|
|
#12
03-27-2005, 11:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: VPIP for all pairs
How about adding BB/Hand? And if there are any apparent anomolies, any other relevant information.
Sample derived from 37k of .5/1. Had each pair between 162 and 180 times. Hand-VPIP-BB/Hand-CCPF 77 91 +.19 14 66 90 +.95 12 55 88 -.20 07 44 91 -.18 06 33 82 -.09 09 22 78 -.05 08 I am negative on 55 and down. I studied the data and have come to the tentative conclusion that I am losing with them because I am not cold calling with them as much. For comparison, I cold called 88 17 times and 99 14 times. Also notice I cold called 33 and 22 slightly more than 55 and 44 and I'm losing less with 33-22. This may all make sense because a set of twos is almost as good as a set of sevens or a set of kings. Set over set hardly ever happens. What do you think? 
|
|
#13
03-27-2005, 11:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: VPIP for all pairs
[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying I should be playing 22 and 33 from EP, even though it is unprofitable from better positions through 19K hands? Tom [/ QUOTE ] Yes. They are profitable hands from all positions. I don't have any numbers because when my computer crashed, it took all my DBs away. Luckily, I had just done a hand review of all my 2/4 hands so those were on CD.
|
|
#14
03-27-2005, 11:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: VPIP for all pairs
[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying I should be playing 22 and 33 from EP, even though it is unprofitable from better positions through 19K hands? Tom [/ QUOTE ] You should definitely play any pair UTG. Seriously, micro-limit games are more than loose passive enough to limp these hands. Click me! 19k hands is no where near a big enough sample size to determine how profitable a single hand is from different positions. Do you limp A2s UTG?
|
|
#16
03-27-2005, 12:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: VPIP for all pairs
[ QUOTE ]
I fold a2s from EP sometimes even MP, depending on the table. Tom [/ QUOTE ] Unless you are playing at bad tables (pretty damn unlikely at Party [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]) you should limp suited Aces UTG, even A2s. Obviously raise the larger ones.
|
|
#17
03-28-2005, 08:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: VPIP for all pairs
Interesting.
My Leak-ometer is now twitching wildly ... I only have about 5000 hands in my database, $0.25/$0.50 at PokerStars and PokerRoom, but my VPIP figures for small pairs are WAY smaller than what you guys are getting. Makes me wonder what I'm doing wrong. Typically, at PokerStars, 40% are seeing the flop, which makes it a tight game according to Ed Miller. Hence, I'm following his tight games advice re starting hands. I THOUGHT that meant I shouldn't cold call raises in EP or MP with anything less than TT. Am I mistaken? Any help you guys could give me on this would be much appreciated. Thanks.
|
|
#18
03-28-2005, 04:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: VPIP for all pairs
[ QUOTE ]
I THOUGHT that meant I shouldn't cold call raises in EP or MP with anything less than TT. Am I mistaken? [/ QUOTE ] The original post just asked about limping with pairs, not cold-calling raises with them. I don't have access to PT at work tight now, but mine are probably in line with others already posted.
|
|
#20
03-28-2005, 07:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: VPIP for all pairs
[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying I should be playing 22 and 33 from EP, even though it is unprofitable from better positions through 19K hands? [/ QUOTE ] That's what most of the better players recommend, but I wouldn't play them unless you've had positive results from MP. I DO NOT play them from EP either. I don't enjoy donating money to my opponents just because a handful of players that are probably better than me are winning with them.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
