13 replies to this topic

[Nathrax]

Hello folks, newbie reporting for knowledge! :-)First of all, being a newbie, I apologize in advance if this isn't the correct forum to post in. That being said, here's my dilemma:I've played quite a bit of 2+0.25$ at Full Tilt Poker, and think I have enough played to draw a few conclusions about my game.The problem is that it's not quite obvious which ones to draw.Attached to this post is a graph showing my first 700 or so SNG's at the 2+0.25$ level.Can any of you smart guys say anything useful about it, or do I need to get more data?Thanks in advanceNathrax  SNG_stats.jpg   194.46K   36 downloads

[dead money]

Nathrax, on Saturday, March 5th, 2011, 8:48 AM, said:

Hello folks, newbie reporting for knowledge! :-)First of all, being a newbie, I apologize in advance if this isn't the correct forum to post in. That being said, here's my dilemma:I've played quite a bit of 2+0.25$ at Full Tilt Poker, and think I have enough played to draw a few conclusions about my game.The problem is that it's not quite obvious which ones to draw.Attached to this post is a graph showing my first 700 or so SNG's at the 2+0.25$ level.Can any of you smart guys say anything useful about it, or do I need to get more data?Thanks in advanceNathrax SNG_stats.jpg

You are winning. Its a small sample but its pretty safe to say you can beat this level. Move up. Play at least 1000 sngs at the next level. If you find similar results then move up again. Only advice I can give you is not to get too into your data. It will mess with you. Just focus on playing your best game and everything will work out.

[outsider13]

Looks pretty good. Not sure what your dilemma is. What kind of conclusion are you trying to come to? Do you want to move up? Obviously if you have the roll to support it, you definitely should.GL!

[Nathrax]

Well, the conclusions (or answers) I was looking for were along the lines of:* Is the variance normal for the level in question?* Are the the ROI and ITM normal or too low to move up in level with confidence?* Is the sample too little? (Which was answered:Yes, it kind'a is.)* Are the distribution of payed placements (First, second and third) skewed in any way compared to other peoples graphs?Sorry for not being more clear about it, guess I'll blame my newbie-ness.Anyway, grateful for any answers.- Nathrax

[outsider13]

The roi seems pretty good. You could be higher for the stake being played, but 10% is good. 700 games is definitely a small sample, but it won't hurt you to move up in stakes at all. Just try and get out of the micros as quick as you can. Paying over 10% rake is dumb.

[MaxStPolish]

outsider13, on Saturday, March 5th, 2011, 8:59 PM, said:

The roi seems pretty good. You could be higher for the stake being played, but 10% is good. 700 games is definitely a small sample, but it won't hurt you to move up in stakes at all. Just try and get out of the micros as quick as you can. Paying over 10% rake is dumb.

really really dumb, fo real.

[Danege]

dead money, on Sunday, March 6th, 2011, 2:32 AM, said:

Only advice I can give you is not to get too into your data. It will mess with you. Just focus on playing your best game and everything will work out.

Are you referring only to the win/loss data or all his stats from playing?Because reviewing stats is vital to getting better.

[fighter]

I disagree with danege. Just causeEither that or because stats are representations of your game and addressing other issues should affect your figures anyway. However looking at your stats and reverse engineering corrections can lead to you plugging leaks that don't exist since GTO is not known and good poker strategy is more holistic then small parts.

[DinkDonk]

fighter, on Sunday, March 6th, 2011, 8:09 PM, said:

I disagree with danege. Just causeEither that or because stats are representations of your game and addressing other issues should affect your figures anyway. However looking at your stats and reverse engineering corrections can lead to you plugging leaks that don't exist since GTO is not known and good poker strategy is more holistic then small parts.

Vague, but definitely true. You're winning for sure, but that doesn't mean you can't improve. Take any route available to you, coaching, sweat session, stat reviews, etc. and play whatever stakes offer you the most long-term success. If playing lower than your bankroll provides benefits you in ways that playing higher won't, take the hit in hourly rate now and benefit later. In poker, the long-term, super anal approach is the way to go these days. Players are just too good at all stakes to skip developmental stages.

[DinkDonk]

fighter, on Sunday, March 6th, 2011, 8:09 PM, said:

I disagree with danege. Just causeEither that or because stats are representations of your game and addressing other issues should affect your figures anyway. However looking at your stats and reverse engineering corrections can lead to you plugging leaks that don't exist since GTO is not known and good poker strategy is more holistic then small parts.

Vague, but definitely true. You're winning for sure, but that doesn't mean you can't improve. Take any route available to you, coaching, sweat session, stat reviews, etc. and play whatever stakes offer you the most long-term success. If playing lower than your bankroll provides benefits to you in ways that playing higher won't, take the hit in hourly rate now and benefit later. In poker, the long-term, super anal approach is the way to go these days. Players are just too good at all stakes to skip developmental stages.

[dead money]

Danege, on Sunday, March 6th, 2011, 3:48 AM, said:

Are you referring only to the win/loss data or all his stats from playing?Because reviewing stats is vital to getting better.

I wouldnt say vital. Reviewing stats can help speed up the learning curve immensely. But I wouldnt say you need to. In fact, I doubt you will find many winning players doing it at all. What I was referring to was that you can become obsessed with your stats. That can be a very dangerous thing. It can mess with your emotions and lead to poor play.

[outsider13]

STTs are a dif beast though when it comes to stats. The most important stats we should be checking in STTs are icm spots. There is importance to looking at early game stats. Some people play too aggressive in the early game and that can be a major leak. Money is won/lost though in the shove/fold stages, and looking at your graph doesn't prove anything about your ability. Based on the results though I'd say you have a good grasp of what's going on.edit, there are a wide range of stats too that are very important (vpip, pfr, steal%, fold to steal, etc.... ). Don't get me wrong. I just think that they can be easily broken down by icm calculators......granted using those stats for ranges.

[Mr. Sparco]

OP, if you don't mind a little math, perhaps you find this interesting:How Big is Big Enough?It's an article I wrote on sample sizes for SNGs; it explains how many SNGs you should have played with a certain ROI to be reasonably sure you are beating the level you're playing at.

[Nathrax]

Good stuff Mr. Sparco.I feel enlightened, thanks! :-)