Optimal HUD Stats

NJPhenomNJPhenom Red Chipper Posts: 3 ✭✭
I've been working through Core 2.0 and am at Level II on preflop. I've been implementing the more aggressive betting and stealing strategies and noticed that my own HUD stats are looking more like a LAG than my typical TAG.

VPIP on my last session was around 39 (usually it is high 20s) with PFR in the low 30s and more AS, 3Bet and 4Bet+ than usual.

Is this optimal? My results were quite good in the last session and it felt different, much more fun than playing tight. Just want to make sure it's also correct.

Comments

  • kenaceskenaces Red Chipper Posts: 1,507 ✭✭✭✭
    NJPhenom wrote: »
    I've been working through Core 2.0 and am at Level II on preflop. I've been implementing the more aggressive betting and stealing strategies and noticed that my own HUD stats are looking more like a LAG than my typical TAG.

    VPIP on my last session was around 39 (usually it is high 20s) with PFR in the low 30s and more AS, 3Bet and 4Bet+ than usual.

    Is this optimal? My results were quite good in the last session and it felt different, much more fun than playing tight. Just want to make sure it's also correct.

    One session is likely too small a sample size to mean much of anything in terms of stats or WR.

    For 6m games(you didn't mention games/stakes) something around 23/18 is solid VP/PFR. But even that can skew a lot depending on the game environment. ie if you have lots of players limping your BB VPIP will be much higher since you get to see the flop way more often with hands that would otherwise fold to a raise.
  • NJPhenomNJPhenom Red Chipper Posts: 3 ✭✭
    Was playing 5NL, 6 max. Yes, there was lots of limping and opportunities to exploit.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 3,669 -
    One important point that Jones is very clear on is that frequency stats can tell us when we're doing something wrong, but it's a logical fallacy to assume that when we have the "correct" stats that we're doing something right.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • Ori13_TTVOri13_TTV PennsylvaniaRed Chipper Posts: 84 ✭✭
    TheGameKat wrote: »
    but it's a logical fallacy to assume that when we have the "correct" stats that we're doing something right.

    i was just trying to explain that to one of my friends earlier today. theoretically somebody could cbet all of his range on 67% of flops and none of his range on 33% of flops. it would look pretty balanced looking at his stats but in practice it would be incredibly unbalanced if someone ever caught on
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 3,669 -
    edited July 29
    Ori13_TTV wrote: »
    TheGameKat wrote: »
    but it's a logical fallacy to assume that when we have the "correct" stats that we're doing something right.

    i was just trying to explain that to one of my friends earlier today. theoretically somebody could cbet all of his range on 67% of flops and none of his range on 33% of flops. it would look pretty balanced looking at his stats but in practice it would be incredibly unbalanced if someone ever caught on

    Actually that might not be too awful since the alleged imbalance is in response to publicly-available information. I was thinking more about opening a "perfect" 23% VPIP. Range construction matters a lot.
    Moderation In Moderation

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file