[kendal14]

While I agree with Homer's analysis and really found it useful... I am going to be siding with The-Matador (aka various other people) on this one (excuse me while I put my flame suit on).

Too many posts are the generic "sample size is too small". For example, in this reply there is no mention of which sample he is talking about. Okay, we can infer from reading comprehension that he may be talking about the 8k hands during the downswing... but what useful information is being given by "sample size is not big enough".

I know that in all online communities the veteren and long time posters get tired of answering the same quesitons and "use the Search noob" is a pre-determined phrase on their keyboards..., and I think in many situations this reponse is sufficient or required. Specifically when the OP asks a generic "Help me find the answer to generic question XXX". However, in this case it is obvious that the OP has put some tought and work into analyzing his statistics and is looking for 3rd party insight to his thoughts. Reading between the lines a little tells any reader that it is obvious that the reader is not looking for long-term win rate judgement, but more comments on how he is analyzing his own data and ideas on other things he can do to improve his analysis.

To the OP:
I would take a look at how your big hands have held up (AA, etc.). How many times have you been called on the river during both your up/downswing. Thinking players that have seen you might be less willing to pay off on the bigger streets after having some information on your aggression factors on each street. Learning when/whom to try to induce bluffs on the bigger streets is a new skill that I think can be added in the short handed game (I am hoping at least... because i just started dabbling in the 6-max and know for a fact I have no idea how to do this correctly).