How reasonable is the following statement:

[axioma]

person A has an average 'went to showdown' value for a session, and a below average 'won at showdown' value for the session. therefore he is running baddly in that particular session, given standard play.

what do you think about the above statement?

[RacersEdge]

Not necessarily true.

Could be going to SD with hands he shouldn't be, unless that's what you mean by "standard play".

[MainEvent]

I think that is a fairly reasonable statement assuming that the person is playing decent poker otherwise. But I am one of the few people who hates giving the standard response of "It depends".

It always depends, but given the info we have, I'd say it's a decent description of what's going on for a good player.

[ckessel]

For bad sessions I tend to look at the percentage of hands won. If I'm winning (10-handed) 8% I'm usually well in the money. Times when I'm at 5-6% I'm usually losing. There are rare exceptions where you hit a few giant pots and that's all you need, but it's a pretty tight correlation.

My worst nights are the 5% nights, typically means my premium cards are getting sucked out over and over.

[axioma]

standard play in as much as he plays the same as he always does.

[axioma]

does the person have to be playing decent poker for the statement to be reasonable? or does it work with any player?

[MainEvent]

No, it doesn't work for any skill level player. An idiot could be seeing the showdown with the worst possible hands while folding his winners.

[axioma]

but if he is playing his normal game, and the averages mentioned in the statement are taken from his normal game, then surely the statement holds whatever the skill level of player A?

[MainEvent]

Again, yes....I change my mind. I was reading too many threads to remember the particulars of this one when I responded. My mistake.

If he's playing his normal game, seeing the same kinds of showdowns for the same percentage of showdowns and just winning less showdowns, he is PROBABLY running cold. As per usual, that's an awful lot of ifs.

I think I am done with this thread as I don't know where it's going.

[axioma]

it was just something i was thinking about, and i was interested to see if there was anything i was missing that makes the statement incorrect.

[sthief09]

that, along with the success of your big hands, can generally tell you. it's hard to be an overall loser with AA and still have a winning session

[chief444]

[ QUOTE ]
person A has an average 'went to showdown' value for a session, and a below average 'won at showdown' value for the session. therefore he is running baddly in that particular session, given standard play.

what do you think about the above statement?

[/ QUOTE ]
If person A is a solid player (assuming that's what you meant by "standard play") I think this statement would be somewhat reasonable. If person A is playing with a VP$IP of like 60% it's probably more like an average session.