Get to showdown more? Prove it.

[crockpot]

[ QUOTE ]
For example:

.32 x .54 = .1728. 17.28% of the time when you play a hand you get to showdown and win.

How about 36% SD% but only 50% W$SD (which is close to my stats, so this is where I'm getting it from)

.36 x .50 = .18 When I play a hand I take it to showdown and win 18% of the time or so. 0.7% adds up over tens of thousands of hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

this math is bogus. if you are only dealt winning hands 20% of the time, it is much better to have a 20% SD% and a 100% W$SD, than vice versa. according to your equations, those two stat lines come out the same.

in your example, assuming your playing styles are the same, you're adding in 0.7% of hands where you win a pot, but 3.3% where you lose a pot. you should still come out ahead, but not by nearly as much as you suggest.

[7ontheline]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For example:

.32 x .54 = .1728. 17.28% of the time when you play a hand you get to showdown and win.

How about 36% SD% but only 50% W$SD (which is close to my stats, so this is where I'm getting it from)

.36 x .50 = .18 When I play a hand I take it to showdown and win 18% of the time or so. 0.7% adds up over tens of thousands of hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

this math is bogus. if you are only dealt winning hands 20% of the time, it is much better to have a 20% SD% and a 100% W$SD, than vice versa. according to your equations, those two stat lines come out the same.

in your example, assuming your playing styles are the same, you're adding in 0.7% of hands where you win a pot, but 3.3% where you lose a pot. you should still come out ahead, but not by nearly as much as you suggest.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right. I had thought about that, but neglected to mention it. You are winning more pots overall but losing bets on other hands. I think this is really a crude tool in any case - there are so many variables that go into this. I was mentioning it because I had seen it previously described by people smarter than me. In any case, I still think that there is something to this but it's hard to truly make quantitative judgments.