[jldecarlo]

Originally Posted by PhilTheThrill14

just pointing out that 100 hands is not enough hands for the statistics to be accurate - so using themis like closing your eyes and picking a number from 1 to 10.

How accurate does it have to be. It is one of the things that you weigh when you make a decision. 100 hands is clearly enough for a pattern to emerge. Is it as accurate as 500 hands? No. But do you have more information on this player than you do on somebody who just sat down? Hell, yes.

Saying that you have to have seen multiple 100s of hands to categorize a player is JUST PLAIN FALSE. The fact that there exists the possiblility that your categorization is wrong doesnt' meant that it's not USUALLY right.

You can sit at a live table for 30 minutes and put players in categories. You have to continue to watch them to make sure you haven't seen variance - a tight player on a hot streak or a loose player against a dead deck, but we all make assumptions based on limited information. That is the essence of poker. How much faith you put in that information is crucial as well.

L

[jojobinks]

Originally Posted by jldecarlo

You can sit at a live table for 30 minutes and put players in categories. You have to continue to watch them to make sure you haven't seen variance - a tight player on a hot streak or a loose player against a dead deck, but we all make assumptions based on limited information.

yeah, that's important. 100 hands is more than 3 hours of live play. if you've played with a guy for 3 hours live and told me you had no opinion of him as a player, i'd think you were crazy, or didn't understand the value of observing your opponents.

i don't think phil is either crazy or lacking such understanding. so i think i have to conclude that he's overstated his case here .

[jldecarlo]

I'm no statistician, but in scientific articles they often quote the "P value" which is the liklihood that the observed pattern could occur randomly.

I would say that if yo observe a significant pattern after 10 hands, it's maybe 60% likely to be random. After 100 hands, maybe 10%. After 1000 hands, less than 1%.

L

[Poboy]

Originally Posted by hachkc

If he's limping into a pot, agreed you wanna put pressure on him. When he makes it 5bb to go from UTG, you need to be much more cautious though. Had he turned over AK/QQ, I would be kicking myself for playing like scared child and missing a few bets but I still would have won. Instead, I now look like some card reading genius and lost the minimum with a big hand. I'm curious what he was thinking when I turned over KK on the river.

Sure, you have to weight the raise in this hand more strongly. What I mean is a guy who is tight passive w/a VPIP of 20 is going to have been folding his limps a lot to my raise throughout the 100 hands. A TAG would eventually push back whether he had a hand or not.

In this hand, I would've included at least AK and AQs in his range, maybe even TT. And I would RR a little more prf. On such a safe flop, I would've cbet, then gone into wa/wb mode. Probably wouldn't have called a bet after my cbet, but I don't know.
The stats are totally useable, but because of sample size, I wouldn't have narrowed his range down so completely.

Originally Posted by jldecarlo

I'm no statistician, but in scientific articles they often quote the "P value" which is the liklihood that the observed pattern could occur randomly.

I would say that if yo observe a significant pattern after 10 hands, it's maybe 60% likely to be random. After 100 hands, maybe 10%. After 1000 hands, less than 1%.

L

Interesting, because I've always thought that you can extrapolate a decent idea of how a guy plays from a pretty small sample. I think it's much easier to do the looser the player is.

[PhilTheThrill14]

OK - I've been a little hard-headed lately.

We can use a small smaple size to assist in coming up with probabilities.

I have to lighten up a bit.......sorry.

[hachkc]

Originally Posted by PhilTheThrill14

Kinda late asking me....since I know how the hand played out with the way you bet....

Humor me.

He would have checked the flop OOP, I'm assuming you bet at at least $4-6 here with a relatively safe board, he calls. The turn gets tricky now because he's called on relatively weak drawining board. Based on the 20 hands we've played against him tonite, he's reraised once and taken it down preflop, limped and flopped bottom set and slowplayed it to the river for a small pot and limped every other time he's entered a pot and won a few small pots.

So what do we do now?


FYI, other 80 or so hands I have on him are from over a year ago. The bottom set hand was played slowplayed mistakenly IMO by limping preflop, calling a small bet on the flop, checking the turn and then making a small bet on the river which was called for like an $6 pot.

[hachkc]

Originally Posted by PhilTheThrill14

OK - I've been a little hard-headed lately.

We can use a small smaple size to assist in coming up with probabilities.

I have to lighten up a bit.......sorry.

We still love you

My only point earlier which Jojo also stated was you use whatever information is available to make your decision. If I made the same decision and only based it on 11 hands, that would have been stupid because there is so much variance in that small sample. WIth 100 hands, there is much less variance so the information is more accurate but still not perfect.

What's my threshold? For VP$IP, I like at least 25 hands for a rough idea of his basic range standards. For PFR, I want at least 50 hands. As Poboy? mentioned, if someone is 37/20 over 50 hands, that's much more informative than a 15/5 over the same range. At 100 hands, I'm pretty comfortable with the info.

[JM]

But since you've been playing with him for 100 hands, don't you already know how tight he is and how likely it is that he has the hand you think he has here with the assistance of PT? Use your experience with him to draw the same conclusion as you did by looking at the stats.

Originally Posted by hachkc

Humor me.

He would have checked the flop OOP, I'm assuming you bet at at least $4-6 here with a relatively safe board, he calls. The turn gets tricky now because he's called on relatively weak drawining board. Based on the 20 hands we've played against him tonite, he's reraised once and taken it down preflop, limped and flopped bottom set and slowplayed it to the river for a small pot and limped every other time he's entered a pot and won a few small pots.

So what do we do now?


FYI, other 80 or so hands I have on him are from over a year ago. The bottom set hand was played slowplayed mistakenly IMO by limping preflop, calling a small bet on the flop, checking the turn and then making a small bet on the river which was called for like an $6 pot.

[hachkc]

Originally Posted by JM

But since you've been playing with him for 100 hands, don't you already know how tight he is and how likely it is that he has the hand you think he has here with the assistance of PT? Use your experience with him to draw the same conclusion as you did by looking at the stats.

Your're no fun

[JM]

Originally Posted by hachkc

Your're no fun

lol, but I suppose if those hundred hands were spread over several sessions, you probably wouldn't remember.