I have a free gift for you Pokerstars MTT players

I collected over 2200 winning hands that won at showdown in pokerstars MTTs over the last 2 weeks. I organized the results into a pretty standard chart with each square showing how many times that hand won at showdown in 2200 winning hands. You guys might be pretty surprised to see which hands were at the top. It isn't A/A and K/K

Top 5:
1) A/K
2) A/Q
3) A/J
4) A/A
5) K/J

Down at the bottom end, 7/2 is the worst hand. No surprise there. It won once in 2000 showdowns. The second worst is a 5 way tie which includes K/4. K4 is pretty weak I know, but Q/5 which is an even weaker hand won nearly 4 times more often.


You can download the chart here:

https://postimg.cc/KkWV16sq



When I collected the data I made no regard to suited/unsuited hands. Next time I will. I'll let you know when I have the new update ready. I ranked the top 20 hands on the right side for quick reference. Yes A/A really does rank fourth and Q/Q does dominate K/K. That's what the numbers say anyway. No wonder we're all taking such bad beats. KK is the 8th best starting hand at Pokerstars! You believe that? I didn't until I put this chart together.

Look at the chart and ask yourself if you can really put all that down to variance. I don't think you can. I'm not a statistician but I would bet $100 that 2000 winning hands over about 6000 hands of poker should be more than enough to cancel out the effects of variance and align more closely with theoretical odds, which this graph doesn't even come close to doing.

If you want to do an experiment, play a Pokerstars MTT using this chart instead of your HUD. I'll bet you'll get deeper and win more.


______________________________________________________________________

A quick study of the numbers:

32% OF ALL WINNING HANDS HAVE AN A IN THEM
74% OF ALL HANDS WON AT AT SHOWDOWN HAVE AN A. K OR Q IN THEM
22% OF ALL HANDS WON ARE WON BY THE TOP 5 IN RANK
26% OF ALL WINING HANDS ARE POCKET PAIRS
16% OF ALL WINNERS ARE POCKET PAIRS LOWER THAN A/A, K/K, Q/Q

90% of all hands won at showdown are won by Pocket Pairs, or hands with an A.K or Q in them.

So if you don't have a pocket pair, or an A.K.or Q in your hand you better take the pot before it ever gets to a showdown. You have a 10% chance of winning if you don't.

Not enough sample size. Look at 120K or more hands that decants luck at 2-max

playinggameswithu said:

Not enough sample size. Look at 120K or more hands that decants luck at 2-max

Click to expand...

Do you know that for sure, or are you just guessing? If it's really 125, then 125 it is. Gonna take me a few months but I'll do it. I know the numbers won't change, they haven't so far with every new set of data I add, but if that's what it takes, that's what it takes. I'll do it.

I'll try to use your data on my games.I'll show you later ok?

FlamengoBR said:

I'll try to use your data on my games.I'll show you later ok?

Click to expand...

Let me know how you do. I just finished another session. Another 150 hands added. A quick look at the figures shows nothing changed. Q/Q cleaned up boards all night and 90% of the hands were won by A,K.Q and pocket pairs. I cashed in 2 out of six 45 player sit and go's. It's hard even when you know what hands win because there's always 3 or 4 of those made hands at the table every deal. You're always up against 2 more just like yours.

I think that guy who says 125,000 hands doesn't know what he's talking about.

I have updated the results with another 500 hands. You can see what changed. It wasn't much among low and middling hands but at the top there was a bit of a shuffle. Q/Q continues on a tear and moved up the chart 2 positions from 7th best hand at pokerstars to fifth. A/X also moved up 2 notches, it's now 4th, ahead of pocket aces.

https://i.postimg.cc/HxhY8sRx/PSwinnersjan8update.jpg

I've also added a few quick tips at the bottom. Now that I know almost for sure what hands are going to win and which are going to lose, I've been noticing a few things that seem to always happen to bad hands. K/4 is one of them. It's won only 6 times out of 2714 hands at showdown. About half the time you flop a K or a 4. But there is always an A and another card higher than 10 with it. Somebody always has the A or the other card, often both. When the K/4 is suited it never makes the flush, ever. And the turn and river always pair the board to counterfeit the 4s and/or puts two more high cards out often making the flush or straight for the other guy. Sometimes after you're already hopelessly dead it will river you one of the cards to ensure you lose even more. It never fails. K/4 sometimes looks promising after a flop, but it's always dead on the river. The only time K/4 wins is when it's up against a worse hand. All the low ranking hands are like that. They never make straights or flushes, always fall apart on the turn and river and only win against other equally pathetic hands. All the lowest ranking hands play exactly like that. You simply cannot win with those hands. It's a done deal, the moment you are dealt them they lose. Don't ever play them. Not even in the BB against a small raise from one other player. Muck them all.

Pockets pairs and hands with an A,K or Q continue to win 90% of the pots.

Alot of times AA wins preflop or on the flop, so that''s why it doesn't win the most showdowns.
That doesn't mean AA isn't the strongest starting hand, cause it def. is!

knocker said:

Do you know that for sure, or are you just guessing? If it's really 125, then 125 it is. Gonna take me a few months but I'll do it. I know the numbers won't change, they haven't so far with every new set of data I add, but if that's what it takes, that's what it takes. I'll do it.

Click to expand...

There was a match between Liberatus AI vs 3 players at 40k hands each so they would do the amount of hands to discount luck/variance. Your sample size is too small judging from 2+2 criticism.

2K is sooo low sample size, i play way more hands daily and you would need atleast 1mil+ sample IMO for this to be anywhere close to accurate even tho even then it wouldnt really be

It may be that the sample is too small. But it still goes to show that variance is way higher than it should be. And I'll say it again. I'm watching the hands closely. You can't tell me that J/3 suited never makes a flush, but that's exactly what I'm seeing. And when I say never I mean literally never. I muck the cards and watch the board. It NEVER, as in, literally NOT EVER happens. You can't tell me that in 8000 hands of poker J/3 or K/4 or 10/5 suited never makes a straight or flush. You cannot put that to variance.

There are people who like 10/5 suited because there is a 10 or a 5 in every straight. I'm telling you guys, 10/5 never makes a straight and the numbers prove it. 10/5 has won 10 times in 2700 showdowns. Even before I put this chart together, I was noticing this kind of thing happening going back years. That's why I started this study. And all it's done is confirm what I already knew about Pokerstars. If you don't have an A,K,Q or a PP in your hand you can't win at showdown. And some hands can't win period. That's not variance, that's a crooked deck.

I originally noticed it with the hand 10/7, they connect and you have the 10th highest card in the deck. I noticed the hand never won 5 or 6 years ago. Theoretically it wins 20% against pocket Aces and 48% against any random hand Yet the numbers show it wins .0025% against all hands. Tell me that's variance. I call bullshit.

I could collect 2,000,000 hands, that's not going to change because I know for a fact this has been going on for years. .

I've asked this before and am curious if you know something I don't... So what is a measure of variance and what is normal variance as it applies to what you are describing versus abnormal or high variance.

puzzlefish said:

I've asked this before and am curious if you know something I don't... So what is a measure of variance and what is normal variance as it applies to what you are describing versus abnormal or high variance.

Click to expand...

You can get simulators for it.

http://www.anskypoker.com/2009/06/100k-hand-variance-simulator/



I got K/4 every time. Variance says the absolute worst I could lose is about 1700 out of 2700. That's end of the world bad. The worst I could reasonably expect is about -800. K/4 at Pokerstars is losing -2708. More than a third worse than what simulations show is the absolute worst.

I haver a free gift for you Pokerstars MTT players

I really like your enthusiasm & generosity in sharing your findings but feel your mind's eye might be somewhat skewed by overlooking certain factors...

Having said that, hopefully you aren't dissuaded because I'm enjoying reading the data & deductions! [emoji846]

playinggameswithu said:

There was a match between Liberatus AI vs 3 players at 40k hands each so they would do the amount of hands to discount luck/variance. Your sample size is too small judging from 2+2 criticism.

Click to expand...

Was Phil Laak one of the players? I remember reading about this (if it is the match up I'm thinking of) it was very close most of the way through and the humans weren't allowed to compare notes on the AI or something like that..

Let me give you guys a typical example of what happens to K♠ 4♠, suited, in a hand of poker at Pokershits. I mucked it of course because I know how bad it plays. Two players limp to me in the BB. I call because there was no raise.

FLOP J♥ Q♦ A♣ Rainbow I got a nice little gut straight draw. Not a bad flop for me. It's got possibilities.
Bet is 200 into a 750 pot. I fold
TURN J♥ Q♦ A♣ 4♥ Look at that gin card. Now I have a pair and a straight draw! I should have called the 200! I could make a nut straight... or trip 4's... that was stupid to fold there to such a small bet.
RIVERJ♥ Q♦ A♣ 4♥ J♠ Aw darn it! Missed it again... how typical.
The other two guys fight it out to see whether three Jacks beat A/Q.

That's what happens to losing hands from that chart at Pokerstars. And it happens every time. I've seen it over and over, and over again. That's what happens. If there is variance, it's a special one, only observable at Pokerstars.

That just happened to me again tonight. About an hour and a half ago.

You know Tracid. take a look around that place in the year 2019. 5or 6 years ago I used to love to observe the $50/$100 big blind tables. There'd be guys in there throwing away 10 large on one hand. You go there now, there's nobody left outside the low and micro ghetto. The only big game they have left is the Sunday Million and that isn't half of what it used to be. It's all just guys playing the nickle and dime tables now. And there's a reason for that.

Anybody who knows poker, and knows the math very tight, knows deep down in their gut that something is very wrong there. Q/Q does not bust A/A 6 out of 10 times, day in and day out, month after month, year after year. All the guys who really understood poker, the ones who made a living at it, they're all gone now. I don't think that's a coincidence.

Like I said, I smelled the rat years ago. I fully expected to see a lot of those results, because I had already made mental notes about some of those hands years ago. Some surprised me, like K/4. the worst hand there. I never noticed that.

No I'm not the best poker player, far from it, but one thing I do better than everyone else I know is see patterns. I'm like a savant for it. I see the pattern nobody else does. And I've learned over time that you can extrapolate it into the future and predict the future result. I've never cashed at the rate I have since I first put together that chart. And I think I just saw another pattern playing tonight, something else altogether, but I'll have to collect data on it.

Even if you don't use the chart for anything else, just use it to muck the absolute worst hands on the chart, that can't win. You're in the BB and somebody raises you up 3XBB and you have 10/7, muck it. Don't say to yourself, "I like to protect my blinds." You'll never see those chips again. I guarantee it. And with all the gin cards, it'll be worse that that. You'll hit top pair and wish you hadn't by the time you're laying in the gutter on 5th street. That's what Pokerstars does. Take the chart with you, you'll see what I'm talking about.

Presumably the two biggest reasons higher stakes players might choose to play elsewhere would be less rake and softer fields...?

I'm not saying you're wrong, just playing devil's advocate!

Hey mate, do you have any % of 2pairs losing on showdown? I am convinced its Pokerstars action hand and I am curious to see if your data agree.

nice thread.
so: ps is not random?
as others have pointed out: it's only showdown hands.
also: the 'measurement' includes player actions and their unknown hole cards.
my guess is that the results can be influenced by betting strategy, which immediately inavlidates any claim on ps being not random enough.
You are aware that statistically you take a sample of 2200 (not even random, see above) from a pool of 8*10^67 possible ways to shuffle a deck; It doesn't even matter if it's heads-up or full ring.
Without check, I would statistically expect 'any' result.

You caught lightning in the bottle Tracid. As you see from the chart, those hands do win .0025% of the time. And that third one that never went to showdown, you'd have lost that if somebody would have called you all the way down. And I did say previously, don't let them go to showdown if you do play them. Just curious, how many hands did you have to go through to find those? My guess it was about 2714.

One more thing. I noticed one of those was from a cash game. I'm not 100% sure the same Random # generator is being used across all formats. This is only MTTs. That's why I specified that. I'm already about 70% sure that spin and go games use a different one that's probably closer to a real deck. Cash games I haven't even begun to look at.

I think that 2000 is not the better way to know this, over 20000 should be good

No Idea Spaceman, but I might have something along those lines at some point. I get the feeling that the decks are middle stacked with all the high value cards tending to sit from card 10 to about card 30. I'm going to have to collect hands to show that, but that's what I suspect.

Reasons I suspect that: I always seem to be going post flop with players further up the table from the button than I am, and they're beating me. Getting the 9th card and the 18th would be a huge advantage in a middle stacked deck. I know there are other reasons why guys up the table have a slight advantage, but I suspect it's way out of kilter. I've also noticed that there isn't hardly a board that doesn't have 2 face cards or an A on it. The average is probably 2.5 cards per just guessing. Half the cards when they're only 4 out of 13 in the deck. There are 7 possible straights but I've noticed that 10,J,Q,K,A seems to hit at a higher rate than all the others. You see it all the time. The others not so often. That's just from observation. I may be wrong about all of the above. We'll see. But you would see all that kind of thing in a middle stacked action deck. If the decks are middle stacked as I suspect, you'll be seeing 2 pairs, trips, high straights way more often than usual. And that would also be why you can't seem to hit a high card paired with a low one in a starting hand. That we already know. By the time you get mid deck where the board cards come from, it's all big cards.

I think they're doing but I'll have to collect info on it. it's nothing but a suspicion right now.

8bod8

I don't think the cards can be influenced by betting strategy but you're right, if you have k/4 bet it, don't let it reach the river. I did say that. You can win with it, just don't let it get to showdown.

PeedroZack

It's going to take some time, but I'm getting there. I try to get another couple hundred a day even if I'm not playing, just observing table action. Every time I get 500 more it seems to change nothing. I don't suspect 17,000 more will either. The day I see K/4 jump 10 in one day I'll concede I was wrong and stop. Everybody else were right, variance... But I know that's not going to happen.