poker tracker- what to analyze?

[slydeni]

Hello. Thanx in advance for any help you can give to me on this topic: Poker Tracker. I have about 20,000 hands saved over past few months. I am very sincere about my endeavor to get better at poker and analyze my leaks.

Does anyone have any suggestions as to how/ or what to analyze specifically within tracker (or elsewhere) that will help illuminate some of my shortcomings. Currently I am a winning player...but not a big enough one -not where I want to be. I play 3-6 on party- 2 or 3 tables at once. I am under 1 BB per hour per table - maybe like .50-.75 on avg.

I want to find out where I am going wrong and consistantly tackle the coveted 1-2 BB / hour consistantly. If anyone can give me some advice as to how to approach the analysis of my game, I would very much appreciate it.How do I get from .60 BB/hr to 1? and then from 1 to 1.5?

Thanx again... and peace-
sly

[Fnord]

If you're unsure about your game, consider dropping down to 2/4 for a while. It's a softer game. 3/6 has some players that are way too good for their bankroll.

[wuwei]

PT questions are best posed in the Books and Software forum. That being said, here's a few ideas:

1. Search the archives here for posts that others have made about their stats, look at the analysis and compare it to your stats. See if some of your core stuff (PFR, VP$IP) is out of whack.

2. Take a look at session notes, pick out some of your biggest losers and winners from each session. Review them, and if you have any uncertainty about your play post those hands.

3. Utilize the auto rate players/export notes/game time windows options for table selection. In addition to the handy bookkeeping, this is the best thing about PT. For questions on this stuff, search the archives again. Lots of posts out there.

Good luck,

[joseki]

What, exactly, does "way too good for their bankroll" mean?

As soft as you guys make the 5/10 10/20 15/30 games sound, why wouldn't these players move up?

[AliasMrJones]

I think what he's saying is they are good enough to play at higher limits, but don't because they don't have the bankroll (yet).

[ElSapo]

[ QUOTE ]
I think what he's saying is they are good enough to play at higher limits, but don't because they don't have the bankroll (yet

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I think he means they have the bankroll but don't.

[Jeff W]

I agree that the OP should move down to 2/4 with the winrate he described. The 3/6 is quite a bit tougher than the 2/4 despite contrary protests. Roughly 10% of the players are highly skilled pros/semi-pros. At 2/4 there are very few good players and the tables are much looser.