

Avg BB/100 was 1.8 for the group of 900



Avg BB/ Att 2
St Devs Hands VPIP 100 PFR WSD W$sd AF to Steal Cnt
>3.0 ------ 256 28 71 6.8 33.17 63.7 1.56 9.1 5
2.0-3.0 ---- 270 27.1 51 7.7 25.67 58.9 2.41 12.9 20
1.0-2.0 ---- 337 21.2 30 5.2 23.30 59.8 2.56 12.4 100
0.5-1.0 ---- 366 20.8 17 4.8 21.12 57.8 2.62 11.4 117
0.0-0.5 ---- 467 17.9 6.6 4.1 19.59 57.3 2.57 10.2 202
-.5 -0.0 --- 446 18.0 -2.6 4.3 20.85 51.9 2.70 11.7 216
-1 - -.5 --- 390 20.4 -13 4.5 21.10 47.6 2.70 11.9 124
-2 - -1 ---- 283 25.8 -26 5.6 21.58 39.3 2.33 13.0 94
-3 - -2 ---- 263 38.4 -49 7.9 26.37 38.6 2.16 12.4 18
< - 3.0 ---- 247 53.0 -74 10.1 32.47 32.6 2.24 20.2 6

Averge for
group: 394 20.12 2.28 4.6 21.12 53.2 2.60 11.51 900

[CASSHERN]

nice ... cool.

>I divided the groups based on Standard Deviations from the bb/100 field

I'm not sure what you mean by that ?
Is "0.5-1.0" the BB/100 for the players included in that group ?