Normal loss in blinds at micro stakes 6max

You're doing well. Remember if you folded every hand your winrates would be:

SB -50bb/100
BB -100bb/100

Originally posted by holmeboy
You're doing well. Remember if you folded every hand your winrates would be:

SB -50bb/100
BB -100bb/100

No.

Assuming a full 6-max table: You post the big blind 1/6*100% of the time = 16.666... bb/100 hands. Similarly for the small blind: 8.333...bb/100 hands. Round off to get 16 and 8 respectively. It's ok to do slightly worse because the tables aren't always full, meaning you post blinds more often.

Originally posted by YohanN7

Originally posted by holmeboy
You're doing well. Remember if you folded every hand your winrates would be:

SB -50bb/100
BB -100bb/100

No.

Assuming a full 6-max table: You post the big blind 1/6*100% of the time = 16.666... bb/100 hands. Similarly for the small blind: 8.333...bb/100 hands. Round off to get 16 and 8 respectively. It's ok to do slightly worse because the tables aren't always full, meaning you post blinds more often.

You lose 1bb every time you are bb if you fold, so after 100 hands in bb you will lose 100bb = 100bb/100.

If you filter out only the SB and the BB hands, you will loose:

Originally posted by holmeboy
You're doing well. Remember if you folded every hand your winrates would be:

SB -50bb/100 (or whatewer is the sb)
BB -100bb/100

If you count that you would fold every hand playing 6max, Yohan is right, but don't really see, what's the point of that, when talking only about SB and BB play.

Originally posted by Baluuu111
If you filter out only the SB and the BB hands, you will loose:

Originally posted by holmeboy
You're doing well. Remember if you folded every hand your winrates would be:

SB -50bb/100 (or whatewer is the sb)
BB -100bb/100

If you count that you would fold every hand playing 6max, Yohan is right, but don't really see, what's the point of that, when talking only about SB and BB play.

No.

Then you would just lose 1,5bb pr orbit, you still won't lose more or less than 50bb/100 from sb and 100bb/100 from bb

It has nothing to do with how many hands you play overall, but how many hands you play from the specific position.

I have also calculated that folding every bb would be -16bb/100h.I have currently lost -16bb/100h from sb, so 40sb/100h(bb=2.5sb) instead of 16. I don't think this is slightly worse :(.

Of course I am not always playing at full tables and I post blinds more often that 16.66/100h, but it still seems to me like a huge leak.

@JcSeerup you are saying that when I filter hands by position in hm, the winrate for bb(for example) is for 100h played from bb? I don't think you are wright..

When you take a specific position you only look at hands from that position. Because you always post on BB if you were to fold everytime you lose -100bb/100.

Its the same from UTG. If you were to fold everyhand from UTG your winrate from that position would be 0bb/100.

I didn't realise this was FL so ignore my comments about your winrates being really good (they still might be, but I literally have no idea for FL).

@holmeboy overall, the winrate is ok for fl(6bb/100h) but I didn't know that when filtering by position the winrate is shown only for the hands played in that specific position

You loss rates from the blinds are fantastic. I've heard coaches say keeping them under -60/100 combined is good and you at -38/100!

Yeap...I have looked again at the stats and it seems both Jcseerup and holmeboy are correct(thanks). I thought the loss is overall and not for the hands in that specific position.

I have really thought that because I am over-competitive and don't like to give up the blinds without a fight cost me a lot of money.

can someone tell me how the winrate looks from every position?

EP +15.09bb/100h
MP +21.24bb/100h
CO +21.95bb/100h
BTN +25.77bb/100h
SB -16.22bb/100h
BB - 22.24bb/100h

thank you.

how large is your sample for every position? BB winrate is great, SB also good, rest I don't know. Btw in FL we normally talk about Big Bets (BB), which is bb/2

Originally posted by decentplayer
Yeap...I have looked again at the stats and it seems both Jcseerup and holmeboy are correct(thanks). I thought the loss is overall and not for the hands in that specific position.

No, they are not except for the trivial fact that if you are on the big blind permanently, then you have -100bb/100 hands. You do not have the big blind every hand unless you play at a particularly rigged site. I'd advise you to play elsewhere if that is the case ♦

You should compare your numbers with 16 and 8 for the big and the small blind respectively, as explained in post number 2, at least if you use data from PT or HM.

(Your stats -16 and -22 is truly a big leak, fix it ;))

Edit: Did you filter out exactly 6-handed? This is important, because if you play plenty 2,3,4-handed, then your stats may be ok.

Originally posted by YohanN7

Originally posted by decentplayer
Yeap...I have looked again at the stats and it seems both Jcseerup and holmeboy are correct(thanks). I thought the loss is overall and not for the hands in that specific position.

No, they are not except for the trivial fact that if you are on the big blind permanently, then you have -100bb/100 hands. You do not have the big blind every hand unless you play at a particularly rigged site. I'd advise you to play elsewhere if that is the case ♦

You should compare your numbers with 16 and 8 for the big and the small blind respectively, as explained in post number 2, at least if you use data from PT or HM.

(Your stats -16 and -22 is truly a big leak, fix it ;))

Edit: Did you filter out exactly 6-handed? This is important, because if you play plenty 2,3,4-handed, then your stats may be ok.

Unless HM/PT reads it completely differently for fl than nl I'm 100% sure JC & myself are correct in this matter. For positional winrates it reads every hand for that position in isolation, the other 5 hands (assuming 6 handed) have absolutely no bearing. So for BB winrate it reads only hands from big blind, so every hand under that category has posted 1bb hence if you fold every time your wr = -100bb/100 so its very misleading using 16 & 8 respectively.

And big bet BB = bb*2 iirc

Originally posted by holmeboy
And big bet BB = bb*2 iirc

almost corerrect. BB = bb/2. One Big Blind (bb) is .5 Big Bets (BB). So good numbers are:

Big Blind: -16 BB = -32 bb
Small Blind: -8 BB = -16 bb.

Originally posted by Funkmaster

Originally posted by holmeboy
And big bet BB = bb*2 iirc

almost corerrect. BB = bb/2. One Big Blind (bb) is .5 Big Bets (BB).

Sorry yeah you are completely right. My mistake.

@ Funkmaster I have 203k hands in total, ~40k from BB and 40k from SB

@Yohan yes, they are correct...I have calculated and if I had folded every bb I would have lost 1970usd and now I have only -395 lost

At this limit I have played only SH and I don't know how to filter only the full tables, but I rarely play with other 3 players at the table and almost never with other 2, so overall this doesn't affect the stats too much.

PS I know that people now use BB as reference, but my winrate in HM is in bb and I have posted the numbers as they are

seems like you're a decent player ♦

Originally posted by holmeboy

Originally posted by YohanN7

Originally posted by decentplayer
Yeap...I have looked again at the stats and it seems both Jcseerup and holmeboy are correct(thanks). I thought the loss is overall and not for the hands in that specific position.

No, they are not except for the trivial fact that if you are on the big blind permanently, then you have -100bb/100 hands. You do not have the big blind every hand unless you play at a particularly rigged site. I'd advise you to play elsewhere if that is the case ♦

You should compare your numbers with 16 and 8 for the big and the small blind respectively, as explained in post number 2, at least if you use data from PT or HM.

(Your stats -16 and -22 is truly a big leak, fix it ;))

Edit: Did you filter out exactly 6-handed? This is important, because if you play plenty 2,3,4-handed, then your stats may be ok.

Unless HM/PT reads it completely differently for fl than nl I'm 100% sure JC & myself are correct in this matter. For positional winrates it reads every hand for that position in isolation, the other 5 hands (assuming 6 handed) have absolutely no bearing. So for BB winrate it reads only hands from big blind, so every hand under that category has posted 1bb hence if you fold every time your wr = -100bb/100 so its very misleading using 16 & 8 respectively.

And big bet BB = bb*2 iirc

You may be correct, but I've read elsewhere that 16 and 8 are the numbers to use. Besides, I have 150k hands in PT4. My stats are:

Big blind: -15.37 bb/100 hands
Small blind: -7.34 bb/100 hands

I am a marginally winning player. What a coincidence that my stats matches the 16/8 so well. Also, if I'm supposed to lose 100 bb/100 hands in the big blind and 50 in the small, well, then I'm a pretty fucking incredible FL Hold'em player in the blinds - and so is decentplayer.

Edit: I suspect that PT4 takes your number (-100/100 hands) and divides it by 6 (for 6-max) to get a measure of "cost per orbit" of sitting in the blinds. See what I mean?

Originally posted by YohanN7
Big blind: -15.37 bb/100 hands
Small blind: -7.34 bb/100 hands

I doubt that.

even -8BB/-16BB are in fact good numbers, your conclusion how to get to these numbers is incorrect. play in sb or bb has nothing to do with the play in any other position and should be analyzed seperately, and that is what HM is doing.