NSchandler
12-02-2005, 04:54 PM
Something that I often do when considering the looseness of the table is consider what I call a weighted VPIP of the table. It would seem that giving greater weight to looser players gives a better indication of the looseness of the average opponent you expect to be in a pot with.
As a simple illustration, consider two tables, 1 where all other players each have a VPIP of 20%. Here you can be sure that any opponent you get involved in a pot with will have a VPIP of 20%. But consider a table where 50% of players have a VPIP of 30% and the other half have a VPIP of 10%. Now, let's say you are involved in a pot with exactly 1 opponent. Since the VPIP=30 players play 3 times as many hands as the VPIP=10 players, 75% of the time you will be against an opponent with a VPIP of 30, and the other 25% of the time against a VPIP=10 opponent. So, on average, you will be against an opponent with a VPIP of 30*.75 + 10*.25 = 25, higher than in the first case, even though both tables have the same (simple) VPIP.
This could of course be extended to other stats - a table with half loose-passives and half TAGs will be more passive than a table where everybody is moderately loose, and moderately aggressive, etc.
Does anybody think that this sort of thinking is helpful at all, or are there strong reasons why this is going to lead to incorrect reasoning? I would think that this would be a helpful feature of some HUDs, but I never see it, and was just curious why. Probably because it's a stupid idea, but you never know...
As a simple illustration, consider two tables, 1 where all other players each have a VPIP of 20%. Here you can be sure that any opponent you get involved in a pot with will have a VPIP of 20%. But consider a table where 50% of players have a VPIP of 30% and the other half have a VPIP of 10%. Now, let's say you are involved in a pot with exactly 1 opponent. Since the VPIP=30 players play 3 times as many hands as the VPIP=10 players, 75% of the time you will be against an opponent with a VPIP of 30, and the other 25% of the time against a VPIP=10 opponent. So, on average, you will be against an opponent with a VPIP of 30*.75 + 10*.25 = 25, higher than in the first case, even though both tables have the same (simple) VPIP.
This could of course be extended to other stats - a table with half loose-passives and half TAGs will be more passive than a table where everybody is moderately loose, and moderately aggressive, etc.
Does anybody think that this sort of thinking is helpful at all, or are there strong reasons why this is going to lead to incorrect reasoning? I would think that this would be a helpful feature of some HUDs, but I never see it, and was just curious why. Probably because it's a stupid idea, but you never know...