Call For Stats (K9o, Q9o, J9o, T9o)
 

As a reference for TwoPlusTwoers, I am trying to collect enough samples to post the average winrate among winning players of four hands: K9o, Q9o, J9o, T9o.

These 4 hands are interesting in that they represent hands right on the cusp of breaking even. They're hands that, possibly, if played very well, could show an overall profit. If this exercise proves successful, I will continue doing this stats collection with a larger variety of hands.

Right now, the only reference of this kind that I know of is at

http://www.pokerroom.com/main/page/g...stats/expValue

This reference has some shortcomings; namely that it incorporates the results of ALL players, including losing ones. Many hands, especially marginal ones, do drastically worse in the hands of poor players than they would with good players.

Below is the current tally for the hands. We need many more responses to generate a statistically sufficient sample size. I have listed all the people who have contributed hands so far. Thanks to all of them for their time and data on behalf of all of 2+2.

Hand Samples Winrate
K9o 22116 -0.022bb/hand
Q9o 22480 -0.045bb/hand
J9o 22690 -0.061bb/hand
T9o 22265 -0.030bb/hand

vkh
Our House
Lmn55d
Cankid
Slik
tolbiny
BoxTree
chris_a
Victor
Monty Cantsin
tallstack
gemmer
BugsBunny
baronzeus
kahntrutahn
Happydaz
protocol
LimitPlayer
climber

Re: Call For Stats (K9o, Q9o, J9o, T9o)
 

Does this take into account when these hands are played in the blinds?

Re: Call For Stats (K9o, Q9o, J9o, T9o)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Does this take into account when these hands are played in the blinds?

[/ QUOTE ]

If by take into account, you mean include, then yes.

Re: Call For Stats (K9o, Q9o, J9o, T9o)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Does this take into account when these hands are played in the blinds?

[/ QUOTE ]

If by take into account, you mean include, then yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

So while they might not be profitable overall, they could be profitable outside the blinds. And you might lose less playing them in the blinds then folding them. This is the information I'm wondering if is being taken into consideration.

Re: Call For Stats (K9o, Q9o, J9o, T9o)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Does this take into account when these hands are played in the blinds?

[/ QUOTE ]

If by take into account, you mean include, then yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

So while they might not be profitable overall, they could be profitable outside the blinds. And you might lose less playing them in the blinds then folding them. This is the information I'm wondering if is being taken into consideration.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not. In fact, if a hand has an overall negative EV, it could potentially be profitable both in the blinds, and outside the blinds.

It may yet have some meaning though. Vkh will give us his analysis after he compiles his results.

Re: Call For Stats (K9o, Q9o, J9o, T9o)
 

I am a bit sceptical of the utility, but whatever, I'll contribute (blinds included).

K9o 491 times 35% VPIP +0.08
Q9o 489 times 23% VPIP (0.01)
J9o 415 times 22% VPIP (0.11)
T9o 454 times 32% VPIP +0.02

Guess I need to work on my J9o play (I hate that hand, BTW - maybe now I can extrapolate a subconscious reason for my dislike).

Re: Call For Stats (K9o, Q9o, J9o, T9o)
 

k9o - 1450 times (.02)
q9o - 1480 times (.02)
j9o - 1492 times (.08)
t9o - 1437 times (.02)

Re: Call For Stats (K9o, Q9o, J9o, T9o)
 

k9o 2926 .05
q9o 2967 (.04)
j9o 2847 (.07)
t9o 2923 (.05)

Nice work btw.

Krishan

Re: Call For Stats (K9o, Q9o, J9o, T9o)
 

K9o 594 .00
Q9o 582 .04
J9o 566 (.01)
T9o 597 (.03)

It should be noted I play a fair amount of 2-4 handed, and this will have a very positive effect on these numbers.

Re: Call For Stats (K9o, Q9o, J9o, T9o)
 

The scope of this survey is to obtain the TOTAL winrate of each of these hands; that is, including the blinds.

I'd like to clarify something that some may not be aware of or realize fully.

If you never ever played a hand, even folding it in the big blind when there's no raise, your expectation with that hand would be what you lost with it in the blinds, divided by the total number positions in the game (eventually you would receive it roughly an equal amount in each position):

(assume 10-20 blind structure)
EV = -0.75bb/AVG_NUM_PLAYERS

If you strive to play in relatively full 6-Max games, AVG_NUM_PLAYERS is going to be somewhere around 5.5.

This means the EV of a hand you always fold will be -0.75/5.5, or about -.14bb/hand.

Now, even hands like 72o and 32o do quite a bit better than this, since once in a while you get a free play in the big blind, and you get a flop that gives you positive EV. The result of this is that even hands for which you may have a VPIP of 0 (you never voluntarily play them pre-flop, like maybe 72o) will do better than -.14bb/hand. From looking at empirical data, it looks like this "Loss Floor" is around -.12bb/hand. If you play primarily 3-handed or heads up, the loss floor will be substantially higher, but -.12bb/hand is in the ballpark if you play mostly full 6-max games.

The better the quality of the starting hand, the more positive EV situations it will encounter when it sees a flop. So we would expect a hand like 92o to have a slightly better EV than 72o, even though we may NEVER volutnarily play either hand. This slight increase in EV is due solely to the increase in playable situations post-flop when we get free plays in the big blind.

As we continue going to better and better hands, we will reach hands that have other playable situations pre-flop in addition to seeing more postive EV flops when getting a free play in the big blind. A hand like J7o, for instance, is almost certainly defendable agaisnt a typical SB raise if we're in the BB. So we would expect the EV of J7o to be higher than that of 72o. However, that does NOT mean that it will have a positive overall EV. It will be positive with respect to the loss floor, but not positive overall.

For a hand to actually break even overall; that is, to have an EV of 0, it would actually have to make about .12bb/hand over what you would lose if you always folded it. To do this, a hand needs to be playable outside the blinds. Hands that are playable UTG will all show a positive winrate. Hands that you fold in the CO but play for a steal on the button probably will not. The four hands that I have asked for stats on are examples of offsuit hands that should be relatively close to making up all of the -0.12bb/hand loss floor. Other offsuit hands that will be close are A7o - A2o. I will probably ask for those next. The reason I am focusing on offsuit hands is that they occur twice as often as pairs and three times as often as suited hands, so it is much easier to obtain a statistically significant sample of them.

Once we have a documented average winrate for some of these hands, you can then look at your own results and compare them. Are you missing profitable pre-flop situations with them? Do you play them in a different manner than most people? Or maybe you're just running bad, or great, with them.