Success rate for check raises on the turn

[SeriousStudent]

I was interested to find out how often a check raise on the turn successfully won the pot. I analyzed, using Microsoft Access, a PT database of 180,000 hands of PP 5/10, 10/20, 15/30 and 30/60.

I found that a player check raised on the turn 8210 times which is 4.6% of all hands dealt.

Everyone folded to the check raiser on the turn 1372 times ( 16% of the check raises), and the check raiser was called on the turn and ultimately won the pot 4365 times ( 54% of CRs) for a win rate of 70% of hands check raised.

The check raiser was reraised and folded on the turn 1525 times ( 18%), and folded on river or lost at showdown 948 times ( 12%).

What I would like to determine, but it will require writing code as Access isn't sophisticated enough, is to determine my ( or any other player) net positive or negative dollars by calling or raising a check raiser. That is, is the total dollars in pots won ( less bets made by me subsequent to the check raise) by calling or raising a check raise larger than the total dollars invested in pots I lost (summing all subsequent bets by me). Would others find this interesting or useful?

This is my first post on 2+2. I searched to see if I could find similar stats but was unsuccessful.

[karlson]

These are fun stats to play with, but probably won't be particularly useful by themselves. Once you take into account preflop and flop action, and perhaps board cards, now you can start making some serious claims. The right way to do this is not quite clear, but some very simple methods of clustering previous action and board shape should work.

Your secondary project should be doable in access with minimal coding. On the other hand, if I was doing it, I'd dump all the hands into some new format that I was comfortable mining.

For what it's worth, The 18% figure (checkraiser folded to a 3bet) seems ridiculously high. I'd check for a bug.

[Sully]

Pretty impressive first post...I hope you stick around and let us know what you find out.

Also, the "Probability" forum under General Gambling is full of nerds who love stuff like this, so if you don't have any luck here, you might check in with the statistics freaks in the back room.

[NLSoldier]

[ QUOTE ]

Pretty impressive first post...I hope you stick around and let us know what you find out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed!

We need more first posts like this and less first posts like "Party is Rigged!!" or "Bots are taking over!!" or "OMG look at this bad beat!!"

Welcome to the forum. Just try not to get addicted, it can become very time consuming.

[TStoneMBD]

i agree with post 1 that this may not be very accurate because your equation deals with other variables, but projects like this always help the poker community. id love to see your completed stats, welcome to the forum!

[Senor Choppy]

Unlike others, I don't think context is really necessary to come away with a ton of useful info in an endeavour like this. Just knowing the frequency that opponents will check-raise a worse hand heads-up would be nice.

I'd love to have something like this personally, but feel comfortable with this part of my game and wouldn't want others than play poorly postflop catching up for free, so to speak. The same goes with many other PT features, they sound appealing, but in the end it's probably better if Pat sticks to hand replaying abilities and 3rd-rate poker site support [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[DeeJ]

I too hate being check-raised on the turn when I have a decent but not great hand (top pair weak kicker heads up, or top pair good kicker with 2+ others in).

I also did some stats analysis and discovered similar information insofar as the turn raiser or check-raiser had the goods more often than not which they did (~60+% from memory). From this I have deduced that I need a strong re-draw/pot odds or a good hand to carry on with, which I suppose is RTFM anyway [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]