winnings per hand category

Hi, GingerKid
The is by hand strength at showdown?
Or is this hand strength at some other point?

Small to mid pocket pairs don't seem to be as profitable to play as they used to.
Even when I hit a set I don't seem to get paid off much these days.

Villains are getting wise...

Peace,
VS

I asked a coach the same question, and he said that a negative winrate is prefectly normal with one pair hands at showdown.

How often does one go to showdown with the ambition to win with one pair? Often you end up there after missing a flushdraw with top pair or something.

But I had to compare to see how I have been doing myself.
iPoker 1.8% of hands -147.95bb/100
Pokerstars 2.8% of hands - 99.94 bb/100
Svenska Spel 2.1% of hands -15.93 bb/100

The Pokerstars value is propably a bit high on both cause it contains more than a year as calling station.

The difference in the higher hands seems to be very small
Full house 2204/2783/3109
Flush 2055/1872/2206
Straight 1409/1604/1679
Trips 1409/1604/1679
2 pair 217/148/212
all in bb/100.

Seems like a big part of my loss on iPoker comes from one-pair-at-showdown. Maybe I can learn something from this?

Even when I hit a set I don't seem to get paid off much these days.

It seems that either you have a leak by not raising enough bluffs so that villians are folding too much once you raise due to your low raise vs cbet, or villians where you play are super nitty in which case you should be playing vs them as maniac which is even more profit.

1pair OTR is often a bluffcatcher that is behind viallains range but you have pot odds...

also a lot of people play pps pre where they should fold

also you sometimes turn 1pair into a bluff, so when you get called...

regarding not getting paid off with sets: that's totally fine. back in 2008 pros used to constantly put in 100bb with TPTK or overpair. nowadays people play better.

regarding not getting paid off with sets: that's totally fine. back in 2008 pros used to constantly put in 100bb with TPTK or overpair. nowadays people play better.

If villian is a reg and cbets flop, you raise with your set, and reg defends unexploitable, which means around 60% vs your raise, around 60% vs your turn bet and around 60% vs your river jam, then the probability that the stacks go in are
approximately 0.6*0.6*0.6 = 0.21 (21%). So thats actually rare, and even assumes that reg made a cbet already. But if you start from the beginning of the flop, reg is also going to cbet around 50% of time, so you multiply with that, and you get in the end around 10% stack off (off course there is a time he check calls you down, or check/raises and stacks off, and times where you loose your set, but as I said it is approximation to show how rare you should actually take the whole stack from reg)

yes.....?
i have no idea why you wrote that, are you actually some kind of advanced troll?

lo, GK is one of the smarter guys around here. If you don't care about his analysis, at least be cool.

so do you understand why GK quoted me and then wrote what he wrote under the quote? he's one of the smarter guys? ok... great? if i thought there wasn't a high% that he's one of the smarter guys, i wouldn't have posted in any of these threads, as most people are pretty stupid and thus not worth me talking poker with, but wtf was his analysis? it was really random, irrelevant and incomplete. (e.g. ignored that a sizeable part of the % he mentioned, villain has better than a set and thus you don't get paid off)

my comment about getting paid off with sets was in defence of vorpal. GK's criticism/rebuttal to vorpal saying he feels he rarely gets paid off with sets is flat-out wrong. (like i said, the way people play has changed a lot over the years. regs with big winrates used to often put in 100bb vs set with just TPTK or overpairs in single raised pots. nowadays even the fish i play against online don't do that so easily.)
and i don't want a lower lvl NLHE player like vorpal to suddenly question an important part of his play just because a blackmember, someone who automatically gets more respect, incorrectly told him he has leak. that just tilts me.

I'm not here to fight, but I get the strong feeling that's what you want. It's these things you say that irritate me: "ok... great?", "wtf was his analysis?", "irrelevant and incomplete.", "flat-out wrong."
It's not a productive way to debate things. This is how I used to talk when I was 16.

If you want to prove a point it's much more efficient for you and for everyone else if you just use actual winrates of hand types in different spots, hopefully with a large enough samplesize. If one player can defend a similar group of hands profitably then it's obvious that he's doing something right. Of course you still need to analyze whether it has to do with game selecting, the platform, the limit and such things that have a huge influence one winrates.

Good discussion...
Under my off-hand comment was "villains are getting wise" which I think is the main reason I (or anyone) gets paid off less with *any* hand.

With WTSD rates in the mid 20s they're folding a TON.

GK is probably partly right also though, in that I DON'T 3-barrel bluff much, unless the first two barrels are decent semi-bluffs.

But as Kruppe points out, I am a much lower level. ♠_cry:

Peace,
VS

your critisisms of my posts are very similar to my critisisms of GK's posts. critisising the tone and content/relevance. however, you don't seem to see that at all, so you seem very biased to me.

i'll just say that i stand by all my points and the language i used to make them(these are posts in an internet forum, a place where one is fairly free to choose a style of writing, not a scientific paper or any wide variety of other types of text that would require their own specific, completely different styles of writing).

Originally posted by Kruppe
so do you understand why GK quoted me and then wrote what he wrote under the quote? he's one of the smarter guys? ok... great? if i thought there wasn't a high% that he's one of the smarter guys, i wouldn't have posted in any of these threads, as most people are pretty stupid and thus not worth me talking poker with, but wtf was his analysis? it was really random, irrelevant and incomplete. (e.g. ignored that a sizeable part of the % he mentioned, villain has better than a set and thus you don't get paid off)

my comment about getting paid off with sets was in defence of vorpal. GK's criticism/rebuttal to vorpal saying he feels he rarely gets paid off with sets is flat-out wrong. (like i said, the way people play has changed a lot over the years. regs with big winrates used to often put in 100bb vs set with just TPTK or overpairs in single raised pots. nowadays even the fish i play against online don't do that so easily.)
and i don't want a lower lvl NLHE player like vorpal to suddenly question an important part of his play just because a blackmember, someone who automatically gets more respect, incorrectly told him he has leak. that just tilts me.

I quoted your part of text, because I just wanted to tell my opinion why I think it is normal that he doesnt get payed off too often. So I didnt want to say your comment is wrong or good, but even if I would, I dont see why would you tilt about it. If it puts you on tilt, sorry for that, I somehow have a talent to put people on tilt, but not intentionally.

and i don't want a lower lvl NLHE player like vorpal to suddenly question an important part of his play just because a blackmember, someone who automatically gets more respect, incorrectly told him he has leak. that just tilts me.

I see the purpose of this forum as finding our leaks and improving them. I would be very happy if somebody would tell me, hey you might have leak there. So I didnt tell him you might have a leak, to make him look stupid and to make me look smart, but just to potentially help him. Other people also help me when I post my hands, and I am thankfull to that even if they something which I think is wrong.

Originally posted by VorpalF2F
Good discussion...
Under my off-hand comment was "villains are getting wise" which I think is the main reason I (or anyone) gets paid off less with *any* hand.

With WTSD rates in the mid 20s they're folding a TON.

GK is probably partly right also though, in that I DON'T 3-barrel bluff much, unless the first two barrels are decent semi-bluffs.

But as Kruppe points out, I am a much lower level. ♠_cry:

Peace,
VS

Hey VorpalF2F, it is your fault that we are fighting now, it all started because of your comment !!! Just kidding

I understood from your post, that you think you are getting less paid off than you should when you have strong hands, thats why I wrote what I think might be a problem. But now I see that you just said it in general, that people dont get payed off anymore as before.

Originally posted by GingerKid
But now I see that you just said it in general, that people dont get payed off anymore as before.

Hi, GingerKid,
Yes, that is what I meant.
Playing NL €5 and NL $2 fast-fold games, I think that only a few players even notice who they are playing agains.

Do you think my observation is accurate though?
Do you think that players in general are folding more to post-flop aggression?

Thanks for understanding
VS

Originally posted by VorpalF2F

Originally posted by GingerKid
But now I see that you just said it in general, that people dont get payed off anymore as before.

Hi, GingerKid,
Yes, that is what I meant.
Playing NL €5 and NL $2 fast-fold games, I think that only a few players even notice who they are playing agains.

Do you think my observation is accurate though?
Do you think that players in general are folding more to post-flop aggression?

Thanks for understanding
VS

I am helping a friend in NL5, so I looked at average players stats in his database for ipoker, stars, partypoker. Common for all casinos is that they fold too much on flop vs cbet (around 45%), but on turn around 25-30% and river also low. So it seems that once they hit a hand they dont like to fold. Also some players fold too much vs 3bet and on flop in 3bet pot, but as I noticed there is not much FE in general for this line, so I would use value heavy ranges as default.

Also raising some dry boards is usually bringing villians to overfold e.g As 6c 2d, because villians cbet it too wide and dont know how to defend vs raises, but in general also not too much FE. So it seems that as default you should wait for value hands and bomb.

And yes, I think that people are not observant at all at fast forward games especially if you play on huge player pool as stars, but also I think on higher limits like NL100 people are not much observant.

Also, imo the most important point is that villians are not 3bet bluffing much, not 3 barreling as bluff much unless scare card comes, and not raising much. So i would in general fold all bluff catchers vs such agression.

So all in all, wait for value hands and value bet big, fold bluff catchers vs their agression.