Stats from Paradise

[luckydog]

Tried another session at Paradise .25/.50 after the recommendations on % seeing the flop. Had a much better time this time. Won back all I lost the first night and a little extra.
I realize that this sample size (100 hands) is way to small to predict long term results but perhaps it will give clues to other places I'm leaking money.
I would welcome comments.

From Paradise Stats table.
Games Won 6% Flops Seen 23%
Showdowns Won 75% Win % Flops Seen 27%

ACTIONS
Fold 65%
Check 12%
Call 13%
Bet 7%
Raise 3%
Reraise 0%

WHERE FOLD
Pre Flop 82%
Flop 4%
Turn 6%
River 2%
No Fold 5%

Thanks
Luckydog

[JasonP530]

It is hard to tell from the results of one session. Try not to place as much emphasis on winning or losing for 100 hands at a clip, because one big hand can make or break a session.

That being said, your numbers look good. It is especially important to keep that flops seen under 25%, so that youre not playing hands that have a negative expected value. If you continue to play there, I am sure you will feel more comfortable, find your own leaks, and begin to exploit the game. Best of luck.

[luckydog]

Jason,

Thanks for the comments.
At this point all I'm really looking for is a general direction. Like on one of the other posts where peoples recommendations for seeing flops ranged from about 30% down to the teens. So I have an idea of what I might look for in trying to improve my game.
I'm only in my second month of playing online for money so it will be a long time before my game settles down never mind the stats /images/graemlins/smirk.gif
I appreciate the advice on keeping the long term view. I do tend to focus on what happened that session even though I know I have a lot of games ahead.

Luckydog

[KeyToTheMint]

The sample size is too small to be meaningful. However, here is what
im thinking.

1-Paradise poker stat tracker is not accurate. It reads you fold 82% pre
flop. This means you saw 18% of the flops. Yet your record shows you saw
23% of the flops. I know even if you made a typo their counter is still in
accurate because my numbers dont add up. Furthermore I've seen it
count hands when I was dealt out.

2- % of showdowns is too high. I could get it to 100% just by showing
down the nuts.

3-It looks like your chasing on the flop. Make sure the pot is laying you
the right price to chase. That your implied odds are there etc.
From memory my fold perctange on the flop is greater than the turn and
river combined..

good luck

[busguy]

Key,

You really need to be careful when giving advice that you are CORRECT in what you are saying.

The stats are quite likely correct. If you look at "actions" his "fold" at 65% and "check" (big blind) at 12% add up to 77 % which makes his flop percentage at 23 percent. The 82% fold figure means WHEN he folds, 82 percent of the time he folded pre-flop.

Oh and the showdown % can NEVER be too high. You cannot ASSUME that because it is high that he is not playing enough hands. With a 23% seeing the flop stat he is very likely playing enough hands.

my 2 cents

/images/graemlins/smile.gif busguy

[KeyToTheMint]

[ QUOTE ]
Key,

You really need to be careful when giving advice that you are CORRECT in what you are saying.

The stats are quite likely correct. If you look at "actions" his "fold" at 65% and "check" (big blind) at 12% add up to 77 % which makes his flop percentage at 23 percent. The 82% fold figure means WHEN he folds, 82 percent of the time he folded pre-flop.

Oh and the showdown % can NEVER be too high. You cannot ASSUME that because it is high that he is not playing enough hands. With a 23% seeing the flop stat he is very likely playing enough hands.

my 2 cents

/images/graemlins/smile.gif busguy

[/ QUOTE ]

First I wasn't incorrect because I wrote only what I was "thinking". I still
don't understand how folding 82% of the time before the flop allows
me to see 23% of the flops. Read this next part carefully. I play at paradise and have seen the counter go up on session hands when
I was dealt out. Therefore the counter is not accurate. To try it reset your
counter get a seat on three tables and sit out. Sometimes the counter
will jump to 3.

In addition, if you take a meaningful sample and your showdowns won
percentage approaches 100% your doing something wrong because
the pot is always laying you odds in poker. If your opponent bets 10 dollars into a 100 dollar pot, your getting 11-1 on your money. If there
is a 25% chance he is bluffing and you can beat the bluff you must call.
your call is profitable even though your losing 75% of the time. ie showdowns won in this case is just 25%. Yet this situation comes up
all the time. Therefore, yes showdown percentage can be too high.

P.S its ok to be incorrect even if I wasn't since others will correct me.
People are just afraid to look foolish in posting something that is wrong.
However, I don't care. I can only learn from it. I also think that's an underlying reason why some great players wont write books. They know
they have incomplete knowledge in some areas of their game but
their overall talent makes up for that minor defecit.

[KeyToTheMint]

I was having a semantical problem. I get how folding pre flop and flop
percentage conflict..

[busguy]

[ QUOTE ]


First I wasn't incorrect because I wrote only what I was "thinking". I still
don't understand how folding 82% of the time before the flop allows
me to see 23% of the flops. Read this next part carefully. I play at paradise and have seen the counter go up on session hands when
I was dealt out. Therefore the counter is not accurate. To try it reset your
counter get a seat on three tables and sit out. Sometimes the counter
will jump to 3.


In addition, if you take a meaningful sample and your showdowns won
percentage approaches 100% your doing something wrong because
the pot is always laying you odds in poker. If your opponent bets 10 dollars into a 100 dollar pot, your getting 11-1 on your money. If there
is a 25% chance he is bluffing and you can beat the bluff you must call.
your call is profitable even though your losing 75% of the time. ie showdowns won in this case is just 25%. Yet this situation comes up
all the time. Therefore, yes showdown percentage can be too high.


P.S its ok to be incorrect even if I wasn't since others will correct me.
People are just afraid to look foolish in posting something that is wrong.
However, I don't care. I can only learn from it. I also think that's an underlying reason why some great players wont write books. They know
they have incomplete knowledge in some areas of their game but
their overall talent makes up for that minor defecit.

[/ QUOTE ]

Point #1 - you answered with your next post.

Point # 2 - were not talking about his showdown % being 100. It was 75 which is a big difference from 100. Your showdown percentage should be high because this means that you are ONLY calling bets on the river with your good and great hands which is what you should be doing. If you play poker to be the table cop and keep guys honest when they bluff you on the river, you will lose a LOT of money. Now I agree with you somewhat that there are situations that do arise on the river where you likely do not have the best hand, but you call down (pot is big) in hopes that your opponent (notice I didn't say opponents . . . because if you have more than one opponent they are likely not ALL bluffing) is bluffing. These situations would arise though fairly infrequently. If it arose 3 times (crying call on the river) in a 200 hand session where you went to showdowns 30 times and won all the rest you would still have a showdowns won at 90%.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating that if your showdown percentage isn't up in the 80% range that you a bad player. I'm saying that if you are a solid player your showdown % should be high (because you don't chase to the river and then make many crying calls), and that, in my opinion, it can (if you are a good player) never be too high.

Point #3 - I'm not saying don't post unless you are correct. Obviously that is what this forum is for, and is how we all learn. Opinions are just that, opinions, and as such, should be open to debate. But when interpreting facts (stats) if you give someone incorrect information and then they rely on that mistaken information it could be dangerous. You misinterpreted the statistics given and then gave advice based on that. All I was saying is that you need to be VERY careful when giving advice based on facts as opposed to opinions.

but hey . . it's all good

/images/graemlins/smile.gif busguy