biggest leak ever?

Ok,
my first post on 2+2:
Im playing for almost 2 years now and use pokertracker for some time, but only cursorily.
Now i discovered something that really made me think:
Everyone open pokertracker, go to the misc.stats tab, now compare the "final hand" for "one pair" and "two pair". Some numbers from me: Im winning, ummm, lets say 6K with 2 pair, but have lost 3K with one pair hands over the last 27K hands. I know i overplay some kind of hands (and havent found a way to stop it) but how bad is this? I havent seen much stats of this kind here but im pretty certain that i actually should show a profit with one pair hands. correct? and how on earth can a sucker like this still make more than 1/100 BB for so long playing 3/6 to 10/20?
best
U

[Maulik]

very typical.

[bugstud]

make sure it's hands that went to showdown or something.

W$atSD% is only about 27%, if thats what you meant...

[shant]

What he means is those aren't all one-pair hands you took to showdown. I believe those are any hand you took to the flop that paired up, including middle and bottom pairs that you didn't take to showdown, but lost money on while in the hand. Having a negative number for that figure is standard if I'm thinking of the right thing.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
What he means is those aren't all one-pair hands you took to showdown. I believe those are any hand you took to the flop that paired up, including middle and bottom pairs that you didn't take to showdown, but lost money on while in the hand. Having a negative number for that figure is standard if I'm thinking of the right thing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes... and no.

The Misc stats looks at all hands regardless of whether you put $$ in or not. Even hands that you folded PF but, would've have flopped a pair are included in those stats. There is, however, a column that indicates the number of times that you saw a flop.

I think it would be interesting to perform a data analysis on these stats from a large sample of players. I think it would be interesting to compare various player's NET$$ differences on hands not folded vs. hands folded (i.e. checking or unchecking the small box in the upper-right on the Misc. Stats window) for no-pair and one-pair hands.

My hypothesis is that the better players are going to have a much larger difference in NET$$ won between hands they took to showdown vs. hands that were folded. This would seem to support the generally accepted claim that better players are such because they're winning more $$ in marginal situations (i.e. weak holdings like one-pair or just a high-card).

[golfboy7]

want to read late, just marking it

when i get home (after work and a seminar about game theory) i will try to add some more numbers, that will take a few hours from now on...

Shouldn't that stat also include hands where you limped with a pair hoping to spike a set, missed your set, and chucked it? So everytime you spike a set and win a huge monster pot, it goes in the + column of your trips category...everytime you don't spike a set and lose money, it goes in the one pair category.

That's a big part of it.

Dennis

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't that stat also include hands where you limped with a pair hoping to spike a set, missed your set, and chucked it? So everytime you spike a set and win a huge monster pot, it goes in the + column of your trips category...everytime you don't spike a set and lose money, it goes in the one pair category.

That's a big part of it.


[/ QUOTE ]
That's a good point. I'm not sure how significant it is.

Or the times you're on a flush draw or OESD and hit a pair on the turn or the river that isn't strong enough to take to showdown. Or hitting bottom pair off one of the blinds and folding to other player's steady aggression.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
Or the times you're on a flush draw or OESD and hit a pair on the turn or the river that isn't strong enough to take to showdown. Or hitting bottom pair off one of the blinds and folding to other player's steady aggression.

[/ QUOTE ]
These are situations where I propose that a good player is losing less than a bad player and thus the difference between folded hands and hand that go to showdown is going to be larger for the better player.

I have no idea if this is even close to being somewhat accurate. It's just an idea.

[inspectorgadget]

Perfectly normal bro, but I think you can work on winning more with your marginal situations because your W$SD seems low, at least compared to mine, and I don't think mine are that great.

One Pair W$SD for me is: 36.2% of the time. I've lost 3,179 at it, almost as much as i've lost with high card (3,769).

Don't sweat it man, this is normal. :-p

[Bob T.]

Don't worry about it. One pair hands in PT include hands that you hold say AK, and the board is 22579. So all of those hands that you essentially missed, but the board made one pair are included in this category.

thanks for the answers, that really helped.
I realize that i have to learn a lot using pokertracker. Btw: my W$SD is 40%, i got that wrong. When i check the "show only hands that went to showdown" button, things change: suddenly im up 1.1K with one pair hands and 7.7K with 2pair (lost 1,5K with A-high or some other busted crap). I am really curios to hear what the ratio for you guys is.
best
u

[silkyslim]

look at how much you won when you went to showdown. I bet you are in the green.

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
Btw: my W$SD is 40%,

[/ QUOTE ]

This is terrible.

Terrible.

Most good winning players are in the low 50's.

This (calling the river with a crappy hand that has no chance to win) could also explain some (a lot) of your losses with one pair

its 40% for one pair hands, overall its 50%. BTW:
the total W%atSD at misc.stats shows an other number than the total w%SD on the general tab. whats that?