Autorate rules debate for PokerTracker Omaha

[L0QTiS]

So, now that we have Poker tracker for Omaha, does anyone have any ideas as far as Autorate rules? Obviously, holdem ratings really can't apply for obvious reasons, but I'm sure there'll be a lively debate as to what constitutes an Omaha Fish vs Moneybags. Also, I'm sure this will differ depending on the game (ie. Limit vs Pot Limit, etc), but I was thinking perhaps we could throw some basic ideas around.

Initially, I think I'd prefer to keep my definitions simple - so lets toss around some ideas...

Moneybags (Good player)
Tight preflop VP
Preflop aggression PFR
Postflop aggression TOT-A

Perhaps
VP$P < 20
PFR > .5 (or maybe a specific range)
TOTA > 1

I don't have my stats in front of me at the moment so I'm going at this completely off the cuff. After 5000 hands i run VP$P of around 14.5% and a PFR of around 0.3%- 0.4% (which I think is fairly passive). No idea as to my total agrro postflop stats.

For holdem reference, Bisonbison's autorate rules can be found here (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=923884&page=&view=&sb =5&o=)
Any ideas?

Which of the other icons should be included?

Dice (Gambler)
Fish (Fish)
Taz (Maniac)
Rock (Rock)

Are there any others which we cannot, at least initially, live without?

[Klak]

would the gambler one be the same as a calling station(loose passive)?

[L0QTiS]

I don't think so. Using previous autorate rules as a guideline (granted, for Holdem but I think it applies here), a calling station is loose passive - slightly loose preflop and passive postflop, while a gambler loose aggressive - loose and aggressive preflop, and generally passivive postflop.

[JoshuaMayes]

I just downloaded PTO yesterday, so I only have about 2000 $25 PLO8 hands from Party loaded in. My VP$IP is around 20.2. A 20 cutoff for "tight" might be right, as I believe I play a little loosely preflop. I think the cutoff between semi-loose and loose might be more indicative of true fishiness, however. Many of the players whose game I respect are rated semi-loose, with VP$IP in the low 20s. None have VP$IP > 25, however.

The default pre-flop agression stats seem off to me, at least as far as they are meant to correlate with good/weak players. Many good PLO8 players do alot of limping and not alot of preflop raising. All of the players whose game I respect are rated either tight/passive or semi-loose/passive preflop. No player in my database has a tight/aggresive preflop rating. In fact, only two players have an aggressive preflop rating, and both of them are players that my notes claim are "total maniacs," and both are big losers over the course of the hands that I have played with them. My guess is that preflop agression is just not a good indicator of skill at PLO8, at least at the $25 party tables.

The overall aggression stats don't factor in bet size, and thus are misleading with respect to how weak a player is postflop. If someone calls pot-sized bets with weak or one-way hands/draws, I want to play against him. In contrast, if a player calls min bets behind several others with longshot draws when the pot is large and he is likely to get paid off if he hits, I might not want to play against him quite so much. Again, several of the players whose game I respect, and who I would not classify as passive players (they always bet/raise the max, they aren't afraid to put all of their chips in with a good draw, they steal in LP or when opponents show weakness, etc.) are rated as passive overall, probably because they call small bets when the price is right and because raising and re-raising without the nuts or a huge draw in small buy-in PLO8 is not a good idea -- too many players call with garbage.

Anyway, these are my preliminary thoughts, and I look forward to hearing from some of the more experienced players.

P.S. I am earned a little over 6 BB/100 hands for these 2000 hands. Anyone know if this is a normal rate? Last time I tallied up my records, I had earned around $7/hour at these tables, mostly playing two tables at once, but I have no idea how many hands/hour I was playing.

[stone_7]

I play high only but my winrate is 4.8/100 in 6k hands over all levels. But my true bread and butter now is 1/2 6 max where I make 7.5/100 with 2k hands. I know my sample size is small but it is what I have so I am going with it.

[balazs]

"P.S. I am earned a little over 6 BB/100 hands for these 2000 hands. Anyone know if this is a normal rate? Last time I tallied up my records, I had earned around $7/hour at these tables, mostly playing two tables at once, but I have no idea how many hands/hour I was playing."

Your sample size is too small, so your win rate is very debatable.
If you put your mouse cursor to the "BB/100 hands" you will see in the bottom of the PTO window that it is calculated as follows: BB (or big bets) = 2x big blind.
So your win rate is $6/100 hand so far in a game with 0.5 big blind.

p.s. Sorry for any misspelling, english isn't my first language.

[Yads]

Here are the rules I've come up with
VPIP-Tot Aggr-$ Won at SD

VPIP
Tight: VPIP<20
Semi-Loose: 20<VPIP<30
Loose: VPIP>30

Tot Aggr:
Passive: TA<1
Aggressive: TA>1

(For the tight passive, tight neutral, tight aggressive rating)
Passive: TA<1
Neutral: 1<TA<1.5
Aggressive TA>1.5

$ Won at SD
Loose: $WSD<65
Tight: $WSD>65

Let me know what you guys think. Should aggression numbers include PF aggression and adjusted accordingly? What about the $ won at showdown stat? Is it relevant? How about the 65% number? I'm a big proponent of raising pre flop, but I've left it off of these auto rate rules. Should we take them into consideration some how (maybe factor them into total aggression)?

[L0QTiS]

This is definitly a good start, but there's one type of player this might not define. I'll have to check my PTO stats at some point this week to quantify this, but there's definitly a flavor of micro/low limit player who raises upwards of 25%+ of their hands preflop. At least initially, this is where PFR may factor into the mix.

Not sure if this applies well to higher limits, but at the low limits it surely does. IMO, these 'action' players definitly merit their own category set (Maniac and/or Gambler).

[Yads]

[ QUOTE ]
This is definitly a good start, but there's one type of player this might not define. I'll have to check my PTO stats at some point this week to quantify this, but there's definitly a flavor of micro/low limit player who raises upwards of 25%+ of their hands preflop. At least initially, this is where PFR may factor into the mix.

Not sure if this applies well to higher limits, but at the low limits it surely does. IMO, these 'action' players definitly merit their own category set (Maniac and/or Gambler).

[/ QUOTE ]

That's true, I was thinking about that. Perhaps we can just scrap the Tight Aggressive Neutral personna and add a maniac personna. What do you think their stats would be exactly?

[L0QTiS]

[ QUOTE ]

That's true, I was thinking about that. Perhaps we can just scrap the Tight Aggressive Neutral personna and add a maniac personna. What do you think their stats would be exactly?

[/ QUOTE ]

I have about 7000 or so hands almost exclusive to the Party Microlimits playing reloads in the last two months. I should be able to come up with some good example players when I get the chance to dig through my stats.

[gergery]

So after around 5k hands of limit O8 mostly at 3-6, with a bunch more data mined from all levels, here are some more thoughts on auto-rating:

1. The purpose of auto-rating is to help you make a better decision. So after looking thru the different criteria, I ask myself, “What specific decision am I going to be able to make better from knowing this – and it should have a big impact on my earn rate?”

2. The criterion in my opponents I find myself looking at most often is VPIP. I want a table with at least 2 players over 40, and over 50 is better. Good tables can have 3 people over 50. Bad tables have everyone below 32 or so. Also, I want to be in the tighter half of the table, and my VPIP is about 27 right now. I think my VPIP is probably a bit too high, and I’ve been tightening up and its been dropping. My win rate is ~6BB/hr/table. Not sure if I’m just running well.

3. O8 plays looser than holdem. Datamining shows levels up to 10-20 still have several seeing flops, and when I look at the summary tab in my holdem games and my O8 games the O8 median point is several VPIP points higher than holdem, on average.

4. It seems like there are a number of hands that are basically close to EV neutral. I think you can play these or fold these. Ie. hands like A2 with nothing else going for it, or 2356. So my theory is that your first 15% or so of hands are fairly profitable, and your next 15% or so are sorta EV neutral. Not sure if this is a valid theory or not. The main reason to play those hands is so get paid off on your good hands, ie. disguise the times you are in there jamming with double nuts, and so that opponents can’t narrow your range of hands too well. After about 28%VPIP or so, you move into marginal or EV- hands.

5. If my opponents have VPIPs below 18 or so, it’s not so tough to put them on hands, and it can be profitable to bluff and raise loosely vs. them since hand values run more closely together. If they have VPIP over 30, then they’re playing weak values.

6. The above numbers are for tables where the range of VPIP is typically 15 to 35 or so. If you are at tighter tables, you must tighten up and adjust the numbers downward. However, all games I’ve mined so far from 20-40 on down are looser than I expected, averaging ~25 or so in VPIP.

7. The other important criterion I look at is Won $ at Showdown. This basically answers, “how well does my opponent evaluate their hand fit with the flop”. My number here is around 70 right now, and the average for my opponents is around 60. I still feel I’m making some mistakes, so I think you want this number higher – 75-80 seems about right. If its too high tho, then you’re not making some weaker calls that have good odds or just getting lucky in not getting counterfeited/ outdrawn. Some of my worst opponents have numbers at 50 or below.

8. Actually, I think what might be the best metric of all with regard to Won$SD might be 1) “% of the time you win half the pot or less, whether its high or low”, and 2) “% of time you win ¾ or more”. Really what you care about is – How often does my opponent play to scoop, vs. play for half?

9. When you can find an opponent with VPIP above 40 and Won at Showdown below 50 you really have some good times.

10. Went to Showdown is also somewhat helpful. I basically use to determine when I can try to push someone off their weaker hand on a T93 type flop. Also, I think it might to helpful to determine whether you should raise the turn and expect them to call vs. fold.

11. I don’t think aggression is a helpful statistic at all. PFR raise numbers are much lower at O8 than HE, with most players averaging around 3-6%. Postflop I haven’t looked at it, but calling is the correct play in O8 much more often than in HE, so I think overall aggression levels are going to be lower. Furthermore, I don’t see what it really tells you that is going to be helpful for a decision. In HE, most of the time people don’t have anything. So it helps you call down a LAG if he’s aggro. But in O8 most of the time people have the nuts or a draw to nuts. So you’re just evaluating your hand to decide whether to continue or not, and using your opponent as an adjustment to that, instead of as one of the primary decision-drivers as in holdem.

12. The biggest correlation I’ve seen so far between earn rate and another characteristic is with PFR. The high earners seem to have 6-9% or so. Not sure what to make of that yet. It seems as tho raising some preflop may be the best strategy. I’ll hypothesize that it ties people to the hand more when you have an advantage, so your good hands end up winning more, even tho your variance and bad beats will be higher. Note – this still doesn’t make PFR a helpful measure, as I’m not sure what I’d do differently if I knew this about my opponents, and even if I’d do something differently I’m not sure how big an impact it would have. Maybe occasionally there is a giant aggro LAG so I’ll check-call, check-call, check-raise him instead of betting, but that’s about it.

Any thoughts/responses to this greatly appreciated.

Note: cross-posted at Pokertracker
--Greg

[gergery]

I think those look pretty good at first glance. i'll look thru my database again to check.

I'd also take out aggression and add in Went to Showdown, but that's me.

[sammy_g]

gregery, you make some excellent points.

[ QUOTE ]

12. The biggest correlation I’ve seen so far between earn rate and another characteristic is with PFR. The high earners seem to have 6-9% or so. Not sure what to make of that yet. It seems as tho raising some preflop may be the best strategy.

[/ QUOTE ]
This one I'm not so sure about. How high is the SD for these players? I suspect that raising preflop greatly increases your variance in this game, so you'll find that the biggest winners AND biggest losers in your DB raise preflop a lot. Is this the case?

I wouldn't look at opponent win rates at all yet since you can't have enough hands for these numbers to be close.

Sam

[gergery]

[ QUOTE ]

so you'll find that the biggest winners AND biggest losers in your DB raise preflop a lot. Is this the case?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. When I sort by preflop raise, many more of the ‘green’ results pop to the top. But I am open to a number of possible hypotheses as to why their results are better, only one of which is that PFR more is better.


[ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't look at opponent win rates at all yet since you can't have enough hands for these numbers to be close.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. With only 5k hands the numbers are at best directional. But it is interesting so see them correlated so far.

[Yads]

[ QUOTE ]
12. The biggest correlation I’ve seen so far between earn rate and another characteristic is with PFR. The high earners seem to have 6-9% or so. Not sure what to make of that yet. It seems as tho raising some preflop may be the best strategy. I’ll hypothesize that it ties people to the hand more when you have an advantage, so your good hands end up winning more, even tho your variance and bad beats will be higher. Note – this still doesn’t make PFR a helpful measure, as I’m not sure what I’d do differently if I knew this about my opponents, and even if I’d do something differently I’m not sure how big an impact it would have. Maybe occasionally there is a giant aggro LAG so I’ll check-call, check-call, check-raise him instead of betting, but that’s about it.


[/ QUOTE ]

Aha, finally some justification /images/graemlins/grin.gif

I think one of the reasons you're seeing this is because when you raise PF you get more dead money in the pot so for the times when you do get quartered you usually wind up breaking even because of the dead money.

[Yads]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd also take out aggression and add in Went to Showdown, but that's me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe we can somehow combine the two, but you're right that it's not quite important anymore.

[L0QTiS]

I've developed a preliminary rating rule set for PTO.

Keep in mind, this is focused on Limit Omaha Hi/Lo hands from Party/skins, Stars and Poker Room at the Micro and Small Stakes Limits (14k hands @ .5/1 and 8k hands for both 1/2 and 2/4 combined).

The goal here is to develop a rating system which can help me make better decisions based on opponent stats.

There's quite a few gaps, but I'm hoping with a little feedback, we can fill some in.


1. Maniac
VP$IP 60+
PFR 15+

2. Fish
VP$IP 60+
W$SD 50-

3. Rock
VP$IP 15-
W$SD 80+

4. Slightly loose / Bad W$SD stats
VP$IP 26.01-39.99
W$SD 57-

5. Slightly loose / Poor W$SD stats
VP$IP 26.01-39.99
W$SD 57.01-66.99


6. Slightly loose / Good W$SD stats
VP$IP 26.01-39.99
W$SD 67+

7. Good player
VP$IP 26-
W$SD 67+


Based on 23,000 hand and about a 4100 player database and a 50 hand minimum rating criteria:
570 players rated
574 players unrated

Win/Loss %

Good (113 players)
79% winers / 21% loosers

Rocks (21)
77/23

SL-L / Good WSD (77)
72/28

SL-L / Poor WSD (75)
51/49

Maniac (19)
42/58

SL-L / Bad WSD (97)
29/71

Fish (168)
16/84

Of the qualified unrated players, the most obvious group is those players with VP$P 40+ and W$SD 50+. I haven't quite figured out what to do with these players.

Comments apprieciated

[TGoldman]

I think a lot of the strength behind the Hold'em auto-rate rules was that the most commonly used statistics such as VP$IP, PFR%, and AF converge to their "true" values relatively quickly. After as few as about 30 hands, it's possible to have a decent read on the type of player that we're up against.

For Omaha, statistics such as WtSD% and W$SD (As well as % of pot won stats such 1/4 vs. 3/4 vs. scooping) provide helpful information, but I'm concerned about the sample size required to make these numbers really relevant. These stats converge so slowly that I'm afraid without extensive data mining they would only have limited usefulness.

I'd like to propose a new factor, something like a "Fold Factor" for each street, calculated as:

Fold Factor = (Bet/Raise/Call %) / Fold %.

Basically, it would give you an idea of how often a player continues with his hand onto the next street, relative to the frequency that he folds. Since the Fold Factor would be comprehensive of every street, it would allow us to gather information every time a player sees a flop.

Clearly this stat would be very VP$IP dependent. For example, players who stick to premium starting hands are going to hit the flop enough that it's oftentimes correct for them to continue. However, I think the combination of VP$IP and a FF may start to give a decent overall profile of a particular opponent. Unfortunately, we would have to do the calculations by hand to test this hypothesis as PTO doesn't have this statistic. Is anyone willing to give it a try? Admittedly I'm new to Omaha, so there may be nuances about the game or playing styles that would render this approach meaningless.

[Yads]

L0QTiS I like your rating system, but I think your VPIP is really high for a good player. I think it should be at least below 22 and probably below 20 for a full 10 handed game. Also what about the players that have low VPIP, but don't have a high enough WSD? I personally fit into this category at the moment. Would they just be considered unrated or would they have some sort of possible tag?

[L0QTiS]

[ QUOTE ]
...what about the players that have low VPIP, but don't have a high enough WSD? I personally fit into this category at the moment. Would they just be considered unrated or would they have some sort of possible tag?

[/ QUOTE ]

I fit into this category as well. Only a fraction of percent from 67% WSD. I've been experimenting with rating these players with an Eagle (Tight with fair to good WSD stats), as well as a Mouse icon to denote players who have reasonably good VPIP, however they have terrible WSD stats. These (mouse) players seem generally good preflop, but undisciplined postflop.

I probably don’t have enough hands to really make any kind of significant observation, but the highest earners in terms of BB/100 fall within the Slightly Loose with Good WSD stats (averages 5bb/100 for “good” players vs. 7bb/100 for the slightly loose good players). I suspect many of these slightly loose but good players trade higher variance for a higher “potential” win rate. Not sure I can attach any significance to this just yet. I have 25,000 hands for myself and probably another few thousand “observed”.

[ QUOTE ]
I think your VPIP is really high for a good player

[/ QUOTE ]

This weekend I’ll look at dropping this to 22%. When I was experimenting and comparing stats earlier last week, I didn’t see much win/loss change for the higher 20-25% VPIP players so thought to include them as “good” but I certainly see your point. As I said, all this is preliminary and I’m completely open to suggestions.

[Yads]

Yeah I really need to raise my WSD. It's slightly above 60%. I guess it's cause I play so much shorthanded and heads up that I tend to pay off way too much when I have a decent 2 way hand.

[gergery]

Good stuff.

I think the “right” VPIP is table dependent. But in general, I agree the VPIP looks a bit loose for good player. Mine is around 23 or so now, and I feel I’m pushing some marginal hands in spots. I’m also actively searching out the weakest tables, which have loose players, and thus its more correct to be playing looser, so that probably influences the # too.

I don’t see many maniacs, not sure how helpful classification is for them
I think a fish is over 50vpip.

Since this category has half winners and half losers SL-L / Poor WSD (75) 51/49
And my overall database shows ~45% of players as winners that suggests this group is actually slightly better than average.

I also don’t think 60-66 is that bad a WSD, since you often can have pot odds to get to showdown, or river bluff can work 20% of the time and be very profitable, etc. So this is somewhat game dependent. Several of the players I respect and who are winners are around 60-65-70.

What about Went to Showdown? I look at that a lot. Under 35 seems too tight, over 45 is too loose.

I’m still trying to figure out how best to use data in O8

[L0QTiS]

[ QUOTE ]

I don’t see many maniacs, not sure how helpful classification is for them


[/ QUOTE ]

I run into plenty of Maniac preflop auto-raisers at the lower limits. I find it very worthwhile to have them identified.

[ QUOTE ]

I think a fish is over 50vpip.



[/ QUOTE ]

Noted.

[ QUOTE ]

I also don’t think 60-66 is that bad a WSD


[/ QUOTE ]

I have actually already revised my descriptor to “Fair”. Are you suggesting to perhaps widen the lower end WSD range of the “good” player?

[ QUOTE ]


What about Went to Showdown? I look at that a lot. Under 35 seems too tight, over 45 is too loose.


[/ QUOTE ]

To be honest, I haven’t given this aspect of the available stats much thought (yet). At this point, I really don’t know how I would incorporate this. I’ll post my complete base rule-set this weekend (or later this week time permitting). I plan on making the following modifications:

2. Fish
VP$IP 60+
W$SD 50-

Revise VP$P to 50+

5. Slightly loose / Fair W$SD stats
VP$IP 26.01-39.99
W$SD 57.01-66.99

Revise VP$P range to 22.01-39.99 (this may be a stretch, this range seems too high so I may need to revisde sl/bad wsd accordingly – thoughts?)

7. Good player
VP$IP 26-
W$SD 67+

Revise VP$P to 22-

Still unsure what to do with VP$P 40-50 – perhaps this falls into the “unsure” area.

[toots]

We need more icon selection.

A properly functioning rating system would rate me with an icon that has a human figure with question marks shooting out of her head and money falling out of her pockets.

Then, I'd believe it was a good rating system.

[L0QTiS]

Sadly, PTRACK staff neglected to include an ATM icon.

Customization would be cool, but I'm just happy enough the've ported this product to the Omaha side.

[gergery]

Hmm, taking a step back and thinking about how I think about these numbers, what I come up with is:

For VPIP, my personal thoughts are:
<18 Rock.
18-25 Typical for decent players
25-40 slightly loose.
40+ Fishie.
This is because I search for loose tables, so the averages are looser. Once someone is over 40VPIP for a sustained period, it doesn’t much change how I play –I’ll come in with some add’l marginal hands vs. them, but still can’t play complete crap. And I want them at my table whether they’re 42 or 80

Went Showdown
<35 Tight. – assume they’ll fold w/o strong hand. Can bluff or raise them if an A2 holding might fold.
35-45 Average
45+ Call stn – assume they’ll call w/ weak hand. So don’t bluff, and feel free to raise a flop bettor and expect them to call

Won @SD
<58 Bad
58-68 Normal
68+ good
I want anyone who is a fish at my table, SL’s are also good. And anyone who is typical/SL if they are also both CallStn & Bad

PFR – This is more useful than I at first thought, but I still don’t see many doing lots of raising at 3-6, and if they are, then they don’t understand the game and it will show up in other #s. It really is only relevant when looking at VPIP also to see what range they’ll raise with. I suppose it might slightly change my standards to play hands that do a bit better vs. few rather than many opponents. But that seems minor. So I wouldn’t use this, but suppose I would put something like.
0-3 passive
3-7 normal
7-10 agr
10+ nutjob
Won High, Won Low, Scoop, -- haven’t looked at these yet, but might be something there.
Won when saw flop, Agression post flop – haven’t looked at these yet, but I think there might be something there that helps differentiate Rocks/NutPeddlers from Good Players. The good ones seem better able to figure out when to a) bluff, b) raise to induce folds or c) raise to get more $ in.

Just some add’l ramblings. Again I’m not yet sure how to implement.
--Greg

[AnyAce]

I only have 6,000 hands in my database so I don't have anything to add on the classification side. However, I do want to thank LOQTIS and Gergery for their posts in this thread. I have found them to be very useful in giving me a sense of who's actually good and who's just hitting flops right now (and also that I need to tighten up even more! My VPIP down to 30 now and am working to push it lower. I agree with Gergery that there are some tables with 6 or 7 people seeing the flop so that it pays to limp with marginal hands and if the flop doesnt hit perfectly then easy fold).

Thanks again.
AnyAce

[L0QTiS]

Hi all,

Here's the modified rule-set. I changed quite a few things and attempted to standardize the ranges:

VP$IP:
Good: 22-
Sl Loose: 22.01 - 39.99
Loose: 40+

W$SD:
Good: 65+
Fair: 57.01 - 64.01
Bad: 57-

Other notes:
Rock W$SD dropped to 75+ (from 80)
Rating begins at 30 Hands


1. Maniac (Taz Icon)
VP$IP 60+
PFR 15+

2. Fishy (Fish Icon)
VP$IP 40+
W$SD 57-

3. Rock (Rock)
VP$IP 15-
W$SD 75+

4. Slightly loose / Bad W$SD stats (Green Frowny)
VP$IP 22.01-39.99
W$SD 57-

5. Slightly loose / Fair W$SD stats (Yellow Triangle with !)
VP$IP 22.01-39.99
W$SD 57.01-64.99

6. Slightly loose / Good W$SD stats (Yellow Smiley)
VP$IP 22.01-39.99
W$SD 65+

7. Good player (Money Bags Icon)
VP$IP 26-
W$SD 65+

8. Tight / Bad W$SD (Mouse Icon)
VP$IP 22-
W$SD 57-

9. Tight / Fair W$SD (Eagle Icon)
VP$IP 22-
W$SD 57.01-64.99

10. Loose / Good W$SD (Question mark ?)
VP$IP 40+
W$SD 65+

11. Loose / Fair W$SD (Elephant Icon)
VP$IP 40+
W$SD 57.01-64.99

+++

I'll let you folks run your own stats, but I was shocked to find the Loose/Good WSD players were
the highest earners in my database, however as soon as I qualified these players to 200 hands min,
it dropped to near even. Keep this in mind when comparing stats. Sustainability is everything.

I have not attempted to work much else into this rating system as I just wanted to get something
started here. This ruleset will rate any player with 30+ hands.

Anyway, here's the actual ruleset. Save as a text file at Begin/End and import into PTO

+++

Autorate Rules Begin
Aggression:Y
ARI_5 1 S Loose / Bad W$SD
1 5 22.01 39.99 Vol. Put Money In Pot % is between 22.01 and 39.99
4 4 57.00 Won $ At Showdown % is less than or equal to 57.00
ARI_4 2 S Loose / Good W$SD
1 5 22.01 39.99 Vol. Put Money In Pot % is between 22.01 and 39.99
4 2 65.00 Won $ At Showdown % is greater than or equal to 65.00
ARI_6 3 S Loose / Fair W$SD
1 5 22.01 39.99 Vol. Put Money In Pot % is between 22.01 and 39.99
4 5 57.01 64.99 Won $ At Showdown % is between 57.01 and 64.99
ARI_10 4 Maniac
1 2 60.00 Vol. Put Money In Pot % is greater than or equal to 60.00
2 2 15.00 Pre-flop Raise % is greater than or equal to 15.00
ARI_2 5 Fishy
1 2 40.00 Vol. Put Money In Pot % is greater than or equal to 40.00
4 4 57.00 Won $ At Showdown % is less than or equal to 57.00
ARI_9 6 Rock
1 4 15.00 Vol. Put Money In Pot % is less than or equal to 15.00
4 2 75.00 Won $ At Showdown % is greater than or equal to 75.00
ARI_3 0 Good Player
1 4 22.00 Vol. Put Money In Pot % is less than or equal to 22.00
4 2 65.00 Won $ At Showdown % is greater than or equal to 65.00
ARI_11 0 Loose / Good W$SD
1 2 40.00 Vol. Put Money In Pot % is greater than or equal to 40.00
4 2 65.00 Won $ At Showdown % is greater than or equal to 65.00
ARI_13 0 Tight / Bad W$SD
1 4 22.00 Vol. Put Money In Pot % is less than or equal to 22.00
4 4 57.00 Won $ At Showdown % is less than or equal to 57.00
ARI_14 0 Loose / Fair W$SD
1 2 40.00 Vol. Put Money In Pot % is greater than or equal to 40.00
4 5 57.01 64.99 Won $ At Showdown % is between 57.01 and 64.99
ARI_15 0 Tight / Fair W$SD
1 4 22.00 Vol. Put Money In Pot % is less than or equal to 22.00
4 5 57.01 64.99 Won $ At Showdown % is between 57.01 and 64.99
Autorate Rules End

[GooperMC]

I just found this post so I am going to add my $20/1000.

I have been data mining O8 for a little while and over 25K logged hands the only good indicators of how successful a player are W$SF and W$SD. It also looks like W$SF is more important then W$SD. Futhermore it looks like agression isn't vital but it does help.

Here is a summary of my data mining so far:
http://www.csc.calpoly.edu/~sjaspan/poker/25KLimitO8Hands.html

[AnyAce]

Interesting analysis Gooper. The VPIP numbers seem high to me but it could be a function of the limits. Have you done the analysis by limit? (I would suspect the VPIP numbers fall as the limits rise. The winning players in my database (300+ hands) tend to have VPIP in the 20s for 3/6 and 5/10.)

Also, are these all full tables or are some 6-max?


Thanks for the post.
AA

[toots]

Have you run any regression analyses on these data?

Pretty kewl, just the same.

[GooperMC]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, are these all full tables or are some 6-max?

[/ QUOTE ]
All of the numbers are from 10 person tables.

[ QUOTE ]
The VPIP numbers seem high to me but it could be a function of the limits. Have you done the analysis by limit? (I would suspect the VPIP numbers fall as the limits rise. The winning players in my database (300+ hands) tend to have VPIP in the 20s for 3/6 and 5/10.)

[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't do any analysis based on limits because I wouldn't have a large enough sample for anything other then .5/1. Once my sample gets larger I will break it down by limit.

[ QUOTE ]
Have you run any regression analyses on these data?

[/ QUOTE ]
I am not 100% sure what you mean by regression analyses. If you mean have I compared these numbers to previous numbers I have not. I was planning to do the analysis every 25K hands , so I am going to do it again when I hit 50K hands.

Anyone have a good hypothsis about why W$SF can vary by almost 10% when VP$IP stays about the same? It seem to me that for bad players W$SF should be high with a low W$SD because they will play questionable hands all the way to showdown. However that is not what my numbers are saying. Any ideas?

[Mendacious]

I predominantly play PL and I am pretty new to this program but not to PL Omaha/8. My observations from the data that I have seen thus far:

I think there are 3 fairly valuable indicators, VP$IP, W$WSF, and W$SD.

I think you can be a successful player with a pretty wide range of VP$IP (15-30%) provided that your W$WSF approaches 30% or above, and your W$SD approaches 65%.

In PL (as well as probably limit) I think what seperates the good from bad players is the percentages that you take a hand at showdown and actually win more than you put into the pot...I am not sure if W$SD really shows this. For instance if you get quartered at Showdown how is this taken into account. Does anybody know if this is taken into account by any statistic, and if it could be. If so, I think this program because WAY more useful for Omaha. My goal as a player as a PL omaha player is to be < 30 for VP$IP, over 33% for W$WSF and over 70% W$SD. I am certain that when I play in this area I am winning. I would love to have the data on getting quartered etc to further refine good and bad play.

LOQTIS-- I like your rating system but at least in Pot Limit I think W$SF is too important not to include, as it starts to show you how well someone is outplaying people after the flop. In PL there are many many pots that don't get shown down (as opposed to limit where virtually every pot is shown down-- at least at lower limits) so I think getting your W$WSF up is critical for success in PL. If you check these numbers especially in PL I think you will start to see a really high correlation between getting this number over 30 (assuming other numbers are good) and winning.

Any comments?

[L0QTiS]

I'm completely open to any suggestions on incorporating W$SF into the mix. My own focus is on limit specifically, so I can certainly see the need for a different or modified model for PL. I think at this point I do not think that limit stats carry over well to pot limit stats.

My initial intent was to get a quick ruleset to be able to determine player tendencies in the fewest number of hands. Speaking for myself, at least in the short run I've had with PTO so far, most of the players I sit down with are unknowns with a smattering of known players. Obviously, as the database grows, the information improves. My goal is not entirely to differentiate a winning player from a loosing player (although in theory, over time, the ideal system should be able to predict this), but rather to quickly determine the looser players vs tighter, etc. This is one thing I don’t want to lose sight over.

[gergery]

[ QUOTE ]

I think you can be a successful player with a pretty wide range of VP$IP (15-30%) provided that your W$WSF approaches 30% or above, and your W$SD approaches 65%.

[/ QUOTE ]

I’d frame this slightly differently. I think you can be a successful player in spite of having higher VPIP #s if you are playing well postflop.

I agree with the W$SF, but think there are several different styles that can all be successful. Some are more aggressive and will have higher W$SF (35+) and lower W$SD (60+), as it relies slightly more on bluffing/eliminating opponents to win shares of pots. Other styles are more nut-peddler-ish and will have lower but still good W$SF #s (30-35) but higher W$SD (~70).

I’ve run some correlation coefficients and quartile analysis on the data-mining I have so far, and compared data on some of the players I respect the most, and as you’d expect the indicators all support the conventional wisdom ala Ray Zee.

Ie.
Tighter is better, up to a point

Play on flop/turn/river is most important and outweights preflop “looseness” mistakes

Raising preflop is not very correlated with winrate, and can even be harmful

The game is about showing down winning hands at the river

You make the most when you correctly call or bet post flop.

--
I’ve found a few other nuggets, but mainly its nothing earthshattering.

[UseThePeenEnd]

[ QUOTE ]
For Omaha, statistics such as WtSD% and W$SD (As well as % of pot won stats such 1/4 vs. 3/4 vs. scooping) provide helpful information, but I'm concerned about the sample size required to make these numbers really relevant. These stats converge so slowly that I'm afraid without extensive data mining they would only have limited usefulness.


[/ QUOTE ]

succinct, and IMO, accurate.

[Mendacious]

I agree with what you said Gergery. Interstingly, I have seen very few players who have played a lot of hands and have W$WSF over 35%-- almost none, and, although virtually every table I sit at has a W$SD table average of around 60%, it is rare to see someone over 70% for W$SD who has played a lot of hands, which I take to mean that variations for this statistic are not that wide.

Also, at least in Pot limit O8, there is a lot of treading water, picking up small pots, splitting etc., to stay level, and most of the money is made and lost on huge scoops and 3/4--1/4 pot splits. I'd love to see some good stats which incorporate pot bets or pot calls that are profitable/unprofitable-- which tells more than W$SD.

[gergery]

My comments are more limit related, as I don’t play much PLO8. But I’d think W$SF would be lower in PLO8 due to the implied odds. And the stats would be alittle less helpful since the amount won per hand won can vary a lot more, and the stats are mainly hand-based (ie. denominator is per flop etc.)

[Mendacious]

Actually I would expect W$WSF to be higher and W$SD to be lower in PL, the reason being far fewer hands are shown down in PL because aggressive betting actually chases players. Conversely, because showdowns involve substantially money contributed by only two players betting big, you can almost never get quartered in PL and show a profit, so on a much higher percentage of showdowns, only one guy actually profited. (Omaha8)