Hello all, welcome to my online poker blog.

I've been playing on and off for a decade after being introduced by a friend.

I played regularly for a few years during the poker boom and had a decent record at the micros, particularly Rush and Zoom No Limit Hold'em games (here's one of my graphs).

Around 2012 I began a new career which involved immersing myself completely in study in my spare time, so I had little to no time for poker. However recently this burden has eased and so I have been gradually dipping back in.

I'm an amateur player who still hopes to some day beat the rake.

Monday, 15 March 2010

Two statistics I find useful

I have used PokerTracker for nearly a year now. During my time in cash, there were two stats that interested me. The first was "% hands won at showdown" (%wsd). The other was "% hands won when saw flop" (%wwsf). These stats tell us how well we play poker. Different styles will lead to different figures but comparing the two should give us an idea about a players profitability. Consider a maniac. His %wwsf figure would be huge, he's betting at so many pots villains will fold alot. But his %wsd figure would very likely be low (he'd be seeing showdown with too many weak hands). Consider a weak player. He'd be the opposite, and likely have a very high %wsd figure but a very low %wwsf figure. Over 30k or so hands, my %wsd was about 55% and my %wwsf about 46%, so I tended towards the weaker side. I think a good measure is the sum of these two figures. If the sum is more than 100% then we should be profitable. Now, my 'sum' would be 101% so you'd think I wouldn't have won much at all. But when I was seeing showdown I was often getting great value from my made hands. These were likely big pots, so that's where my profit came from, so in this sense we should probably weight the sum towards the %wsd figure. Anyway, the point is that so far in all the HUSNGs I've played at Absolute and Full Tilt combined my %wsd is almost 55% but not only that, the %wwsf has been over 50%. No wonder these games are so profitable! Now obv they're only microstakes matches, this isn't a big deal. But I think for any microstakes grinder out there, the best investment I've yet found is these HUSNGs. Certainly better than cash, probably better than FR SNG (although this is a game I've little experience in). I think when we're looking for the best investment in poker these two stats can tell us alot about a game's profitability. HUSNGs (at least at the micros) are obv a very good investment.
EDIT: I just had a thought, these stats are closely related to style so HUSNGs might not be the game for everyone. But for me certainly, they are working better than cash did. Gl


  1. u only hv to look at the sharkscope leaderboards to see that HU rules.

  2. true, I just hope they retain their profitability and don't diminish over time :S