What do you make of this STAT?

[tripdad]

I'm just curious as to what others have in their databases, trying to find the "ideal" VPIP%, or whether that is even all that important.

Pokertracker for the $5/10 SH game Party/Empire, etc...

VPIP% of LESS than 25%: winners 44%, losers 56%

all players: winners 42.55%, losers 57.45%

so, those who are what i would consider "tight" perform just barely better than the average Joe, whose VPIP is 38.74%.

i suspect that post flop play and aggression are much more crucial factors for the winning player, and that a very good post-flop player who is currently playing quite tightly preflop (say 20% VPIP) could make loads more cash if he increased his VPIP to say, 25% or so or maybe even more.

any thoughts?

cheers!

[sethypooh21]

2 things.

First 6 max is very much a post flop game, so VP$IP isn't the end all be all (say the loose screw...).

Second, initially this was a surprising stat. However, if you consider that winning at poker is the application of small edges repeatedly over time, this makes more sense. The tighter (and presumably better) players have a small (2% in your data) edge on their looser counterparts. If you were to watch everyone in your database play 100 100-hand sessions, that 2% would start to tell much more than it does in the limited contact you have had with each player.

In my imagination, it's like rolling two many sided dice. The better players win on the average roll or better, and the losers only win on the better than average roll. (So two six sided dice, winner wins on 7+, losers win on 8+. After only a few rolls by each person, it will be tough to differentiate the winners and losers by results, but you KNOW that those who are giving themselves a better shots at winning by only needing a 7 are certain to, as a group, win in the long run.)

[naphand]

Your sample would be more menaingful if you compared the V$IP<25 with the V$IP>25, rather than just the average (which necessarily includes the <25 figs).

Also you should only include those players who have a minimum number of hands played, as many players will seem loose or tight over a small hand sample. Try using minimun hands played of 100. I know that even over several hundred hands my V$IP can vary from 12% to 30%+. It is unreliable over small hand samples - and that applies when considering the play of players even with a "large" sample number of players.

V$IP will vary by game conditions - more raising means less flops seen with marginal hands. A very passive game will see some marginal hands played from off the button. There is no "ideal" though there may be a typical "range". I would say typically this was 20-28% for most poster here. I know there are some rock-types who are a little under 20% and some have played profitably over 30%.

You will also need to consider the effect of the number of players; 5-max and 6-max are quite different in terms of the stats you see. Personally, my V$IP increases by about 4-6% 5 handed, and my aggression by a similar amount.

[tripdad]

also, the opponent who is the biggest winner, and the opponent who is the biggest loser both had VPIP% over 60. not surprising, but kinda interesting. both are well over 100 hands, as they are on my buddy list [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img].

cheers!

[meow_meow]

When I filter for at least 100 hands (not including me):
first, winners outnumber losers 52.6 to 47.4%
net of everyone is +0.22 bb/100

for those with VPIP <25%
winner 44.4% (only)
BUT, net +1.63 bb/100

for those with VPIP >25%
winners 54.1%
BUT, net -0.29 bb/100

So, proportionally less winners at the lower end of the VPIP scale, but they make money in total, as opposed to the higher end, where there are more people winning, but as a group they are losing.

Needless to say there are more than 3x as many players in the second group (high VPIP)