I am unsure what this means

bacats32 · #1 02-27-2007, 03:25 PM

Ok I have been doing really well lately playing in local tourney's in bars and such. But I have really been putting in my pracice in the micro's online. I believe it has helped alot. Here is what I don't understand. It shows I have (this is all in the green here) 65.58 bb/100 at the $.01/$.02 in my last 454 hands. I have a 78.52 bb/100 for only 162 hands. 11.11 bb/100 763 hands. Please if someone could tell me what that means. I normally play 1/2 nl live. or my typical buy in tournament is $40 with about 50ppl in it and do quite well. Could someone please tell me what my stats mean.

KurtSF · #2 02-27-2007, 04:29 PM

They mean mostly that you are running red hot.

They also might mean that you know your way around a poker table, but small-sample-size and all that.

bacats32 · #3 02-27-2007, 05:01 PM

I guess what I am really looking for is I know that they are small sample sizes but they are accurate for the most part. I do win alot live but live I don't have the software to tell me exactly what. I am also looking to see how this compares to the stakes I play live and with. If I am ready to commit to play more live or maybe even up online.

bacats32 · #4 02-27-2007, 05:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Ok I have been doing really well lately playing in local tourney's in bars and such. But I have really been putting in my pracice in the micro's online. I believe it has helped alot. Here is what I don't understand. It shows I have (this is all in the green here) 65.58 bb/100 at the $.01/$.02 in my last 454 hands. I have a 78.52 bb/100 for only 162 hands. 11.11 bb/100 763 hands. Please if someone could tell me what that means. I normally play 1/2 nl live. or my typical buy in tournament is $40 with about 50ppl in it and do quite well. Could someone please tell me what my stats mean.

[/ QUOTE ]
I guess I failed to mentioned that the others were the 78.52 was $.02/$.05 and the 11.11 was $.05/$.10 all no limit.

bernie · #5 02-27-2007, 05:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I guess what I am really looking for is I know that they are small sample sizes but they are accurate for the most part. I do win alot live but live I don't have the software to tell me exactly what. I am also looking to see how this compares to the stakes I play live and with. If I am ready to commit to play more live or maybe even up online.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why don't you just keep records live?

btw...Lil' bar tourneys are usually as crapshoots. The structures usually suck and you have very little time to actually play. I wouldn't really base any skill analysis on those.

Your stats, in regard to the whole almost 1000 hands(if I read that right) doesn't mean hardly anything.

b

bacats32 · #6 02-27-2007, 06:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I guess what I am really looking for is I know that they are small sample sizes but they are accurate for the most part. I do win alot live but live I don't have the software to tell me exactly what. I am also looking to see how this compares to the stakes I play live and with. If I am ready to commit to play more live or maybe even up online.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why don't you just keep records live?

btw...Lil' bar tourneys are usually as crapshoots. The structures usually suck and you have very little time to actually play. I wouldn't really base any skill analysis on those.

Your stats, in regard to the whole almost 1000 hands(if I read that right) doesn't mean hardly anything.

b

[/ QUOTE ]

well this particular one I play in doesnt suck the structure is pretty nice. half hour blinds 3000 to start 25 50 blinds to start. I have been there 5 times cashed twice final tables one other.

bernie · #7 02-27-2007, 06:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I guess what I am really looking for is I know that they are small sample sizes but they are accurate for the most part. I do win alot live but live I don't have the software to tell me exactly what. I am also looking to see how this compares to the stakes I play live and with. If I am ready to commit to play more live or maybe even up online.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why don't you just keep records live?

btw...Lil' bar tourneys are usually as crapshoots. The structures usually suck and you have very little time to actually play. I wouldn't really base any skill analysis on those.

Your stats, in regard to the whole almost 1000 hands(if I read that right) doesn't mean hardly anything.

b

[/ QUOTE ]

well this particular one I play in doesnt suck the structure is pretty nice. half hour blinds 3000 to start 25 50 blinds to start. I have been there 5 times cashed twice final tables one other.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a rarity. That's better than most casino tourneys. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Still not enough sample size.

b

ImprovinNewbie · #8 02-27-2007, 08:26 PM

this is a grunch (i have only read your post and now one elses) but said stat means that you are winning that many big blinds every 100 hands played. this being said this number of hands is meaningless in terms of accuracy. it is said that it takes 100000 (100K) hands to actually determine you bb/100 rate. good luck and post hands. then tell the deal after 100K hands.

Josem · #9 02-27-2007, 09:09 PM

i think you are spending far too much time worrying about rediculously insignificant sample sizes.

I wouldn't even looking at a bb/100 figure until you've done at least 5,000 hands. your sample sizes are so rediculously small that you would gain more value in playing an extra few hands than spending time looking at the stats.

KurtSF · #10 02-27-2007, 09:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I guess what I am really looking for is I know that they are small sample sizes but they are accurate for the most part. I do win alot live but live I don't have the software to tell me exactly what. I am also looking to see how this compares to the stakes I play live and with. If I am ready to commit to play more live or maybe even up online.

[/ QUOTE ]

Accurate as in a true representation of what you've done in that past? Sure, 100%. PokerTracker rocks. Accurate as in an accurate representation of what you are likely to do in the future? No, almost completely meaningless.

If you can beat these stakes consistently online you can probably beat the lowest stakes live as well. Even though they will be much bigger $$$, the play is not as good. The problem here though, again, is that the stats are almost completely meaningless for determining if you can beat these games.

The #1 question when deciding if you want to play at different stakes should be bankroll. If you do not have AT LEAST 20 buyins for the stakes you want to play, don't even consider it. And if you're properly rolled, the #2 consideration is if you can beat the games. Well, there's no way to determine that without playing like 30k hands in them (which is forever live!).

The advice usually given, and the path taken by most, is to start small and build from there. Play (either live or online, whatever floats your boat) at the very smallest stakes available to you. Read, study, and play some more. When you feel confident you are beating that game and are properly rolled, then move up.

Good luck.