A request regarding reads (no hand)

[Jaran]

[begin soapbox]I have noticed something that has been going on in the forum for a while that I would like to address. Specifically, the way people are using limited PT stats in place of a read. When I see something like "villian is 45/5.2/1 over 25 hands" (and this is not topic on any specific poster), I get the feeling that the OP has no idea how this villian is actually playing. These stats are pretty worthless until you have many more hands than this. Rather than post a bunch of numbers that mean absolutely nothing, try and tell me about how this villian plays: i.e. has he just called down the last ten hands w/middle pair or less, did he cap the flop HU with a 4flush, or even something like he has been calling too much pf and hasn't raised postflop once. Pokertracker is a great tool, and one that we all should utilize. However, do not let it become a substitute for you in one of the most important areas of poker, reading the other players play.[/end soapbox]

[Bodhi]

Duh... Pretty obvious stuff. Most of us give other reads besides PT stats when we have them, if we don't have them we just give PT stats. Deal with it.

[Jaran]

I think you are missing the point. The pt numbers over a limited number of hands are not really worth much. However, you should be able to get a feel for what the player is playing, and how he plays it, in the same limited number of hands. Maybe I'm being a bit pendantic about it, but I am seeing a reliance on pokertracker for reads, rather than judging the plays. And I feel that this reliance can stunt the growth of a player.

-Jaran

[@bsolute_luck]

search for Entity's post "when a read is not a read". he addresses the same issue. sadly most people don't seem to have taken it to heart.

[KingOtter]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you are missing the point. The pt numbers over a limited number of hands are not really worth much. However, you should be able to get a feel for what the player is playing, and how he plays it, in the same limited number of hands. Maybe I'm being a bit pendantic about it, but I am seeing a reliance on pokertracker for reads, rather than judging the plays. And I feel that this reliance can stunt the growth of a player.

-Jaran

[/ QUOTE ]

When I get a 'read' on a player... a particular characteristic that I think defines their play beyond Poker Tracker stats, I stick it in a note on that player.

Usually after about 45-50 hands I've got notes on most everyone.

But when I join a new table I almost never see anyone with a note on them.

So everytime I open a table I pretty much have to learn everyone (except the ever-present rocks that I've over 300-400 hands on).

So... my point is... I'd be willing to bet that after only 25 hands, Poker Tracker stats is the most valuable information they may have on a person.

I'm just sayin' ...

KO

[Jaran]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think you are missing the point. The pt numbers over a limited number of hands are not really worth much. However, you should be able to get a feel for what the player is playing, and how he plays it, in the same limited number of hands. Maybe I'm being a bit pendantic about it, but I am seeing a reliance on pokertracker for reads, rather than judging the plays. And I feel that this reliance can stunt the growth of a player.

-Jaran

[/ QUOTE ]

When I get a 'read' on a player... a particular characteristic that I think defines their play beyond Poker Tracker stats, I stick it in a note on that player.

Usually after about 45-50 hands I've got notes on most everyone.

But when I join a new table I almost never see anyone with a note on them.

So everytime I open a table I pretty much have to learn everyone (except the ever-present rocks that I've over 300-400 hands on).

So... my point is... I'd be willing to bet that after only 25 hands, Poker Tracker stats is the most valuable information they may have on a person.

I'm just sayin' ...

KO

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe I think differently than others, but I would much rather rely on what I've seen in a players play after 25 hands than a string of numbers which aren't going to give a true indication of what kind of player he is. I watch what players showdown, I'm constantly checking the HH's in the upper corner. I make notes on anything that is out of the ordinary. Additionally, when you are looking at the numbers, does it tell you if a person might be pretty decent postflop, even if he is way too loose pf? I really feel a lot of players are using pokertracker as a crutch rather than using it to refine reads that they make on their own. And I feel this is a mistake.

-Jaran

[aK13]

I must agree.

First off, PT stats are completely useless over 25 hands.

Secondly, these stats often don't tell you about other tendencies that you should know from observing players, such as "limps AA/KK", "calls down with any PP", "coldcalls with any hand he would raise", etc.

If over 25 hands you can't get a feel for how your opponent plays, you need to cut the tables and really focus.

[Bodhi]

Don't ignore the fact that after 25 hands the stats on someone tend not to change much. I have extensive hand histories for many players who I see frequently, and they are mostly static after the 40-60 mark after a little swing in some direction from 25.

I should import my notes into PT again.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't ignore the fact that after 25 hands the stats on someone tend not to change much.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's very incorrect.

[bozlax]

I'm in agreement with Jaran on this point, and will even extend it. Posters seem to be using these statistics to justify marginal or even bad plays, e.g., "I know that raising J9o out of MP3 is LAGgish, but MP2 is 75/15/0.3 over 32 hands so I wanted to isolate him. Too aggro?"

I've actually given up multi-tabling for a while (except to clear bonuses) in order to try and wean myself off PT/PV a little bit. 2/4 is fascinating without the colorful little number cloud around all the avatars but mine.