Ideal stats for Micro-/Smallstakes

    • Sendrafreak
      Sendrafreak
      Bronze
      Joined: 31.05.2011 Posts: 2,074
      Hello guys,

      I would be interested in "ideal" stats of the following categories in Micro- und Smallstakes (always three ranges would be nice: Too loose/ideal/too tight).

      (1) 3Bet
      (2) 3Bet Flop
      (3) Flop Checkraise ooP
      (4) Turn Checkraise ooP
      (5) Flop Fold
      (6) Turn Fold
      (7) River Fold

      Would be nice if some expert could give me an overview of the above mentioned "ideal" stats in the long run (so a 3x7-Table).

      Thx,
      Sendrafreak
  • 69 replies
    • JLeitmotiv
      JLeitmotiv
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2009 Posts: 756
      And here will come Madorjan in his shiny horse to tell you that you shouldn't stat-fix your game. And I'll have to agree with him. Moreover, in that case, it will be better if you post here your own values.

      Anyway, Sendra, if you want, you can add me on Skype (JLeitmotiv) and we can do a sweat session. I am no pro whatsoever (I'm basically the opposite, just a little fish!) but maybe we can discuss those spots where you are having difficulties
    • Boomer2k10
      Boomer2k10
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.09.2010 Posts: 2,551
      Originally posted by JLeitmotiv
      And here will come Madorjan in his shiny horse to tell you that you shouldn't stat-fix your game. And I'll have to agree with him. Moreover, in that case, it will be better if you post here your own values.
      Can I come in on a Bronze horse and say the same thing? :f_love:
    • MatejM47
      MatejM47
      Black
      Joined: 21.01.2010 Posts: 1,193
      It would be nice if you'd mention if your playing FR SH or HU. 3bet can bet either 4% 7% or 15% depending on the format.
    • JLeitmotiv
      JLeitmotiv
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2009 Posts: 756
      Originally posted by MatejM47
      It would be nice if you'd mention if your playing FR SH or HU. 3bet can bet either 4% 7% or 15% depending on the format.
      And here might come the problems. Since 15% is if you play SH, 7% if FR, 3% if you play DFR [that would be doublefullring, 20 players per table] :D

      Now, being serious. The loosing up in the opening ranges must be somehow along your postflop experience. For instance, I now open 87s from UTG in certain conditions. I used to be terrified to do that. I 3bet more lightly now, and I have very basic equity concepts for preflop play. That's where I stand. However, I fail at watching preflop just as it is. Another street. We are told from the beginning how preflop is this magical place where unicorns live, Freddie Mercury is alive and you can use charts and everything will be fine. Then we strip it off of all poker meaning, since we can use the Approx/Stox/whoever tables and that's just fine.

      Now, if things like this happen preflop, where we have only a couple of cards to deal with, imagine what it would be like postflop, with gazillion combinations out there!

      And don't make me start on sample issues! How many hands do you have? There are things pretty snsitive on your list, like x/r per street.


      Now, of course I can tell you that if your 3b is 30%, you are throwing your money away, but you probably already knew that. The same if your fold flop/turn/river is 50%.

      Once all this is considered and understood, stats will have a true meaning :) [at least I hope so! I'm still waiting :D ].

      Again, consider posting your own stats overhere, don't be shy :f_biggrin:




      PS: Boomer,you can't come in here with your horse anymore. She's extremely spoiled and clumsy, and she'll break all my furniture. You are welcome here on your own, though. Hope you understand that.

      Thank you very much,

      Hotel Management
    • Boomer2k10
      Boomer2k10
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.09.2010 Posts: 2,551
      Lousy Horse :(
    • Sendrafreak
      Sendrafreak
      Bronze
      Joined: 31.05.2011 Posts: 2,074
      Hi guys,

      thx for the answers, and I understand very well that stats depend on many things, but normally there are some standard values, which are good in the long run and some others which are too loose, too tight and so on, relying on millions, billions of games of good players which are evaluated statistically. For those values I was asking, and I think you know very well what I'm talking about, aren't you?

      Anyway, I give you my values, maybe someone could say sth. about them. Obv I'm talking about 6-max. Stats are from different stakes up to to the midstakes, but most of them rely on 0.5/1 | 1/2 | 2/4, overall 60k hands.

      (1) 3Bet: 12,8
      (2) 3Bet Flop: 29
      (3) Flop Checkraise ooP: 32
      (4) Turn Checkraise ooP: 28
      (5) Flop Fold: 37
      (6) Turn Fold: 24
      (7) River Fold: 35

      Regards,
      Sendrafreak
    • Tarhonya
      Tarhonya
      Bronze
      Joined: 18.07.2010 Posts: 694
      I guess I'm quite fit-or-fold on the turn than:
      Flop Fold: 31
      Turn Fold: 42
      River Fold: 38
    • YohanN7
      YohanN7
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2009 Posts: 4,383

      ... stats depend on many things, but normally there are some standard values, which are good in the long run and some others which are too loose, too tight and so on, relying on millions, billions of games of good players which are evaluated statistically.
      Your best bet may be to simply use LeakTracker in PT4 (and the equivalent in HM2 if they have it). They should be the ones having access to billions of games played by winning players. If they have implemented this feature in a responsible fashion, their numbers (soundness intervals) can't be too off. I'm just trying to be logical here. The other option is to solve FL Hold'em GTO-wise for pre-flop play. You are still nowhere near the best answer since the GTO player will never beat the fish off of as much money as a truly good player would when playing multiway.

      /Johan = :f_confused:
    • madorjan
      madorjan
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.11.2009 Posts: 5,561
      Woah, I got a shiny horse now? And I'm IN it? Thanks JL.:D

      Anyway, I 100% agree with JL about agreeing me.:) However, from these data you provided you can't just identify certain deviations from other (possibly better) numbers - like when players post their "fold to river raise when in 3bet pot OOP" stat, and ask if it's too high or too low. The numbers presented here describe a strategy, or at least a little part of it, that could be viewed as a whole - and although that is stat-fixing too, in a manner that's still more useful.

      An example of what you did wrong: posting the 3bet value in itself doesn't tell us much. Of course, I could say that it's not that bad, but probably a bit low - but that's not necessarily true. It's true, if you're the standard small stakes reg, play from 28/20 to 32/24, then it is a tad bit low. However if you're not sure in your postlflop skills and play a bit nittier, like 25/18 or something, this number is just perfect. If you're a drunk retard like me playing closer to 35/28-38/30, the number is awfully low. Also factors like a) do you 3bet from the BB, b) do you coldcall first in/second in after a coldcall, etc. may also factor into the answer. Like a guy that 3bets 15% but coldcalls another 15% (not including big blind defense) may be a good 3bettor, but really sucks preflop.

      However, the good part is the checkraise per streets and fold values. From these you can definitely derive a lot. For example I'd be really curious, how you can checkraise a total of 51% of your range on 2 streets. It definitely means you a) split up your range imbalanced, b) check/raise some pretty mediocre to shitty hands. If I saw you at the table with these stats, I'd be pretty certain that you a) delay your monsters to the turn OOP, b) overplay par+draws, c) overplay draws w SD-value (A, K hi draws), d) potentially have a weak, capped flop c/r range that contains a lot of valueless hands (like bottom pair and such). That's definitely a leak.
      Flop the fold stats, it also seems like you don't really fold the turn that much, but fold the flop way too much. Kind of like a "fold or get to the river" mindset, that is also bad, especially because you can peel a lot of flops profitably, given you get great odds.

      From a really simple one-street alpha-based (not GTO, but balanced) strategy suggests the following fold numbers (in a Single Raised HU Pot):
      Flop - 18.2%
      Turn - 23.5%
      River - 16%

      Now these numbers are obviously super-low, OOP you can fold more because of the positional disadvantage, and people generally don't bluff enough with turn barrels, betting more of a depolarized stronger range, so folding even 1.5x these numbers may not be a mistake, but I wouldn't go over that (unless you're a fan of being exploited).

      @Tarhonya
      The distribution of numbers seems much better than in Sendra's stats, but the numbers are too damn high. Try not to be such a nit!:D
    • Sendrafreak
      Sendrafreak
      Bronze
      Joined: 31.05.2011 Posts: 2,074
      @madorjan & anyone else

      Thx for your comments. I play quite tight preflop (25/20), but I would not say nitty cause this approach cannot be really bad on the low stakes in view of the high rake which obv doesn't "support" the typical kobeyard-like LAG-style. But on the flop I'm probably really a bit nitty, that's true 'cause my evaluation of these typical problem-spots like Ahigh and Khigh HU might not be optimal (I know, using the equilab helps). But my c/r values should be ok I think, but as you already said , I think in many situations there is no "optimal line", but many things are a matter of taste. When thinking about guys like otterkopf who "still" plays high stakes in the sense that this simply cannot be possible due to his hyper-aggressive style then we have to believe that even this kind of poker CAN be successful, played by a smart player under certain circumstances.

      Anyway, let's see what the future will bring, probably I have to force myself to analyze more spots with the equilab. On the turn I recently integrated the c/r line into my play (previously I had hardly used it) which is quite effective in many spots (simply because a lot of guys, among them recreational players, interpret a check on the turn as a weakness and bet without thinking), but probably I'm still too much of a showdownmonkey. Yeah, the turn, especially ooP, is still the field where I have to work more thoroughly on my game. But the good thing about it is that even some good players in the midstakes (5/10) have their problems on this street, so I'm not quite alone ...

      Sleep well guys,
      Sendrafreak
    • JLeitmotiv
      JLeitmotiv
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2009 Posts: 756
      Originally posted by Sendrafreak

      When thinking about guys like otterkopf who "still" plays high stakes in the sense that this simply cannot be possible due to his hyper-aggressive style ...
      sry to sound like an ignorant but... who's that guy?
    • madorjan
      madorjan
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.11.2009 Posts: 5,561
      kobeyard-like LAG-style
      I LOL'd so hard...

      You're mistaken in a lot of spots, so let's start there.

      1) Not playing LAG on micros, high rake environment, etc.
      You're right, high rake environment doesn't support looser play. However bad opponents do, and the amount and quality of mistakes your opponent will make generally outweigh the rake factor by a ton. If we're not talking about "Kobeyard-like LAG style", but real LAG-style, that is definitely the way to go at micros given you have the required postflop experience. In the micros, you can play absolutely exploitatively, since most of the players won't give a shit about what you do, or if they do, they'll adjust really bad. That's not true on higher stakes, since for example on 5/T you can rarely find a table with more than one weak spot, and all the other guys are regulars, who are much more likely to adapt (or not, but that's another question). So playing LAG at the micros should be the standard, it's not, because micro players don't have the required postflop skills, but that's the way they have to tend to.

      2) 25/20 is not a "bit nitty", more like "giant effing nit" especially at 1/2, 2/4. In today's environment, where sadly thinking players play these stakes (the ones that were once okayish, but after BF they were eaten by the higher stakes players grinding midstakes), they'll exploit the shit out of you with - guess what - playing really LAGgy against you.

      3) Your check/raise values are definitely not okay, especially not in that distribution they are now. (Quick question: why did you post them if you think they're ok?) Check raising 50+% of your range doesn't really make that much sense, especially if you take your calling range into account. You may maximize value with the check/raising range, but your calling range suffers so much from not having any kind of decent hand at all in them, so it really cannot be good. It still may be successful, but that doesn't mean it's good. I don't even x/r 50% of my range in HUHU (where I call my entire range on the BB, and ranges are more equal than in any SH context), so in SH, where on most board the opponent will have the stronger range in general, check/raising this much is definitely a leak. I think you're the kind of raise or fold player that thinks "a caller in poker is a loser in poker" or stg like that, which is so obv not true in Limit games.

      4) Idolizing high stakes/mid stakes players
      I have to be honest, I fell into a trap like that too. I thought they were good, they obviously had to know something to get that high. Now just to be clear, I don't know otterkopf's play at all, but I saw Kobe's English vids and also played quite a lot at 5/T. There's a lot of things you can tell about 5/T regs, but most of them are awful. Not like in fish-awful, but they make such mistakes, basic fundamental mistakes and all the time, it may not be the best idea to start comparing yourself to them, even though they may be better than you. You definitely want to be much better than those guys, because it's not impossible. (And let me just tell you that I include myself in that group as well - although I hope I make less mistakes.) So wanting to play like kobe, or like XY 5/T reg, but really wanting to play like anyone else is a big mistake, cause no one is perfect and you'll just copy their leaks into your game. You can get great ideas from these players, but you should double-check everything, and implement only the ones that are really valid. You'll be surprised if you double-check everything they say.

      Also, check out one of the latest Barry Carter columns for "Survivor bias", maybe that'll clear it up a little bit.

      (I can't imagine how many flames this post will get.:D Anyway, that is my opinion, you have every right to disagree.)
    • Sendrafreak
      Sendrafreak
      Bronze
      Joined: 31.05.2011 Posts: 2,074
      Hi,

      probably you're right, too many leaks in my game.

      Üdv,
      Sendrafreak
    • decentplayer
      decentplayer
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.04.2011 Posts: 47
      I like to play laggy at micros(5c/10c) but I'd like to know another opinions..is 37/21 with 3bet 11 too laggy? I know I have a lot of leaks in my game and I am working on that problem, but I recently thought of my graph in hem...although I have 6.21bb/100 in 55k hands(I have another ~50k hands not tracked in hem but with pretty much the same stats I think), the difference between showdown and non-showdown seems to be too big.I have won at showdown 360 and lost without showdown 245. Is this mainly because of the leaks, or it is kinda normal to have such a difference between these 2 lines?
    • JLeitmotiv
      JLeitmotiv
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2009 Posts: 756
      Originally posted by madorjan
      From a really simple one-street alpha-based (not GTO, but balanced) strategy suggests the following fold numbers (in a Single Raised HU Pot):
      Flop - 18.2%
      Turn - 23.5%
      River - 16%
      Hey! I'm really interested in this :) Can you please tell me how you got to it/where did you read it/what else can be found about that? Coming from physics and having a not-so-solid background in formal Nash Equilibrium, I'd like to know how you got these results! Thanks!
    • Boomer2k10
      Boomer2k10
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.09.2010 Posts: 2,551
      Originally posted by JLeitmotiv
      Originally posted by madorjan
      From a really simple one-street alpha-based (not GTO, but balanced) strategy suggests the following fold numbers (in a Single Raised HU Pot):
      Flop - 18.2%
      Turn - 23.5%
      River - 16%
      Hey! I'm really interested in this :) Can you please tell me how you got to it/where did you read it/what else can be found about that? Coming from physics and having a not-so-solid background in formal Nash Equilibrium, I'd like to know how you got these results! Thanks!
      It's a simple case of looking at the odds you are getting on average on every street.

      i.e On the flop your opponent is getting 4.5-1 to steal the pot on average (Button Open (2SB), SB fold (0.5SB), BB call (2SB).

      In order to defend vs this if we are talking about 1 street we therefore have to continue with the pot 1 time for every 4.5 times we don't. So the %-age is 1/5.5 = 18.2%

      Unfortunately this doesn't work from a GTO standpoint on flop and turn becasue of a couple of factors:

      1) There are more streets to come so it's actually more expensive to continue than you think, but you have equity etc
      2) You have multiple options for continuing (Raise or Call)

      This is why c-betting 100% HU in LHE is pretty much the preferred strategy becasue it's almost impossible to expoit, the best you can do is try and fight back when the ranges are in your favour.

      The only street where 1-street alpha and GTO are near enough to each other is the river and even then it's a %-age of what you go to the river with rather than your overall range.
    • Boomer2k10
      Boomer2k10
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.09.2010 Posts: 2,551
      Originally posted by decentplayer
      I like to play laggy at micros(5c/10c) but I'd like to know another opinions..is 37/21 with 3bet 11 too laggy? I know I have a lot of leaks in my game and I am working on that problem, but I recently thought of my graph in hem...although I have 6.21bb/100 in 55k hands(I have another ~50k hands not tracked in hem but with pretty much the same stats I think), the difference between showdown and non-showdown seems to be too big.I have won at showdown 360 and lost without showdown 245. Is this mainly because of the leaks, or it is kinda normal to have such a difference between these 2 lines?
      Well on average I play 37/29 and 15 3-bet recently when playing at micros for videos and madorjan thinks I'm a nit. :f_biggrin:

      For most TAGs in 6-max you will see a "fork in the road" style graph when the SD winnings are a huge + and non-Showdown winning are a big -. it's only really big-bet games (NL and PLO) and when the games get super short in FL that you can get +ve non-showdown winnings (Bryce was one of the first to manage that), it's just the nature of the game, you're going to peel w/ odds and fold a lot and that's going to hurt the Non-SD and there's also MW pots where you can't really bluff 4 people off their hands and it's just going to go to SD.

      If I were to criticise your stats your VPIP and PFR are too far apart, this seems to suggest you're cold-calling when you should be 3-betting or you're open limping, either of those things, except under extreme circumstances, is a problem.

      If you want to pot your stats I'll do a quick rundown on them
    • madorjan
      madorjan
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.11.2009 Posts: 5,561
      Hey,

      that's not an easy one, but first off, read through Mathetmatics of Poker by Bill Chen and Jerrod Ankenman (toughest book I ever read...), then you'll have a feel about how you should do it. Then think about it a lot, especially about the effects of the multistreet game, equities and card removal effect, and you'll get a hang of it. (Took me nearly a year to do that all - and still feel pretty mediocre in it.:) )

      If I can have one advice for you, don't worry about it that much until a little bit later. It gives you a huge weapon in poker, but not one you can use without a lot of previous knowledge, experience, etc. Also, it requires a lot of energy (and a good coach, like I had) so that the ideas would sink in. Of course, you can start learning these stuff now, but you'll find it hard to apply them in microstakes games, just because the room for exploitation there is so much higher.

      To answer your question: we want to make our opponent indifferent to bluffing. Now this is a long story, but all aside, we can't call too much, since then his bluffs wouldn't be at least neutral, therefore he could do fine not bluffing us. (That's actually not true, because of our equity we may "delay" our folds to next streets, but that's multistreet thinking.) Now if he bets into a pot of P, he gets P:1 on his bluff. To make his bluff neutral we therefore have to fold 1/(P+1) of our range. (If you stick it into an EV calculation, the result should be zero for his bluffs.) For the exact percentages, I took a single raised pot, where the opponent barrels and we call on previous streets - these numbers will differ, once we 3bet preflop or get c/r-ed on the flop, or even if there was no small blind posted.

      I hope you'll find this post terrifying and never look into this part of the game, since it gives you a decent advantage even at midstakes, and I definitely don't want another regular sticking around there.:) No, but really, it's a great tool once you fully understand it, but that's a long journey.
    • madorjan
      madorjan
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.11.2009 Posts: 5,561
      Nice, Boomer got ahead of me, damn...

      @Boomer: I'm not sure in this exact case one-street alpha cannot be applied. The thing is - you want to make him indifferent to bluff, meaning if he succeds, end of the hand now. Folding less than 1-street-alpha is fine, cause you can make him indifferent on next streets to come to his whole line, that's true, however you definitely cannot fold significantly more (of course range asymmetry and position and other factors may make you fold a bit more, but not by a lot), since then your opponent is just printing money in that case. So I think given we're talking about ending the hand at one point, we shouldn't differ all that much from our one-street alpha.

      Also on the multiple action argument: actually, we cannot make him indifferent to bluffing with anything else like folding/continuing the right amount, so I think that's not gonna be a reason also.