Hey guys,
So I'm curious. Lets assume that my SB WR is -20bb and BB WR is -50bb. Does this mean I'm doing better on my SB play than BB or vice versa?
In % terms, I'm doing better on SB (+60% vs +50%)
In absolute terms, I'm doing better on BB (+50bbs vs +30bbs)
Thoughts?
Hi, ZeDawning...
If you ALWAYS fold your blinds, you would have:
SB - 50bb/100
BB -100 bb/100
So if your winrate in SB is -20 bb/100, you are losing 40% of the expected amount.
In the BB you are losing 50% of the expected amount.
So I would say, yes, you are doing better in the SB than in the BB
I hope that makes sense...
Best of luck,
--VS
Ty for reply.
I probably might disagree w it though. I now tend to think that absolute amount is a better indicator.
What Im trying to do is to try to simulate the play on a blind (SB/BB) which is doing better than the other. (Ofc it cant be 100% copied due to known reasons)
In my eg., if my SB play is better than BB, I can try to simulate similar play on BB as well expecting a better WR.
Which will most likely not work in practise since we dont 3bet most of our range in the BB and call more there too. By simulating SB play, we probably end up losing a lot more.
Most people's SB WR, percentage wise, seems to be better than BB. SB shouldn't do better than BB in general (again for reasons we know).
So...am I wrong thinking my BB play is doing better than SB?
Or am I comparing apples w oranges 
Originally posted by ZeDawning
Ty for reply.I probably might disagree w it though. I now tend to think that absolute amount is a better indicator.
You may be quite right.
In the course of 100 SB, you expect to be down 50 big blinds.
You are only down 20, so your "winrate" is 30 bb/100
Similarly in the BB your winrate is 50 bb/100.
You have a higher winrate in the BB, therefore you are doing better overall.
What the expected winrate would be is largely irrelevant.
Cheers,
--VS
