150k hand checkup

[Trix]

I thought it was some weird looking toombstone :/

[sweetjazz]

This thread is probably worth a bump. I just came across it, and the think that surprises me the most is that Illunious has such a high winrate and W$SD, but such a low W$WSF.

I have to small of a sample size for my results to be significant and my playing style is very different. My VPIP is a little under 19% (though I've been running good in starting cards, so my real VPIP is probably closer to 18.5%) and my PFR is 11% (too high I think -- I'm keeping an eye on some of my more marginal raises; I've also logged a significant number of hands at tables that became shorthanded which may explain the higher number). That might explain why my W$SF is higher (about 33%), since my pots are more likely to be less multiway. Or is just due to the fact that Illunious is sometimes folding winners after the flop. Could it be the bets that he saves when playing those marginal hands that end up losing are more than the bets he wins when the marginal hands hold up? My instinct says no, but I am open to empirical evidence to the contrary.

I originally thought Illunious had managed to exercise great table selection, above and beyond the usual awful play at a typical 0.5/1 table. But this does not seem to be the case, given that he's multi-tabling. Although Illunious talks about foregoing marginal plays, he must be quite expert at pumping up pots when he has a pot equity edge. That is such a hugely important factor when playing 0.5/1.

It seems that either some of the aggressive post-flop play may be wrong (overplaying e.g. A2s when flopping an A because so many people limp with any A and will never fold it under any circumstances), or that an even higher true winrate is sustainable at 0.5/1. I've only played 7400 hands at 0.5/1, so I can't contribute anything statistically meaningful to the discussion. While I know I am running good right now, I am not convinced that 5 BB/100 isn't sustainable with expert play. (Of course, if you're winning at that rate, there's good reasons to move on before you play enough hands to statistically "prove" that you have this winrate.)

[illunious]

[ QUOTE ]
I originally thought Illunious had managed to exercise great table selection, above and beyond the usual awful play at a typical 0.5/1 table. But this does not seem to be the case, given that he's multi-tabling.

[/ QUOTE ]

I average 30 hands per session. I think I do benefit greatly from table selection. I am usually on 9 BB+ avg pot tables.

[grouchie]

just out of curiosity, how long did it take you to get to the point where you could 16 table?

[illunious]

[ QUOTE ]
just out of curiosity, how long did it take you to get to the point where you could 16 table?

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that a question for me? I don't 16 table, 10 tables is my comfort level after about one year of playing poker online. I've tried 12 and 15 tables and I don't like it.

[zuluking]

You da man.

[Greg J]

Quite an epenis you have there. Can I touch it?

[bennyk]

I have never seen someone post a VPIP as low as mine. I feel less alone now.
bk

[zuluking]

Illunious is a poker GOD. I wish he'd PM me his Party Poker screen names so I could avoid him. I'm sure he's taken me for a few $$$ over the past year.

[bennyk]

of course, i meant i felt less alone in the similar VPIP sense, not the quality of play sense.

I don't see him telling us his SN anytime soon, for obvious reasons [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

bk