LA players win more money than TAs on the long run???

[Tann]

I did some data-mining in my PokerTracker database, which contains 40,000 hands of mine, mostly from Party and Crypto rooms, 0.5/1 and 1/2 stakes. I wanted to know, which type of players win the most BB on average. (Methodology: on the Preferences page check the Player Filter option, and select a player icon category. On the Summary page the parameters of that player category are displayed, including the average BB/100 value.)

I did it for every player type, and wrote down the results. I expected that the TAA players have the highest BB/100, but the result was really a surprise:

Winners:
---------
1. LP-A (elephant), 76 players (60% winner), 4 000 hands, 12.81 BB/100
2. LA-A (tasmanian devil), 171 players (60% winner), 10 000 hands, 8.1 BB/100
3. sLA-A (smiley face), 180 players (61% winner), 13 000 hands, 5.9 BB/100
4. TA-A (moneybag), 155 players (60% winner), 15 900 hands: 4.51 BB/100
5. sLP-A (question mark), 74 players (51% winner), 5000 hands, 3.67 BB/100
6. TP-A (mouse), 217 players (56% winner), 17 000 hands, 2.97 BB/100

Loosers:
---------
7. sLA-P (sad face), 122 players (44% winner), 8 200 hands, -0.21 BB/100
8. TA-N (eagle), 116 players (41% winner), 8 400 hands, -0.87 BB/100
9. sLP-P (calling station), 22 players (39% winner), 15 000 hands, -2.48 BB/100
10. TA-P (yellow triangle), 54 players (46% winner), 2 400 hands, -2.67 BB/100
11. TP-P (rock), 222 players (35% winner), 15 000 hands, -3.95 BB/100
12. LP-P (fish), 612 players (32% winner), 37 849 hands: -9.48 BB/100
13. LA-P (dice), 288 players (36% winner), 16 500 hands, -9.6 BB/100
14. Default, 3427 players (35% winner), 45 000 hands, -14 BB/100

Analysis:
- All winners are aggressive postflop.
- All loosers are passive (or neutral) postflop.
- Passive preflop play does not help winning.
That's OK so far. But:
- Loose aggressive players win MUCH more than the tight aggressive players (???)

I have contacted with another player, and he has similar results in his PokerTracker database.

Maybe it is better to be LAA than TAA???
I am confused.

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]
- All winners are aggressive postflop.


[/ QUOTE ]

Because they hit hands?

The more hands I hit, the more I'm gonna bet and raise. If I don't hit many hands, I'm gonna fold a lot, and not win much during that time.

[tylerdurden]

all of your sample sizes for winners are < 20k hands.

[Tann]

I hope someone with a larger database will check it.

[btwnfdngs]

Seems to me that any sample that has any group w/ an avg bb/100 of over 12 is completely unreliable.

[Tann]

Maybe this is the key. There were ten thousands of loose players in the database, some of them just hit a winning streak, and PT put them in the LAA category. That explains the increased aggression factor with the looseness and the high BB/100.

[CMonkey]

You have to be careful about classifying players as LA, TA, or anything else. Your database statistics are really only accurate for you and anyone you've played a lot. If your database is anything like mine, for most players you have a few dozen to a couple hundreds hands on them.

For example, I'm fairly TA by most standards (VP$IP 19%, PFR 7%, Post-flop Aggression 2.2). However, if I get a good run of cards, these stats are naturally going to shoot up. If you catch my during a good run, I will look to you like a maniac as I jump in and raise a lot of pots. Conversely, if you catch me during a bad run, I'll look like a rock as I toss away all my hands. Similarly, if you catch a LA player during a bad run, he may start to look a bit TA-ish and get classified as such. LA's may be loose but they still won't play 72o and 83o even if it gets repeatedly handed to them. Well, a great percentage of LA's won't, anyway.

You can't blindly trust the categories that your database assigns to various players. You have to look at the players' actual play and decide for yourself. The stats are just tools that point you in a vaguely correct direction.