How to use Pokertracker info

[NineLions]

Okay, I know there are some Pokertracker experts out there.

I've been playing with the program for a couple of weeks now, including using GameTime+ and PokerAce.

But there's such a huge amount of info on my own play. So far I know that I'm losing money in the SB, that KQo is one of my worst hands (along with KK!), that I need to be more aggressive post-flop, but that I'm tighter and more aggressive preflop than almost everyone I've played against in the last two weeks. I've also replayed most of my biggest lost hands to see if I can determine where I went wrong, or if it was just the poker gods.


What other things should I look at?

For example, I think that I'm not making as much on my winning hands as I could; are there stats that might indicate this? and what are some other things to look at that might point out some leaks?

 

[Xife]

When I first got poker tracker a little under a month ago I read an article on another poker forum site.. I'll pm you the url because I'm not sure If I'm allowed to post it here or not. It helped me out a lot.

 

[F Paulsson]

What things you look at depend largely on what kinds of games you play. It's important to realize that stats aren't necessarily "good" or "bad", it's how they fit into your overall strategy and style, as well as how they fit with your choice of games and your opponents.

If you're playing limit, for instance, you should be losing money out of the blinds. There's no limit player good enough not to, unless an expert decides to play way below his usual stakes.

So it depends. Some things aren't necessarily "bad". What I've noticed is that as I get better, more and more hands become profitable. Among those that used to be a little bit in the red for my shorthanded limit tables are AJ and AT, and those are now definitely profitable. Realizing that I'm losing with hands that "should" be winners is an eye-opener, and makes me think about how I play them. With these two hands in particular, it was a positional thing, as it turns out.

 

[NineLions]

What things you look at depend largely on what kinds of games you play. It's important to realize that stats aren't necessarily "good" or "bad", it's how they fit into your overall strategy and style, as well as how they fit with your choice of games and your opponents.

/quote]

Yeah, KK for example really shouldn't be a negative hand, but there were a couple of raise/reraise/all-in situations preflop that shouldn't have been called by my opponents and they hit their hands, one short stacked situation at a cash table where I had lost some cash beforehand and didn't have enough scare away a straight draw which then hit, and a bunch of blinds only wins which haven't covered the cost of the other big losses.

I think I applied your SB advice from another thread too liberally and started completing with hands that I couldn't get away from, 'cause my SB net has gotten worse. I now, before I call from the SB or limp with a marginal hand, I tell myself out loud, "I'm folding this to any pressure unless I really hit the flop really hard". It seems to help.


And I play a few different types of situations, so I try to filter the results to only look at one type of situation at a time; ie. 6 max cash, 9 max cash, SnGs.

I'm beginning to realize that because I rarely reraise postflop is one of the likely reasons why my postflop aggression is low, which probably also contriubutes to my not winning as much as I should with my winning hands. Apparently I c-bet 85% of the time, which seems fine.


Maybe I need a "Harrington on Pokertracker" or something like that with a plethora of examples for different situations.

 

[Four Dogs]

Unless you started with a a database of at least several thousand hands, much of the specific hand information will be of little use. It's hard to say how profitable AA is from the button when it's only happend 3 times. But you can make use of more general information such as how you perform at various limits, table positions or number of opponents. For me, more helpful than starting hands is betting patterns and habits. Much of this can be found by clicking on the More Information tab which appears in several of the tabs. When you click on this you will be taken to an easy to read report which sumarizes your (or an opponents) betting style in shocking detail. Lately I've been focusing on win rates when seeing the flop and when going to show down. As far as I can tell, you should be at least 40% on the flop and 50% at the showdowns. This is of course for no-limit. I'm sure it's different for limit. You can also tell alot about someone (yourself maybe?) by their first action on the flop after a preflop raise. Do they bet, call, check. Much of this can also be found under the general tab, but I find the report format easier to digest.
PokerTracker is the best investment anyone serious about understanding poker can make, and like all things, the more you use it, the less confusing it becomes.
GL

 

[NineLions]

Well, I've accumulated a few thousand on myself at least, which is the player I'd most like to analyze.

I'm not sure about the More Information tabs you refer to. Usually when I open it up to do some investigation, I'm looking at ring or tourney stats, with 8 or so tabs. Oh, maybe that's what you mean. If that's the case, I do use those tabs. I use Preferences as well as the other filters to narrow down game types, hands, etc. The graphs usually I find pretty useless, but all the stats are interesting. I just have to figure out what they might be telling me!

Yours sounds interesting; 50 on showdown I could see especially as sometimes there will be more than 2 people; 40 on the flop seems high though, as if you'd be overcommitted to seeing the hand through or taking it down even if you missed the flop?

 

[Vintage82]

When I first got poker tracker a little under a month ago I read an article on another poker forum site.. I'll pm you the url because I'm not sure If I'm allowed to post it here or not. It helped me out a lot.

Was it the one by a fella called Xcession? Thats the one I read, I found it massively useful in analyzing and applying PT statistics.

 

[chevanater]

where can we find Pokertracker?

 

[NineLions]

Was it the one by a fella called Xcession? Thats the one I read, I found it massively useful in analyzing and applying PT statistics.

I've got the link from Xife, and you're right about the author. I've collected the article and printed it out for further reviewing.


And for chevanater, just Google pokertracker to find it.

 

[NineLions]

btw, Dorkas or Chuck are promising an article on it's uses, which I'm looking forward to.

 

[Four Dogs]

I'm not sure about the More Information tabs you refer to. Usually when I open it up to do some investigation, I'm looking at ring or tourney stats, with 8 or so tabs. Oh, maybe that's what you mean. If that's the case, I do use those tabs. I use Preferences as well as the other filters to narrow down game types, hands, etc. The graphs usually I find pretty useless, but all the stats are interesting. I just have to figure out what they might be telling me!

Sorry NL, it's not More Information, but rather, More Detail. Look for the button on the right hand side under the General Information tab.

Yours sounds interesting; 50 on showdown I could see especially as sometimes there will be more than 2 people; 40 on the flop seems high though, as if you'd be overcommitted to seeing the hand through or taking it down even if you missed the flop?

Well, it's not all that hard to believe if you think about how it happens. John D'Agostino wins money over 52% of the time he sees the flop. Here's how. He raises from late position with strong hands and usually goes head to head against one opponent. He'll win 70% of the pots he plays without ever seeing a flop, but the times he does he's usually got the best of it, both in quality of hand and position. In fact, the only reason his win rate isn't higher is that he'll often see a flop for free or nearly so from the blinds, or occasionaly engage in a speculative hand where he is nowhere near an even-up contender for the pot. Incidently, he wins about 60% of his showdowns. He's the best, but almost all the winning players have similar numbers.

 

[aliengenius]

Posted this link in another thread earlier, but pretty good PT articles here.

 

[NineLions]

Sorry NL, it's not More Information, but rather, More Detail. Look for the button on the right hand side under the General Information tab.



Well, it's not all that hard to believe if you think about how it happens. John D'Agostino wins money over 52% of the time he sees the flop. Here's how. He raises from late position with strong hands and usually goes head to head against one opponent. He'll win 70% of the pots he plays without ever seeing a flop, but the times he does he's usually got the best of it, both in quality of hand and position. In fact, the only reason his win rate isn't higher is that he'll often see a flop for free or nearly so from the blinds, or occasionaly engage in a speculative hand where he is nowhere near an even-up contender for the pot. Incidently, he wins about 60% of his showdowns. He's the best, but almost all the winning players have similar numbers.

Hmm, I was sure I posted a reply last night, but it's not there.

I found the button you were referring too, and I have used it before. Problem is I don't know what to compare most of these stats to . My Won $ when saw flop is 30.13% in one account, and Won $ at SD is 50.38. I think one of my problems is still paying off chasers when they hit, and not getting enough for my winning hands.


That article is a good one; I've printed it out to review later.