interesting "Stat" online tourn.

[bigfishead]

Been playin a bit online. Tournaments and single table freezeouts mostly. NL mostly. I usually turn on my stats
(Ultimate Bet)when I join a table. Yesterday I played 2 tournaments both NL. #1 had 122 players #2 had 400 players.
I got 3rd place in 1st and I think it was 18th in 2nd (bad play out too soon on my part)

So the stat is this. Through every table change, through both tournaments, I only called or made a bet on the river
1 time. I of course saw the river a few times. Probably not more then 20 times all told I dont know. But I never had to make a bet or call a bet but once.

Any thoughts?

[RiverMel]

UB's stat function is a piece of crap. Are you sure about this stat, or are you basing it entirely on what the UB software told you?

[bigfishead]

You obviously didnt read it clearly. I did not "CALL or BET" on the river. If I was already all-in that doesnt change a thing. UB stat is fine if you understand how to use it according to the data it gives. I'm not saying it is "GOOD". I am saying I can use what the give me to work with. Use the tools they give ya.

[Copernicus]

While far fewer hands go to the river in NL vs Limit and tourney vs ring, once in two tourneys seems on the ridiculously low side.

Were you the aggressor on most of the earlier round allins, or were you calling a lot? Were there a lot of rag flops checked down and won by high cards? Do you play Sklansky's "system" and only play near nuts preflop?

[RiverMel]

You obviously are an ignoramus. Why does my cautioning you about the reliability of the UB software mean that I misunderstood / missed something in your post? I understood exactly what you were saying. Nowhere did I say that "it's impossible" for your stats to have been as you were claiming, nowhere did I even indicate disbelief. I was merely pointing out that UB's stat software is often incorrect (if you monitor it closely it will become obvious to you), in an effort to (gosh, can you believe it) provide you with useful information so that you wouldn't be basing your judgments on unreliable information (i.e., UB stat) in the future. I won't make the mistake of trying to be helpful again in the future.

[Aces McGee]

Good use of the word "ignoramus." It's a favorite of mine... /forums/images/icons/grin.gif

Aces McGee

[bigfishead]

Were you the aggressor on most of the earlier round allins, or were you calling a lot?

Aggressor.


Were there a lot of rag flops checked down and won by high cards?

No, I was the agressor then too.

Do you play Sklansky's "system" and only play near nuts preflop?

Similiar. Almost as tight. Never played a med pair in early
position. Paid attn. Stole a few pots when I could in position but not too often so as to not get played back at.

My guess as I didnt write it all down was a bit over 400 hands total were dealt to me.

[bigfishead]

Well I guess I misinterpreted the meaning of your post. I'm not afraid to admit my faults when I see them. If you were offended by my reply to your post I understand. I came off incorrectly.

I always feel free to respond and offer an opinion to any posts here. My "advice" is only my opinion. However I usually try to "qualify" a response with some sort of experience or data too. Just so the poster understands the "context" in which I come from. Hope this helps any who read it.