Bison's Autorate Rules and SSH "Tight" Preflop Recommendations

[kevyk]

Bison Bison defines a good player as:

VP$IP < 20%
PFR > 5%
Total Aggression Factor > 2.00

This seems reasonable on the face of it, but a glance at the preflop recommendations in SSH reveals that Ed Miller recommends limping with roughly 2/3 of the hands he deems playable (I am referencing the 'tight games' recommendations). Thus the preflop aggression factor should be about 0.5 for a player who plays according to Ed Miller's suggestions.

An aggressive player who averages a 2.5 postflop aggression factor, but plays by the SSH rules, will just barely meet Bison Bison's criteria for proper aggression.

This suggests to me that in games where people play tightly (using the SSH definition of a tight game as one where 3-5 players see a flop per hand) preflop, but loose after the flop, the definition of a good player should be revised.

I am uncertain of how to do this; since Ed Miller says that better postflop play is the hallmark of a truly good small-stakes player, perhaps only flop, turn, and river aggression should be included in the calculation of aggressiveness? Bison's standard of VP$IP < 20% and PFR > 5% would still ensure that weak preflop players were not counted as good ones.

[uuDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
....perhaps only flop, turn, and river aggression should be included in the calculation of aggressiveness?

[/ QUOTE ]
This is the case already. From Bison's autorate post:

[ QUOTE ]
The stats I use are VP$IP (basically, pre-flop tightness), PFR (preflop aggression) and Total Aggression (not counting preflop, so it gives us a nice summary of postflop aggression).

[/ QUOTE ]

[sammy_g]

I suspect the SSH starting hand recommendations (even the "tight" game ones) will push your VP$IP over 20 in most small stakes games where there isn't a lot of preflop raising. So Ed wouldn't get Bison Bison's good player rating. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Cerril]

In extremely passive but tighter games I think 20-22% is about where you'll fall. In more aggressive games 17-20% is more about what you'd expect. I was misplaying a couple hands a bit too tightly and was seeing about 16.5, but that's creeping back up as I deal with my pocket pairs better.

[uuDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
I suspect the SSH starting hand recommendations (even the "tight" game ones) will push your VP$IP over 20 in most small stakes games where there isn't a lot of preflop raising. So Ed wouldn't get Bison Bison's good player rating. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

SSH assumes 15-35% of pots are raised. This is a pretty passive game compared with even the lowest Party Poker limit full ring games, which have 50-60% of pots raised. Under these conditions, my VP$IP is ~16%.

[Lost Wages]

...Ed Miller recommends limping with roughly 2/3 of the hands he deems playable...Thus the preflop aggression factor should be about 0.5...

There is a flaw in this reasoning. You will be folding a lot of the limping hands if there has been a raise ahead of you. So, even though he recommends raising with 1/3 of the playable hands, you will be raising more than 1/3 of the time that you enter the pot.

Lost Wages

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

Since reading SSH, my V$IP has jumped from 18% to 22%. My winrate has doubled. I do not get the highest rating in PT, but I'm happy with the $$.

PT rates me as sLA-A.

[kevyk]

Thanks for all the responses.

I must have misread Bison's original post, so thanks for pointing out that he does not advocate including preflop aggression in his "total aggression" statistic.

I also agree that a preflop aggressiveness rating of 0.5 is just a rough estimate and also probably a lower bound on what to expect when implementing the SSH preflop recommendations. I can't believe that it would be much higher, though.

As Lost Wages pointed out, the fact that there is a raise in front of you will often make you fold a calling hand. But a raise will force you to fold some raising hands, such as offsuit AJ, AQ, or KJ in late position, as well. Additionally, there are plenty of situations where a good player will limp (e.g. A2s from MP), get raised, and call one more bet. So preflop aggression for a winning "SSH" player is probably 0.5<AF<1.

A moot point, though. I'll be very interested to see how my player ratings change once I throw out the preflop aggressiveness rating.

[QuickLearner]

[ QUOTE ]
Since reading SSH, my V$IP has jumped from 18% to 22%. My winrate has doubled. I do not get the highest rating in PT, but I'm happy with the $$.

PT rates me as sLA-A.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting point. If I sort the players by icon in the summary tab, the sLA-A players are very nearly all winners. In fact, they seem to outperform even the TA-As.

One adjustment I have made to Bison's system is to put a lower limit on the VP$IP stat. It gets rid of the uber-rocks; that's what I corrently use the bomb icon for, and they're almost all money losers.

[flair1239]

You have to watch these ratings closely. At the .5/1 and some 1/2 tables, I don't think you are being overly loose with a VPIP of 22-24%. As you get many oppurtunities from LP and the blinds to play speculative hands. As a matter of fact I would argue that at .5/1 if you are below 17%, you are probably not adjusting properly to loose conditions.

Keep in mind the bisonbison plays at 3/6 and while it may not be tight and aggressive by medium stakes standards... it is much more tight and aggressive relative to .5/1 and 1/2.