Why I play so crazy

[Bozeman]

Random thoughts/questions:

I have 54% W$@SD. Am I playing too loose?

At 300/600 and 50/100 level my W$@SD drops below 50%. Others it is 52-65%.

How many bb/hand do you make? I average 0.06, + at all levels, but varying from .01 (300/600) to .14 (10/15) in a non-monotonic fashion.

Bad beats happen. They happen more to good players, since they more often are the favorites when money goes in.

Where in PT do you get the numbers you are quoting?

Take my PT #'s lightly, I have only been using it for ~120 tourneys.

Craig

[talkinghead]

0.05 BB/hnd for me

I think the won at showdown % is lower than I expected it would be as, with a decent stack, you'll put in steal raises and someone will go all-in and you have the odds to call him even though you've the worst hand, self weighting both the initial raise and the call. This sorta thing comes up a lot and I'd be interested to hear if anyone (winning player) had a won@showdown % greater than 65% at SNG's. Personally, i don't think they would.

[Steven Punk]

This is a scary post. The "unlucky" part can be so destructive to newer players if they adopt this.

If you want to make the point that you are trying to gain your chips in an easier fashion than having to commit a big % or all your stack to a thin edge that is fine. Blind steals or flop steals can be quite profitable if you are playing the players rather than your cards.

If new people that aren't as experienced as you in taking advantage of reads and situations will go broke adopting your innitial post and if you played ring with this attitude you wouldn't last a month.

[CrisBrown]

Hi Steven,

This post is over two months old, and was written while I was in a terrible funk. As allen pointed out in his reply, my W$SD percentage was exactly what I should have expected given the percentage of times I was ahead vs. behind when the money went in. I'd previously read a post suggesting that in NL play, your W$SD percentage should be around 80%, and once I read allen's reply to my post, I realized that 80% figure was a pipe dream.

I don't know why someone decided to resurrect this dead horse. *shrugs* Entertainment value, I guess.

Cris

[Steven Punk]

Sorry didn't notice the dates. Please disregard my rantings. (Most do anyway)

[ThaSaltCracka]

yeah where did this thread come from???? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[MrDannimal]

"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

[LinusKS]

I guess that's what you get for believing everything you read. But, wow. 80%?

I guess if the mythic nl player played nothing but AA... maybe.


Allen's post was interesting.

I'd never quite thought about it that way... but winning just 58% of the time when you're a 2-1 favorite three out of four times you go in... is pretty sobering.

Puts a new light on winning less than you "deserve."


Btw, YOUR POST MAKES ME WANT TO STICK A FORK IN MY TESTICLES.

(j/k)



[ QUOTE ]
Hi Steven,

This post is over two months old, and was written while I was in a terrible funk. As allen pointed out in his reply, my W$SD percentage was exactly what I should have expected given the percentage of times I was ahead vs. behind when the money went in. I'd previously read a post suggesting that in NL play, your W$SD percentage should be around 80%, and once I read allen's reply to my post, I realized that 80% figure was a pipe dream.

I don't know why someone decided to resurrect this dead horse. *shrugs* Entertainment value, I guess.

Cris

[/ QUOTE ]