Very very preliminary analysis

I've only been playing at Pokerstars (2/4)for a week or so, and as I've only played about 850 hands I think its obvious I'm not what most would consider a "serious" player. I would just appreciate comments if I'm on or near "the right track" at least as it relates to this first set of stats. I know there is nothing you can really say about winrate until you hit 20-50K hands, but I thought there might, at least initially, be something that stands out to people, (looking for comments on things to improve) from the stats below: Thanks.

839 hands played and saw flop:
- 39 times out of 90 while in small blind (43%)
- 66 times out of 93 while in big blind (70%)
- 126 times out of 656 in other positions (19%)
- a total of 231 times out of 839 (27%)

Pots won at showdown - 41 out of 83 (49%)
Pots won without showdown - 74

[hobbsmann]

these stats are pretty worthless and you are going to need AT LEAST 10k hands to say anything reasonable. Get poker tracker and play a lot more and then get back to us.

[waffle]

You're playing too many hands.

That's about all we can say given this small amount of data.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
You're playing too many hands.
That's about all we can say given this small amount of data.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's not neccessarily true. The sample is too small to make assumptions.

[waffle]

vp converges pretty quickly.

Thanks for the honest advice. Poker tracker is my next purchase...I'll see you guys in 10K hands or so.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
vp converges pretty quickly.

[/ QUOTE ]
Correct - and he likely is playing too many hands. However - he could also be on an incredible hot streak. The assumptions made on the information given in the OP are equally likely to be correct or incorrect.

[waffle]

[ QUOTE ]

Correct - and he likely is playing too many hands.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree.
[ QUOTE ]
However - he could also be on an incredible hot streak.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree.
[ QUOTE ]
equally likely to be correct or incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]
No [censored] way.