Party getting tighter?
- From: A Man Beaten by Jacks <nobody@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 16:11:07 -0400
At least at 1/2 limit. I separated out and exported about 10,000
hands of data from earlier this year (pre-April) and a huge sample
(10,000 hands from farming 10 tables nonstop for 24 hours
straight), and compared.
The pre-April sample has 10,897 hands in it, and 1,722 players,
and an average VP$IP stat of 27.19.
The April sample has 10,264 hands in it, and 1,357 players, and
an average VP$IP stat of 25.91.
Now, this is enough hands to be statistically significant, but not
with a methodology that necessarily eliminates biases (for example
the fact that Party is offering the first non-account-specific bonus
in a year or so may be skewing the results). At least one of the
biases, though, would be toward loose play. I took the April sample
from Friday at 5:00 PM through Saturday at about the same time.
Now, I'm not going to defend this methodology. In fact, I invite anyone
with better or more data to refute or confirm this, but I think anyone who
has played Party lately would have the opinion that it is, in fact, tighter.
But let's assume this data is valid for the moment, and that the VP$IP
stat is 1.28% lower than it was just a couple months ago. That may
seem minor, but I can speculate what impact it might have. While it
represents only 1.28% of hands, let's make a couple assumptions.
Let's say that a VP$IP stat of 20% is "proper," and that anything higher
than that is contributing money to the pot (shared by any players in the
pot who are playing more properly to the degree that they are playing
more properly than the others). So the pre-April stats represent 7.19%
of hands contributing money to better players, and the April stats
represent only 5.91% of hands being contributions of dead money.
In that case, there has actually been a decrease of 17.8% of hands
played which are "contributor hands." While it is unlikely this assumption
is highly accurate, in any case, a 1.28% change in VP$IP is actually a
significant change in profitability.
Another aspect is that Party has a fairly high rake at 1/2, raking $0.50
out of a $5 pot. So, while you theoretically "make money" from marginal
calls, and often pick up the pot on the flop when they miss, this being a
very common occurrence, this marginal "profit" over a series of small
pots like this is more or less eaten by rake. Only in the larger pots is
the rake really overcome.
There's too little data here (that I have) to make much of this, but it
seems just from feel that Party is tighter and I have at least some data
showing that it is, in fact, tighter. I don't know if the same applies
across other sites, since most of my data on other sites is from tables
I personally play, and those tables, I go out of my way to select loose
tables. (The Party data is mostly farmed.) My data on other sites
indicate the tables I play are getting looser, but that simply represents
that I'm getting better at table selection.
Anyone have any data or speculation as to the tightness or looseness of
Party, whether it is a trend (either just on Party or across sites), and
where it's going?
.
- Prev by Date: Re: What does .cx stand for
- Next by Date: Re: Ethics question. What would you do?
- Previous by thread: What does .cx stand for
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
