just curious about what a good showdown win % is for limit, I'm usually around 80%, but its been lower lately b/c of suckouts, but whats a good percentage. Thanks

80%!?

Your folding WAY to much.

80% seems a bit high. You may be folding too many winners. I'm no expert, but I thought the rule of thumb was to aim for the 60's in percentage.

55-60 percent

in limit

100% obviously

interesting, thanks for the help

huh?

i'm so confused...

isn't 80% unusually tremendous?

he's winning 80% of his showdowns? i wish i could do that...

maybe i'm just having a completely braindead moment... how is he folding way too much or folding too many winners if he's winning a whopping 4 out of 5 showdowns?

also, 55% - 60% is unusually high for limit. ideally, you want to be around 50%. i'm at about 49% and i'm trying to find out why i'm not a few points higher. wrto was on a good run when he was up to 53% or so, i think.

am i just completely braindead?

are we talking about folded to a river bet % and not win at showdown %??

aseem

Yeah, I missed the boat on this one as well.

I would be curious as to what is a good showdown % where you don't fold on the river in limit and NL.

80% is great. On GOOD nights I run 80%-85%. Usually I think I am around 60-65%.

Limit that is!

60-65% is unusually tremendously high.

actually, i take that back. this might be a good/normal number at tighter games where you win more pots you play in but the pots are smaller.

small stakes games feature winning players winning fewer pots they play in, but those pots being far bigger.

so, win at showdown % decreases, but that doesn't affect winrate (actually, winrate is higher at low limits because the increase in size of pots won is disproportionately higher than the decrease in showdowns won).

aseem

I think what they are getting at with saying is he
folding too many winners is that with that high
of a showdown win %, he's only basically "nut peddling"
whereas he may be folding hands that would have
been winners at the river when he gets bet in to.

I'd like to see his "folded to a river bet %" as well.

this doesn't make sense at all.

folding too many winners on the river would lead to a LOWER won at showdown %.

folding LOSERS leads to a higher won at showdown %.

ok, one thing i haven't considered is the sample size. it's very possible he's folding too much, but if this is a small sample, it may be coincidental that he's just coincidentally folding mostly losers.

it just doesn't make sense that he's folding too many winners and thus his won at showdown % is whoppingly high.

aseem

Maybe I'm missing something here.

If he folds a hand which would have won, it won't affect his
showdown % at all, since he's not showing it down, he's folding it.

If he's not showing down many hands, and only going to the
river with the nuts, or something very close to it, that would
explain his showdown win %.

Like I say, I'd like to see a lot more stats before judging.

aseem is right. you should be looking at a number around 50% or you're folding too many hands on the turn and river, many of which could be winners.

some numbers for you: (others should do the same as "proof")

i am a 2.34 BB/100 player at 10/20. my WSD% is 51.2% over 30k-ish hands.
i am a 2.97 BB/100 player at 5/10. my WSD% is 50.3% over 20k-ish hands.

other players will give you similar numbers, i'm sure. it would seem that as players play tighter at higher levels (generally), you should need a higher WSD% to compensate for the smaller pots.

i think what some are confused about is, like aseem said, that the poorer play at low limits generates such high pots that there is a very small percentage of each pot that is just your own money coming back to you. if you win 40% of your showdowns, but only 20% of the money in your pots belonged to you in the first place (this is often the case at micro and very low limits), then you're looking good, right? even when you're playing juicy tables at higher limits, you're putting in maybe 35-40% of the money at most into the pots that go to showdown.

you're much worse off folding hands that are only a 25% chance to win by your estimate on the river than you are calling when you're "75% sure you're beat." that's because your call is much, much less than 25% of the pot. kapish?

A better way to think of it is: If you only showed down the nuts your show down % would be 100%. Obviously that's not a good idea because you would be folding too many hands that would have won, but you didn't show them down. That's how folding too many winners leads to a high showdown percentage.

interesting way to look at it.

alternately, if you folded only some winners and no losers, your win at showdown % would go DOWN because the ratio of winners to losers would go down.

i guess just one statistic can't completely give the whole picture on whether OP is folding too many winners or losers or what.

aseem

Aseem, you're confused. His elevated W@SD percentage is very likely because he's folding to a river bet too often. As another poster mentioned, that one statistic alone without knowing the fold to river bet number is incomplete information.

A general rule of thumb is around 50 % for looser games, upward of 60 % for much tighter, aggressive games.

-GB

That is correct.

Example: Say I only call on the river with the nuts. Every other hand, I fold. My winning showdown % is 100 but obviously I am folding a ton of winners.

Make sense?

right. like i said above, winning players should post their PT stats on this. i guarantee that the biggest winners win around 50% of their showdowns in the long run at low limits.

67%

well, like i said, i can provide a counterexample too.

say you still kept calling at showdown with your normal hands, except removed a few winners at showdown. your win at showdown % would DECREASE now, since you're calling with the same number of losers but calling with less winners.

just this number alone doesn't tell whether the OP is folding winners or losers.

aseem

and your winrate/limits/# of hands?

i repeat: aseem is right. it's kind of silly that people are arguing this. WSD% is a pretty bona fide known stat to maximize winrate.

I think we're all basically re-stating the same thing

Where the hell is the OP to give us
some more stats??

I only call on the river if I have the nuts. Even if it is checked, if I don't have the nuts, I will fold anyways, as I don't want to have to face the humiliation of losing. Therefore, my showdown percentage is 100 percent. I am 34 for 34 in 356 hours played, man, I am undefeated...

And also down probably 12000BB/100.

lol

vnh. but i'm sure you get that every time your opponents see your cards, eh? :-)

2.9 BB/100 - .5/1 - a little over 8K hands
2.4 BB/100 - 1/2 - about 5K hands

P.S.--I think I am playing at a higher winrate right now. After reading this forum, I am starting consisantly winning more and my stats have just begun to show it.

Also, I played 1/2 before playing .5/1, so I think I am a better player since playing that limit.

With a decent finish yesterday in a MTT, I almost have the bankroll to move back to 1/2.

Folding winners, yes, but also folding a ton of winners. I guess the question of those folded hands, what % of those were winners vs. losers.

Well, if was heads up when you folded, there is no way to know if it was a winner or a loser.

52-56%

read this http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat...rt=&PHPSESSID=/

ok, so i don't have pokertracker, but I've played about 10,000 hands and have averaged my showdown win % between 72%- 80%. Now for the first 8,000 or so I was on a pretty good run, taking my BR from 160 to 880 playin .5/1 then 1/2. And over the last couple thousand I've been in a downswing. So what i've gathered from these posts is I need to be calling more river bets. Which is interesting, b/c I already feel like I call to many hands where I know I'm beat. Is this just b/c caling the extra $2 is ok, because i could risk folding the winning hand and costing myself a $12 pot or something. I'm looking to get pokertracker soon and hopefully this will clear up some statistical problems. Thanks for all the help guys.

You want somewhere higher than 50%, but not really any higher than 60%.

If you go to high for percentage, than you are giving up alot of money you bet and called into hands that are potential winners. If your win % is that high chances are you aren't paying attention to pot odds at the turn and river.

Betting and calling through 3-4 rounds of bets and then folding at the end because you might lose can be very costly. It may seem like you're winning more if your percentage is high, but in the long run you're losing money.

You also have to look into the hands that you are winning in those percentages. Over 100 hands...say :
Losing a $20 pot and winning an $8 pot make your % needs higher...So, if you win 80% at showdown, and those wins average $8, you've won $640, and losing 20% average $20 pots, you've lost $400 for a total winnings of $240 over 100 hands.

Now say, you're winning 60% over 100 hands...

You win 60 pots averaging $15 for a total of $900
You lose 40 pots averaging $9 for a total of $360
You're total winning is $540 over 100 hands.

So, in essence, you lost 20% more pots the second 100 hands, but won $300 more.

This is an extreme example, but it is a good illustration on why your winning % may not mean nearly as much as you hope it would. This is not a team game with standings in a conference, winning pots means little without the money to back it up. This is the most money won over time, not the most pots.