PFR higher than VPIP

NoWuckingFurries

NoWuckingFurries

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Total posts
3,834
Awards
1
Chips
29
I'm assuming that this has something to do with whether hands are included where you are playing the blinds, but it seems illogical to be able to have a PFR higher than your VPIP to me.
 

Attachments

  • CClowerPFR.jpg
    CClowerPFR.jpg
    113 KB · Views: 100
F

floweryhead

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 30, 2013
Total posts
300
Awards
4
Chips
0
This is an anomaly I've also noted from time to time but I've always just put it down as a software glitch but, as you say, it could be from playing from the blinds. However, if that's the case then isn't raising from the blinds is also VPIP as you voluntarily chose to raise which is what VPIP is. Maybe if you contact PT4 or HEM2 (or whichever tracker you use) they can clarify why this happens. I'd be interested to know.
 
BluffMeAllIn

BluffMeAllIn

4evrInmyheart RIP xoxo :(
Silver Level
Joined
May 2, 2009
Total posts
11,324
Chips
0
It's not a glitch, it has been addressed previously in the pt4/hm2 support threads if i recall. It's related to the formula's used to calculate and yes if I remember correctly it has to do with raising from the bb when it has been limped around.......it up's your pfr but not vpip or something along those lines.

The support threads are stickied in the following section:
https://www.cardschat.com/forum/poker-software-tools-61/
 
Last edited:
NoWuckingFurries

NoWuckingFurries

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Total posts
3,834
Awards
1
Chips
29
It's HM2 in this case.
 
F

floweryhead

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 30, 2013
Total posts
300
Awards
4
Chips
0
It's not a glitch, it has been addressed previously in the pt4/hm2 support threads if i recall. It's related to the formula's used to calculate and yes if I remember correctly it has to do with raising from the bb when it has been limped around.......it up's your pfr but not vpip or something along those lines.

The support threads are stickied in the following section:
https://www.cardschat.com/forum/poker-software-tools-61/


Cheers... I've always wondered
 
W

whoami

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Total posts
25
Chips
0
I think it's because of the situations when someone before you has gone all-in (or at least bet more than what you have in your stack), in which case your pfr wouldn't change (whether or not you fold or call all-in) as you don't have an opportunity to raise, but if you fold your vpip would of course decrease. This is because vpip = times you voluntarily put money in pot preflop / times you had a change to put money in pot preflop, and similarly pfr = times you raised preflop / times you had a change to raise preflop. So if someone has gone all-in, you don't have a change to raise so that hand won't count for pfr but as you had an opportunity to put money in pot, it will affect the vpip negatively.

If you get a walk in the bb, neither vpip or pfr will count that hand (as you didn't have an opportunity to do either), but if it's limped to you in the bb, then both vpip and pfr count that hand affecting positively or negatively based on whether you check or raise. So even if you never fold preflop, you could have a vpip less than 100 % if you have checked from the big blind when it's limped to you.
 
W

whoami

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Total posts
25
Chips
0
So the pfr being higher than vpip has nothing to do with the blinds.
 
NoWuckingFurries

NoWuckingFurries

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Total posts
3,834
Awards
1
Chips
29
I think it's because of the situations when someone before you has gone all-in (or at least bet more than what you have in your stack), in which case your pfr wouldn't change (whether or not you fold or call all-in) as you don't have an opportunity to raise, but if you fold your vpip would of course decrease. This is because vpip = times you voluntarily put money in pot preflop / times you had a change to put money in pot preflop, and similarly pfr = times you raised preflop / times you had a change to raise preflop. So if someone has gone all-in, you don't have a change to raise so that hand won't count for pfr but as you had an opportunity to put money in pot, it will affect the vpip negatively..

If I called a shove then I would expect my VPIP to be higher than my PFR, which is an extremely common situation.
 
W

whoami

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Total posts
25
Chips
0
If I called a shove then I would expect my VPIP to be higher than my PFR, which is an extremely common situation.

Yes, but I was saying that if you FOLD to a shove, your vpip decreases and pfr remains the same, which can lead to pfr being higher than vpip.
 
W

whoami

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Total posts
25
Chips
0
Let's suppose that you are playing in a table full of crazy players who shove very often. (Actually only one or few such crazy people would be enough to prove my point, but it might be easier to think when most opponents are crazy.) Let's also suppose that you have the smallest stack. When someone has shoved before you, you sometimes fold and sometimes call (you can't raise as the shover has you covered). If you decide to raise and try to steal the pot whenever it's folded to you (or limped or minraised, as long as there is no shove), your pfr would be close to 100 % but your vpip could be for example only 10 % (if you call shoves 10 % of the time).
 
HoldemManager

HoldemManager

Official HM Representative
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 27, 2014
Total posts
550
Awards
1
Chips
29
http://hm2faq.holdemmanager.com/questions/2052/Database+Update+Utility#6

Q: Why do some players have higher PFR than VPIP?
A: First of all, this only happens in games where you face a lot of all in situation (e.g. Shortstack games, tournaments). If you dont face all-ins, PFR will never be higher than VPIP.

Here is an example of how PFR changed:
Situation 1: (without all-ins)
You played 10 hands, called once and raised 2 times.

Previously:
That made your VPIP 30 (3 out of 10 times), PFR 20 (2 out of 10 times)

Now:
Exactly same as before, VPIP 30 (3 out of 10), PFR 20 (2 out of 10)

Situation2:
You play 10 hands, call once, raise 2 times (same as before), but you also face 4 all-ins)

Previously:
VPIP 30 (3 out of 10 times),
PFR 20 (2 out of 10 times)

Now:
VPIP 30 (3 out of 10 timeS)
PFR 33 (2 out of 6 times, you couldnt raise when facing 4 all-ins)

Q: Why is this good?
A: The new % is the more accurate representation of player's range in games with a lot of all-ins. Think of it this way: are you more likely to raise all-in, or call an all-in? For a lot of players, it holds true that they raise a much bigger % of their hands than what they call with and that's why you will see their PFR being higher than VPIP.


Fozzy71
Customer Support
 
Four Dogs

Four Dogs

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Total posts
4,298
Awards
1
Chips
17
Has to be a glitch. PFR is a fraction of the times you vpip. It canot be more than 100%.
 
PokerTracker

PokerTracker

Official PT4 Representative
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 8, 2011
Total posts
725
Awards
1
Chips
66
Has to be a glitch. PFR is a fraction of the times you vpip. It canot be more than 100%.

Its is not a glitch, this is a more mathematically accurate method which both HM2 and PT4 employs. Both brands have been using this newer more accurate method of calculating VPIP and PFR for a few years now, it has been widely adopted and praised for its accuracy.

PT4 users can compare the old method with the new method by using the Custom Global Player Scatter Graph, this allows you to compare PFR for the entire population of players in your database, against the Legacy PFR method which Fozzy describes above. As you can see, there are certainly differences in the most outlying scenarios when facing extremes such as hugely aggressive LAG - but in general the data results are virtually the same. This new method of calculating improves accuracy, but as a result there will be rare extreme scenarios when PFR can be higher than VPIP, typically this only occurs in low sample size scenarios.


2014-12-04_09-18-28.png


- TT
 
Four Dogs

Four Dogs

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Total posts
4,298
Awards
1
Chips
17
Its is not a glitch, this is a more mathematically accurate method which both HM2 and PT4 employs. Both brands have been using this newer more accurate method of calculating VPIP and PFR for a few years now, it has been widely adopted and praised for its accuracy.
I read the explanation after I posted and tried to delete. Very odd but I guess it makes sense. I don't imagine it will change much either way after you have a few hands banked.
 
W

whoami

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Total posts
25
Chips
0
As some of you may know, PokerTracker and HoldemManager have different formulas for calculating aggression frequency. (I'm talking about the stat that is in the range of 0%-100%, not aggression factor, which is a (bets+raises)/calls.) HoldemManager's version is (bets+raises)/(folds+calls+checks) and PokerTracker's (bets+raises)/(folds+calls). So the difference is that PokerTracker doesn't include checks in the calculation of the aggression frequency (AFq), which means that PokerTracker's aggression factor will be higher than HoldemManager's.

Which one do you think is better? I would like to hear some solid arguments for either side. And it would be nice if PokerTracker and HoldemManager representatives (who posted it this thread earlier today) could give the reasoning behind their formulas.
 
NoWuckingFurries

NoWuckingFurries

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Total posts
3,834
Awards
1
Chips
29
I don't imagine it will change much either way after you have a few hands banked.

When playing microstakes SNGs a lot of the players you meet will be unknown, so it does have some relevance to people who frequently play that type of tournament.

As some of you may know, PokerTracker and HoldemManager have different formulas for calculating aggression frequency. (I'm talking about the stat that is in the range of 0%-100%, not aggression factor, which is a (bets+raises)/calls.) HoldemManager's version is (bets+raises)/(folds+calls+checks) and PokerTracker's (bets+raises)/(folds+calls). So the difference is that PokerTracker doesn't include checks in the calculation of the aggression frequency (AFq), which means that PokerTracker's aggression factor will be higher than HoldemManager's.

Which one do you think is better? I would like to hear some solid arguments for either side. And it would be nice if PokerTracker and HoldemManager representatives (who posted it this thread earlier today) could give the reasoning behind their formulas.

You might be better off posting that question in the dedicated HM2 thread:

https://www.cardschat.com/forum/pok...fficial-holdem-manager-support-thread-241059/
 
Four Dogs

Four Dogs

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Total posts
4,298
Awards
1
Chips
17
I actually experienced this today on my own stats on two tables. My vpip/pfr ratio is always razor thin but both times I had a run of cards early on and went for a good while with my pfr being as much as 2% higher than my vpip. To be honest I made a bit of a game of it. There might have been a few hands that I should have just called with.
 
PokerTracker

PokerTracker

Official PT4 Representative
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 8, 2011
Total posts
725
Awards
1
Chips
66
As some of you may know, PokerTracker and HoldemManager have different formulas for calculating aggression frequency. (I'm talking about the stat that is in the range of 0%-100%, not aggression factor, which is a (bets+raises)/calls.) HoldemManager's version is (bets+raises)/(folds+calls+checks) and PokerTracker's (bets+raises)/(folds+calls). So the difference is that PokerTracker doesn't include checks in the calculation of the aggression frequency (AFq), which means that PokerTracker's aggression factor will be higher than HoldemManager's.

Which one do you think is better? I would like to hear some solid arguments for either side. And it would be nice if PokerTracker and HoldemManager representatives (who posted it this thread earlier today) could give the reasoning behind their formulas.

We considered dropping Aggression stats from the default PT4 HUDs because they are not the most reliable of stats. Truth is aggression cannot be accurately measured, aggression Factor and Aggression Frequency are both an attempt at measuring aggression but they are both flawed. We understand that some sort of measurement, regardless of how flawed, is better than no measurement for many players - therefore we chose to leave the stats in the default HUD. For more advanced players we often advise them to use a wide range of action stats combined with the understanding of sample size to gauge the aggressiveness of an opponent, and to ignore the two aggression stats in the process. We feel players who are more experienced will be best served by following this strategy, if you do in time you will not need to use Aggression Factor or Aggression Frequency anymore.
 
NoWuckingFurries

NoWuckingFurries

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Total posts
3,834
Awards
1
Chips
29
Came across an even stranger one in the Full Tilt freeroll (thanks for the freerolls, CC :D )
when FTP_Marcs was showing at 7/14 after 17 hands!
 

Attachments

  • CC714stats.jpg
    CC714stats.jpg
    127.7 KB · Views: 29
PokerTracker

PokerTracker

Official PT4 Representative
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 8, 2011
Total posts
725
Awards
1
Chips
66
Came across an even stranger one in the Full Tilt freeroll (thanks for the freerolls, CC :D )
when FTP_Marcs was showing at 7/14 after 17 hands!

This is not strange if you understand that a stat is a measurement of actions divided by the opportunity to take that action. In PT4 the actions and opportunities are displayed by default, if you saw this data then you could quickly calculate how this is possible.
 
NoWuckingFurries

NoWuckingFurries

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Total posts
3,834
Awards
1
Chips
29
This is not strange if you understand that a stat is a measurement of actions divided by the opportunity to take that action. In PT4 the actions and opportunities are displayed by default, if you saw this data then you could quickly calculate how this is possible.

I am sure you feel that is a very meaningful explanation but sadly I am none the wiser about how their PFR can be double their VPIP. It's HM2.
 
HoldemManager

HoldemManager

Official HM Representative
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 27, 2014
Total posts
550
Awards
1
Chips
29
Check in the # of opportunities. You will find they are not the same.

It's like this:

Guy goes all-in, you are closing the action. What are your possible actions?

Can you raise?

No. You can only call or fold.

So it logically follows that when you close the action, and it is an all-in to you, that there does not exist the opportunity to raise.

There will always be fewer opportunities to PFR than VPIP. But if you PFR, you VPIP'd by definition.

So you play 5 hands headsup in the BB vs an opponent.

In 4 hands, he min-raises, you can either call, raise, or fold. In 3 of these hands, you 3-bet in all 4.

In the 5th, he tires of being 3-bet, and shoves. You fold.

So in these, you have 5 opportunities to VPIP. You VPIP 4/5 (80%).
But you could only PFR 4 of them, in which you do PFR by 3-betting him. Your PFR and 3-bet would be 4/4, 100%.

If you check the popups, you'll see that there are different opportunities for the PFR than the VPIP, thus there are different denominators, they will not add to 100% and PFR can be higher than VPIP.

udbrky
Customer Support
 
NoWuckingFurries

NoWuckingFurries

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Total posts
3,834
Awards
1
Chips
29
But if you PFR, you VPIP'd by definition.

That's the confusing bit. If PFR is automatically VPIPing as well, then it seems illogical to have PFR of twice as much as the VPIP.

Earlier in the thread it was explained how different ways of calculating them could lead to minor discrepancies, but 7/14 doesn't sound minor. Obviously 14/7 is an everyday occurrence (because I tend to play too passively).

You are very good at explaining complex things, incidentally, so thanks.
 
PokerTracker

PokerTracker

Official PT4 Representative
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 8, 2011
Total posts
725
Awards
1
Chips
66
Earlier in the thread it was explained how different ways of calculating them could lead to minor discrepancies, but 7/14 doesn't sound minor. Obviously 14/7 is an everyday occurrence (because I tend to play too passively).

Minor discrepancies, meaning over a sample size of a few hands, not minor discrepancies in the difference between the two stats. After a few more hands, this minor discrepancy will probably reverse itself naturally as the opportunities increase. Keep in mind its very very rare to see PFR higher than VPIP over large sample sizes, this typically only can occur during small samples.
 
Top