Two Plus Two Older Archives

Two Plus Two Older Archives (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/index.php)
-   Stud (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=18)
-   -   Stud Winrate, possible move up? (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=402617)

12-21-2005 04:53 AM

Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
Hi guys,

Long time lurker, first time poster. I've been slowly working my way up the foodchain at the Party Stud tables over the last few months, and had a question for you experts.

I'm very familiar with B&M expectations, but obviously the speed of online play increases things. Over my last 7500 hands, my BB/100 is 4.05. This is at $5/$10 on Party, usually playing a minimum of 2, maximum of 4 tables.

1) Is this rate considered low? I'm always looking to improve (7CS4AP is on it's way via Amazon), but don't really know what is considered average at these limits. I used the search function to take a gander at previous questions like this, but couldn't find anything definitive.

2) Is the tougher competition, and decreased multi-table potential worth the move to $10/$20? Is the difference in quality of play appreciable? Just curious to see what you guys thought.

I look forward to your input, and thanks for all your help (even if you didn't know about it) over the last few months! Merry Christmas.

KH

Michael Emery 12-21-2005 05:09 AM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Over my last 7500 hands, my BB/100 is 4.05.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I used to play in this game I had a winrate of slightly over 2.5/100. The person who I consider to the the best stud player on party also shared with me that they had approximately the same winrate. I hope you keep it up, but it shouldnt be sustainable. As for your next question, there is a HUGE difference between the 5-10 and 10-20/ 20-40 games on party. If you are intent on moving up it might be wise to be game selective at first. They are much tougher.

Mike Emery

12-21-2005 06:12 AM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
Help this lurker if you would. By saying 4.05 BB/100 do you mean you win 4.05 big bets per 100 hands?

Or in other words, playing $5/10 you're winning 4.05 x $10 or $40.50 every 100 hands?

Thanks.

preiserone 12-21-2005 06:20 AM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
yup thats what that means. This is a huge number though, that would be extremely dificult to sustain. A very good player might be able to get 2BB/100, 2.5 if your Mike Emery.

12-21-2005 06:55 AM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
Thanks, Mike.

This is exactly the kind of information I was looking for. After reading your reply, I went back through my stats from the last 7500 hands (I have them broken down by day), specifically looking for some sort of indication that my 4.05 may in fact be bloated.

I'm by no means a statistics guru, but on my worst day, I was -10.84 BB/100 (only 280 hands that day). On my best day, I was 12.35 BB/100 (520 hands that day). Those were MAJOR extremes compared to the rest of my data, and I in NO WAY am implying that I'm some kind of Uber-Player, so...

Is it possible that the games are softer now than when you were back at that level, or is 7500 hands just not a large enough sample?

Maybe I shouldn't care this much, but if there was ever a place to find out, I know this is it. Thanks again.

KH

preiserone 12-21-2005 07:07 AM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Is it possible that the games are softer now than when you were back at that level, or is 7500 hands just not a large enough sample?

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO your probably just on an upswing, I'm sure you'll be able to keep a decent winrate but it won't be that high. If it doesn't go down your doing phenomenally, keep it around 2/100 and your in real good shape.

Michael Emery 12-21-2005 07:21 AM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Is it possible that the games are softer now than when you were back at that level, or is 7500 hands just not a large enough sample?


[/ QUOTE ]

I cant believe that the games are that much softer now than back then. When I used to 3-4 table them a year ago they were pretty good. There are posters like Istream, beta, etc. that could probably tell you better, as they still play in them. But IMO 7500 hands is FAR to small of a sample size to get an accurate number. Go to the hold'em forums and post your winrate of XBB/100 over 30K hands and people will start screaming thats not even enough to know. I do know that if you can sustain over 2BB/100 in this game you are a very good player.

Mike Emery

Michael Emery 12-21-2005 07:25 AM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
As an interesting sidenote:

Just so you know the difference in difficulty between the 5-10 and the 10-20/20-40's, there is no player at the latter levels that makes 2BB/100 or more. Of course this is over a fair number of hands.

Mike Emery

BeerMoney 12-21-2005 10:41 AM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 

7500 just isn't a lot of hands. Go to the hold em forums, they'll tell you your stats are meaningless until you hit 100,000 hands.

Right now you should be confident of 2 things:

You are probably a winning player.
You are probably running hot.

Just enjoy the two things for now.

The player pool in the stud games is so small right now, at the 10/20 and 20/40 level, straight forward ABC poker just isn't getting it done.

lstream 12-21-2005 01:51 PM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
[ QUOTE ]
There are posters like Istream, beta, etc. that could probably tell you better

[/ QUOTE ]
There are stretches of 7500 hands where you can easily hit the 4BB/100 number. However, this is way too small a number to be meaningful. You need to play long enough where you run bad for a month or two, cause it happens to everyone.

I have logged about 750 hours at 5/10 over the past several months. I track my results by the hour, not per 100. However, I think you can do a rough translation since I can typically play 60 hands per hour or so, based upon some statistics I used to keep.

I am currently tracking 1.45 BB/hour which converts up to about 2.41 BB/100 - pure table performance not counting bonuses or rakeback that I no longer get. I have to double check that 60 hands per hour when I get home. This is after about 750 hours or 45,000 hands I guess. This is also after a brutal stretch from late August to mid November where I made nothing (I am guessing this was 10,000 - 12,000 hands) .

I don't consider myself a top player compared to some of the other posters here, so maybe some of them are at 3 BB/100 or so. However, I would think you need to be one seriously good player to sustain that number in the long run. At 10/20 and up, I am not sure how I would do, but the performance would certainly come down.

lstream 12-21-2005 09:16 PM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
Update to my last post. I have played less hands than I thought - it looks like approximately 39,000 5/10 hands. I play about 54 hands per hour, not 60. Looking at my actual spreadsheet shows an implied BB/100 of 2.67. I also think this number is likely to head down, because I went on huge heater when I first started at 5/10. 39,000 is not likely a big enough sample.

12-21-2005 10:52 PM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
Some more comments on Win Rate and other stats.

I agree with most here that a sample of 7500 will mot necessarily encompass all the swings that a player's bankroll will undergo so there is some error. But I would guess that when you do have such a sample the accuracy is somewhere around +/-10% at least 90% of the time or better.

But here's another point, if an adequate sample is only around 100,000 hands, Win rate becomes meaningless except maybe for those who play 1000 hands per day.
Otherwise, (and I would suspect this is the case for most players who are learning) Win Rate measured over long periods becomes meaningless because it fails to account for many other elements such as change in play, stakes, etc.

And the question of sample size applies to all systematic analysis of players. In another note, wish lists of player stats for software to display were requested. I think people requested fold, raise rates, etc. How many hands do you need to sample before you get a predictable 3rd st call rate? 4th st? 5th?

Alex/Mugaaz 12-22-2005 09:02 AM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
[ QUOTE ]
As an interesting sidenote:

Just so you know the difference in difficulty between the 5-10 and the 10-20/20-40's, there is no player at the latter levels that makes 2BB/100 or more. Of course this is over a fair number of hands.

Mike Emery

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a guess or do is there some stud tracking software I don't know about?

12-22-2005 06:19 PM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
The swings in 10/20 are much greater than 5/10. There is more aggresive betting and semi-bluffing going on. Less limping on 3rd. More completions on third. A tougher game in general, although there are times when it is riper to play. If you become familliar with your opponents, you will know when that riper time is.

But beware, that the swings can be great at time and you might be comfortable with a $1,000-$1500 swing downward. It can be a profitable game, but if you're not comfortable with wider swings, it might not be for you. But if you are looking for a more interesting and exciting game, then you will enjoy it, especially if you can win at it.

Good luck.

highlife 12-29-2005 04:32 PM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
[ QUOTE ]
But here's another point, if an adequate sample is only around 100,000 hands, Win rate becomes meaningless except maybe for those who play 1000 hands per day.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is a ridiculous statement. you should say something like "winrate becomes somewhat less meaningful" and maybe we could agree.

you are basically saying it doesn't matter at all what your prior success in the game is because current conditions are not the same as those shown in the past results.

12-29-2005 05:20 PM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But here's another point, if an adequate sample is only around 100,000 hands, Win rate becomes meaningless except maybe for those who play 1000 hands per day.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is a ridiculous statement. you should say something like "winrate becomes somewhat less meaningful" and maybe we could agree.

you are basically saying it doesn't matter at all what your prior success in the game is because current conditions are not the same as those shown in the past results.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, how's about: it becomes way less less meaningful. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

My point was that most players, after 100,000 hands, will be playing a different game. 100,000 hands could take several years.

highlife 12-29-2005 06:26 PM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
ok, so in your opinion, is there any time winrate is meaningful?

12-29-2005 09:05 PM

Re: Stud Winrate, possible move up?
 
[ QUOTE ]
ok, so in your opinion, is there any time winrate is meaningful?

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me give an example of what I mean.

Imagine a player has been playing 4 years and plays at about 500 hands / weeks, for a total of ~100,000 hands. Very likely (and only if he follows this forum and reads 7cs4ap [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]) his game will be improving all along. If the player looks at his win rate over the period of 4 years, it will provide an average of how he did over these 100,000 hands but it will likely not give an accurate reading of his current winrate. In this case, he should probably look at a smaller and more recent sample (6 months?). The error on the number obtained will be greater but should be more meaningful.

On the other hand, I agree (and know from personal experience) that a sample of 10,000 hands might very well be misleading. It might not capture some up or down swings.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:58 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.