Villain Stats and Sample Sizes

[luvr]

I'm fairly new to poker forums and started on 2+2 a short while ago before relocating to Leggo. I just wanted to post my thoughts on something I keep noticing. I don't know if this is going to be useful or not but...well I started typing and just spewed.

I keep seeing people posting "villain is x/y/z over <50 hands". Personally I try not to pay attention to stats over a very very small sample and like to not include them in my HH posts if I think the sample size is irrelevant. I'm not a fish/maniac by any means but I can run 35/28 on a table over a bunch of hands but only because I'm catching the cards to do so. I don't think initial stats on opponents are useful and using them is more likely to cause incorrect reads. I think if the stats are like 70/2/inf over 50ish hands with a lot of limp/calls then he's probably a donk but just cause a guy played 40/33 over a small sample doesnt mean much, could be a reg 23/18 running hot or tilting and you don't really know.

I think in it would be more useful to ignore <50 or <100 sample sizes and instead post a comment about how you feel they've been playing. Might sound lame but usually after a playing a couple pots with a person (or more carefully observing your tables)you can get a better feel for the type or player they are.

When posting hand histories you could also mention a couple previous hands you've seen them play/show down and if not just post that villain is "unknown". You're not expected to have an exact read on a guy you've just sat with for 25 hands IMO.

This also applies to actually playing, look at small sample sizes if you want but I wouldn't put too much weight on it. I think people are putting too much weight on stats when I see something like "zomg he's 50/30, he's a psycho, his range is so weak just ship it" (forgetting it's just over 20 hands).

Challenge: Try playing without stats once and awhile...I don't think there's harm in going back to basics to keep you on your toes. I've been playing "seriously" since last winter and just started using a HUD <2 weeks ago. If you do go without stats for a session, maybe post here and tell us how it goes? If you learn anything?

I thought of this because I was reading a post where someone said villain is x/y/z over ~25 hands and that reminded me of a post by someone smarter than I about newer poker players using stats and I think that person had a point (sorry I don't remember who you are). They were basically saying that if you're fairly new to poker and just working on the theory & fundamentals of being a winning player then in truth stats probably aren't helping you much anyway. For example if you don't really understand the difference between an aggression factor of 1.5 for a player with a VP$IP of 60 vs a player with a VP$IP of 15 then you could very well be making incorrect assumptions based off it.Aggression Factor - a link Probability pointed out to me (thx again).



Good luck on the virtual felt everyone!



-Luvr

[Maximus13]

I think Ryan Fee started the buzz about new players should be playing w/o a hud, and how many new players rely on stats w/o really understanding the game itself.

Over time I have learned what stats should look like over a small sample, high vpip like 35/28 over 25 hands does not mean to much other then i am getting suspicious, this doesn't mean I am willing to call 3 streets with a marginal tp hand on a board where the draws have completed or something.

However:
What we can use the stats for even over a small sample is irregularities in there stats to pick up on player tendencies.

For example:
This player we notice has a 35/28 but has folded to 0/4 cbets, and has agf of 9 I am suddenly alot more suspicious. then if he was 35/28 with a fold to cbet of 60% and agf of 3.

Another irregularity that I commonly see that noobs will have is a vpip of 25/6 this shows they lack preflop aggression, therefore we can assume that they do not understand preflop aggression and will adjust poorly, so I will begin to exploit him by apply preflop aggression.

In summary we can't trust some stats in the short run, but we can trust irregularities in the stats pretty early to pick up on tendencies and player types, once we have defined there tendencies we can begin to adjust and exploit.

[luvr]

Yes! It was Ryan Fee who put that idea in my head. Good call. I also agree with you, initial stats aren't useless depending on who's using them. For newer players though, stats could be misinterpreted. I was just bored and it was like 2:30am so I thought I'd start typing.

[preflopjitters]

Stats are overrated in general. It is much harder to pay attention to timing/bet sizing tells and take notes on specific lines your opponents have taken, and I think those things advance your game more, too.

[Maximus13]

Originally Posted by luvr

Yes! It was Ryan Fee who put that idea in my head. Good call. I also agree with you, initial stats aren't useless depending on who's using them. For newer players though, stats could be misinterpreted. I was just bored and it was like 2:30am so I thought I'd start typing.

Don't get me wrong, Misinterpreting stats have cost me alot of money as well as using stat to justify bad call downs. You make some great points in your post, and I was simply just trying to add to the discussion.

[robbyd86]

I typically post the stats, but make sure i give the hands sample so ppl don't blow it out of proportion. However, if someone has a small sample but is 71/8 u can be pretty sure they're a fish. When you're playing 4-6 tables stats are sometimes all you have to go off of, and if it's not a decent sample, i treat it as an unknown plr.

I do think stats are overrated and think that it's better to play w/o a HUD, but at the same time HUD makes life a lot easier. Every now and then I like to two table w/ no HUD, and just take massive amounts of notes. But when I play w/ a HUD, i basically use stats as my notes unless i see something specific worth taking note. It's just a lot easier to identify who the fish are imo.

[Probability]

Stats have costs me multiple K's without question.

I have learned slower and spewed more because of them.

[stockton]

To me it seems ridiculous to not play with a HUD and I'll explain why.

In a game where information is EVERYTHING, the HUD is just more information. It seems pointless to blame your inability to use it properly and apply it properly on the HUD itself. It's just regurgitating information, it is up to the player to use it in the most +EV way even if that means ignoring it for that situation. I'm not saying be a HUD monkey with stats on "gone to showdown on tuesdays", but what I am saying is the HUD is not to blame for your bad plays. we are all responsible for our own bad plays, it isn't the HUD's fault, it's our inability to properly apply its information.

The HUD is the messenger, and we all know you don't shoot the messenger.

[Probability]

It's incorrect information imo.

The HUD does not say how often someone c/r vs me or how much liter they open when there is a fish in the BB.

It also makes you lazy.

[stockton]

Originally Posted by Probability

It's incorrect information imo.

The HUD does not say how often someone c/r vs me or how much liter they open when there is a fish in the BB.

It also makes you lazy.

this is also you misinterpreting the info. it doesn't claim to tell you how often villian c/r you.

lazy is a personality trait. probably not induced by the use of a HUD