weird position stat

net amount from each position:

BUTTON 31.95
1 33
2 1 (?)
3 25.9
BB 15.89
SB -45.91

over 1402 hands. what i don't get is first off all, my 2nd position net, i guess this could just be bad luck i guess. secondly, the SB being negative but BB being positive?

i think this is because i get to get a lot of free plays from the BB, and so i have a chance to hit a hand a lot. one because there are less players i'm more likely overall to have the best hand, two because with less i am more likely not to be raised to preflop and have to throw my hand away many times.

while from the SB i'm folding weak hands as usual.

[damaniac]

[ QUOTE ]

over 1402 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Any deviant statistics are probably mostly due to this.

that's what i think about the position 2, but that's still just awfully strange. i think there's a reason, just like with the SB/BB. what do you think of my reasoning?

[Cancuk]

[ QUOTE ]
net amount from each position:

BUTTON 31.95
1 33
2 1 (?)
3 25.9
BB 15.89
SB -45.91

over 1402 hands. what i don't get is first off all, my 2nd position net, i guess this could just be bad luck i guess. secondly, the SB being negative but BB being positive?

i think this is because i get to get a lot of free plays from the BB, and so i have a chance to hit a hand a lot. one because there are less players i'm more likely overall to have the best hand, two because with less i am more likely not to be raised to preflop and have to throw my hand away many times.

while from the SB i'm folding weak hands as usual.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lots of players can play this amount of hands over a couple of hours. Also, automatically you're BB is -.5BB per orbit, so this means you've won a fair amount of hands from the BB over this amount of hands. But, again this means nothing because of sample size.

sigh.. does my reasoning why BB would be greater than SB make sense? sometimes i feel people only read half my posts. i'm saying this might be normal for 6-max even over a longer run.

[ QUOTE ]

over 1402 hands

[/ QUOTE ]

[Cancuk]

[ QUOTE ]
sigh.. does my reasoning why BB would be greater than SB make sense? sometimes i feel people only read half my posts. i'm saying this might be normal for 6-max even over a longer run.

[/ QUOTE ]

no, it doesn't..because you automatically lose .5BB from the BB every orbit. while from the SB you're losing .25BB (dependent on blind struchture), and usually only coming into the pot with a +EV hand, therefore, over the long run, the BB will be a much larger loser than the SB.

what if i always get checked to in the BB? i get to see plenty of free flops that i'd never see from the SB.

[damaniac]

You'll lose a lot less than .5BB for that reason, but you aren't going to show a profit. Remember, the flop is only "free" because you don't have to put in additional money, but you already put in money: the blind. So it isn't really free. That you get to see free flops a lot contributes to winning a much higher % from the blinds than other positions and showing greater winnings from there absent the blinds, but being forced to put in a SB OOP with a random hand will never show a profit longrun. If that were so, you should autolimp every hand that isn't likely to be raised, since you'd have the same scenario as the blinds but with better position.

[Cancuk]

you're still losing .5BB in the BB whether you get to play or not, which is more than in the SB.

You lose more in the BB than the SB in the long run.

[ghostface]

[ QUOTE ]
sigh.. does my reasoning why BB would be greater than SB make sense? sometimes i feel people only read half my posts. i'm saying this might be normal for 6-max even over a longer run.

[/ QUOTE ]

once we see 1402 hands we stop reading and usually dont respond either.

thanks.

i give up on this forum.

[ghostface]

[ QUOTE ]
thanks.

i give up on this forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, lets think about why we dont like small samples. People can have 200bb downswings in 1402 hands. People can have 200bb upswings in 1402 hands. People can break even in 1402 hands. People can also have a weird stat in the 2 off the button position. People can also win out of the BB and SB over this size of a sample. All kinds of crazy [censored] can happen in 1402 hands.

let's say i get a free play in the BB and fold every SB hand. how many hands would i have to win from the BB to give myself more of a net amount than the SB? because in the BB i give myself a chance to win bets from ohter people to make up that deficit.

[damaniac]

I suppose that's plausible but then you'd also be losing way too much in the SB by folding every hand. So the only reason that would work is because you are in essence artificially inflating your SB loss by failing to play even remotely optimally. It's like saying your winnings UTG could be greater than on the button if you folded some big hands on the button. Sure, but why would you do that?

[Wynton]

I tried getting a good discussion going about position stats here (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=headsup&Number=4014665&fp art=1&PHPSESSID=) , but unfortunately there were not that many responses.

[Cancuk]

[ QUOTE ]
let's say i get a free play in the BB and fold every SB hand. how many hands would i have to win from the BB to give myself more of a net amount than the SB? because in the BB i give myself a chance to win bets from ohter people to make up that deficit.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would you ever want to do this? It doesn't make sense and is extreamly neg. EV

But, you would just have to make up the difference between the SB and BB, which in a 1/2 Blind struchture is .25 BB.

So you would have to make a profit < -.25BB/100 from the BB. Which isn't hard at all, my BB is -.18BB/100...and I'm pretty sure that's pretty bad because the database i have mostly consits of a 40K breakeven stretch (used to be a downswing).

cheers

you mean greater than .25? i just don't see why it's surprising to have BB > SB when i almost always see the flop in BB but not as much in the SB. yeah BB is twice as much but i can also pick up pots which more than make up for that.

[Cancuk]

[ QUOTE ]
you mean greater than .25? i just don't see why it's surprising to have BB > SB when i almost always see the flop in BB but not as much in the SB. yeah BB is twice as much but i can also pick up pots which more than make up for that.

[/ QUOTE ]

<-.25/100 (greater than negative .25/100).

If you played in a game where nobody ever raised, and you got to see the flop w/ every hand from the BB, you might have a BB w/ a winrate better than the SB, but I still don't know about that since your BB winrate would have to be .25/100 better than your SB, where you're only entering the pot w/ +EV hands.

I don't know, but in any normal game, this isn't going to happen.

[imported_leader]

[ QUOTE ]
you mean greater than .25? i just don't see why it's surprising to have BB > SB when i almost always see the flop in BB but not as much in the SB. yeah BB is twice as much but i can also pick up pots which more than make up for that.

[/ QUOTE ]
Call every time UTG and see if you only lose .06-.11 BB. Also the fact that you can lose less in the SB then the BB is a proven fact. If you play enough hands you will see this.

< is less than

> is greater than

[Cancuk]

[ QUOTE ]
< is less than

> is greater than

[/ QUOTE ]

ya, my bad.

[imported_leader]

[ QUOTE ]
< is less than

> is greater than

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you. I know that. Read my post. You will lose money in the blinds. Any good player loses less in the SB then in the BB over the long run. If you play hundreds of thousands of hands like I have you will see this.

thanks i wasn't responding to you. thanks.

[milesdyson]

fantastic thread everyone.

nvrfglol - after this much time lurking/posting here, you should know better than to make a stats post after 1400 hands...

[imported_leader]

[ QUOTE ]
fantastic thread everyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Where's Surf to lock this bitch.