PokerStars homepage
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tip For Beginners

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Tip For Beginners

    Hello all, I would like to give all beginners and maybe experienced players too, a little poker tip that will help you.

    On the internet is a tracking site that keeps tracks of your tournaments and gives you a ranking.

    This site is called Official Poker Rankings, and can be easily found using any search engine.

    At the top left you will see a player search, simply type in your player name there to get your results up.

    You will then notice across the top 3 boxes

    poker ranking ranking period poker league

    The results it first gives you mean absolutely nothing

    Click the drop down box on poker league

    Change the setting to trainee

    This then will give you an accurate overall progress of your game over the years

    I was surprised

    120 Days 97.74%
    Year 2012 98.90%
    Year 2011 88.91%
    Year 2010 77.77%
    Year 2009 35.85%

  • #2
    Congratulations on your progress 486. umbup:

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by holdemace486 View Post
      Hello all, I would like to give all beginners and maybe experienced players too, a little poker tip that will help you.

      On the internet is a tracking site that keeps tracks of your tournaments and gives you a ranking.

      This site is called Official Poker Rankings, and can be easily found using any search engine.

      At the top left you will see a player search, simply type in your player name there to get your results up.

      You will then notice across the top 3 boxes

      poker ranking ranking period poker league

      The results it first gives you mean absolutely nothing

      Click the drop down box on poker league

      Change the setting to trainee

      This then will give you an accurate overall progress of your game over the years

      I was surprised

      120 Days 97.74%
      Year 2012 98.90%
      Year 2011 88.91%
      Year 2010 77.77%
      Year 2009 35.85%
      congrats on your progress but just remember not all tournaments are tracked
      3 Time Bracelet Winner


      Comment


      • #4
        Thx guys

        Comment


        • #5
          So this means you're NOT a "Grandmaster" anymore? Actually the numbers that you're referencing here,whether you click the rankings to trainee (your results in $>0-$1 games only) all the way to Diamond ($200 and up) or just leaving it on default (Grandmaster--which is FULL tracking,at least for what OPR covers,which is NOT everything or even close to it...)these numbers are what are referred to as the "ladder" rankings,and quite contrary to your statement are probably the LEAST important or telling statistic on OPR. There was a thread a couple years back on the reliability of and weight that should be given to,third party tracking sites,such as OPR,Poker Table Ratings (PTR) which tracks ring games (and data mines without players consent,which is why Pokerstars no longer allows PTR to track their players...umbup,Sharkscope and others. Most people came down decidedly against the sites,both for reliability and for the weight,if any,that should be given to the results. I was in the minority as I felt that there was some value to them and as a matter of fact,as I said then and will repeat now,I used OPR stats as my first baseline in player notes. Now understand I did this knowing full well where OPR's blind spots were. OPR does not track any non-monetary buy-in games (no League games,no free rolls,like the Weekly Round 2's or Depositor FR's,no FPP games...). It also only tracks buy-in games starting from 36 players and up,so no STT's,no 12,18 and 27 mans,no MTT's that have fields shorter than 36 players (this does happen of course...for example,just one of many actually,there was a $215/$5K guarantee MTT yesterday which had only 34 runners,but I think you would agree that the $2720 the winner of that tourney received is a little more significant than you,or I or anyone winning bus fare for shipping a .25 45 man,even though OPR doesn't recognize it...). Despite all that and the claims by many that OPR has missed some of their results in games that it DOES track (for myself I can only say that they were on point 100% in my numbers,as I actually also keep track of everything I had played on here myself---notebook,pen and paper,no Excel Spreadsheet...just a personal thing,I process data better that way I think),despite all that I did,as I said,use OPR stats as a first baseline in my player notes,including to what color ring I gave a player in color coding. Basically I surmised that since it was in 45 and 90 mans and MTT's that I would be seeing these players anyway,and that IS what OPR tracks,that their numbers would be relevant. I had a minimum of at least 200 games played in a "career" as the cutoff to assign a color (less than 200 but a player whom I wanted to be able to spot as someone I had a note(s) on and they were colored orange...). Naturally any notes on play specifics would be included and often took precedence over the color code baseline,but that's where you have to trust your own discretion most times.At the end of the day a solid read supersedes anything and my notes would ALWAYS include those. But here's the rub as to your post---when I would use OPR as my baseline on a player the drop dead LAST thing I would give consideration to is the "ladder" ranking of the player,because there are many times where it's not reflective,or out of whack if you will,from the real story. I have reams of players with a line like this... OPR ranking 2010: 88.94% (fairly good,probably right on the profitable/not profitable cut line) ITM%: 13% (player mostly plays 45 and 90 mans,that's a low ITM number to be a 89% ladder ranked player) ROI%: +2% (yep,profitable but just barely) AVG Finish Percentage: Early: 20%---Early/Middle: 20%---Middle: 35%---Middle/Late: 20%---Late:5% So this player busts out early to middle in MTT's 75% of the time,has only a 13 ITM%,despite playing mostly 45 and 90 mans,yet is still a little profitable and has an 89% ladder ranking... Sandtrap,JWK,Dave and many others already know the answer here..."He binked something!!!". And sure enough the player in question,these are stats from my notes on an actual player who's name I will not divulge here obviously,took a 2nd place in a $4.40 MTT once for $380 which was a huge prize above his normal buy-in level (he played mostly .25 45 and 90 mans)so his ladder ranking was skewed. Take that bink away and he's probably around a -25% ROI player which would knock his ladder ranking back to the 50-55% level,as a rough guess. But,and here we come to the meat of the matter,you CAN'T take away that bink. It's part of the picture. Yes you have to take it all in perspective,yes it tells a more complete story (he's really a mediocre to bad player who probably luckboxed that second place)and as the tagline for "The Wire" (best TV show ever...) goes..."Everything's connected". My notes on him depict him as the type for a bad player..."plays too many hands,with no regard to position or prior action,player types or anything really,poor bet sizing,calls and limps too much,plays Ax like it's the cat's ass,will station himself to the river if you bet it small enough to keep him enticed but you can go high enough to make it -EV for him,just not decidedly so...",I had these and others. But the fact is that no matter how he DID bink that second place,it's a great result and IT COUNTS. What you're doing here holdem,in only wanting to discuss the stats that reflect your poker "career" in the best light is cherry picking. Pure and simple. Now if you want to continue to delude yourself as to your skill set then that's fine,well and dandy. More power to you,it's your pattern as seen here over and over and over again. Holdem on a good run = Holdem's the cat's ass of the online poker world. Holdem on a bad run = It's the RNG's fault,or how Stars deals the deck (no burn cards,not enough decks to choose from ),or the trainers and analyzers here have given you a bum steer or,my personal favorite and yours to it would seem..."I wasn't really trying". That's the excuse of a 5 year old by the way... Bottom line is you can spin and cook your stats and try to cherry pick them all you want but you know the truth whether you want to admit it to yourself or not. You've been a losing player. Period. Yes you are making steps to correct that and should be congratulated for it,but when you come in here and give other students bad information,which is precisely what you're doing with your thread and your supposition within it here,then you're getting called on it. By me or someone else. Let's put some things to light here about YOUR capability of being able to ascertain what and what isn't an important stat on OPR and what validity any of it has to do with gauging someone's proficiency. A: When you first started using your OPR stats to try and crow about your game in this Forum a few months back you were so clueless about OPR that you actually bragged as to being ranked as a "Grandmaster",not realizing that since Grandmaster is just the default setting that tracks ALL of a players results at every buy-in level (again as far as the games that OPR tracks...)thet EVERYONE who has ever played any game that they paid to play on Stars and had 36 runners or more is a "Grandmaster". Including,and I'm sure they're out there,peeps who have literally played naught but ONE .02 990 Hyper-Turbo. B: OPR stopped meaning much of anything a few months back when Pokerstars changed their relationship with them and now players have to "opt-in" to have all of their stats and results shown. Without doing so all that can be seen are a players "ladder" ranking,Avg. finish percentage and ITM% and their results in games they managed to make it ITM. No ROI,no net prizes won,no average buy-in,no results in all games in which the player failed to cash. A rather incomplete picture and since many (most) players haven't opted in (I have BTW...nothing to hide in my stats,warts and all...)I now consider OPR to be pretty much useless in the way that I used it before,as a baseline for my notes,and will not be doing so when American players return to Pokerstats. C: You have been challenged,on more than one occasion,when you come in here boasting of your OPR rankings to opt-in and show ALL of your stats,including the most important one...your ROI. ROI isn't everything when judging a player IMO but it IS the most important one because ROI (Return On Investment) denotes the single most important thing of all...is a player profitable or not. This,at the end of the day,is a zero sum game. Either you're profitable...a winning player...or your are not...a losing player. If one only plays for fun and recreation then this doesn't really matter much,if at all,to them and more power to them. That's perfectly fine and poker is a great recreational game if that's what one is looking for. But that's not YOU holdem,you constantly want to measure yourself and toot your "successes". Well then let's see the whole story. I know from before the time that we had to opt-in here that you were a minus ROI player,around -25% if I remember correctly. Let's see how close to zero you've managed to move the needle since then and then we'll know if you're really improving or not. A ten game stretch,well done BTW umbup:,but a ten game stretch tells us nothing. So open up the book holdem. Or are you afraid of the answers within? By the way as to your "trainee" stats I looked for myself and my rankings on that number for the only 2 years I'm tracked (thanks for nothing clusterphucked US Government ) and I have a 97.77% rank for 2010 (which I dispute,I sucked in 2010 and sucked hard...) and a 98.78% ranking in 2011 (that sounds right,but seeing there is no real discrepancy between the two numbers and knowing how much better I was playing in 2011 is what gets me back to the whole "ladder" ranking thing,be it for "trainee" or "Grandmaster"...it's the least reliable stat on OPR...). So for the two years I could be tracked I'm in the top 2.23 and top 1.22% of players in the "trainee" level respectively. I was truly a prince among donkeys. I'm not going to be pulling a muscle patting myself on the back anytime soon. Show the numbers holdem. I'm not going to engage you in a debate on this subject to then just have you go to your "you guys misunderstood what I was saying" crap here. I'm simply going to say that you are 100% wrong in your assertion to the "ladder" ranking stats being the only one that matters on OPR. They aren't even the most important one and even less so when one endeavors to do as you are trying to do here...only count the games you want to count and act like your less desirable numbers at the Silver and Bronze levels shouldn't be held against you. Again,if you want to delude yourself then good luck with that. But when you give bad information to others in this forum to try and justify yourself then that's a bunch of BS in my book and I'm sure I'm far from alone in that view. Show ALL the numbers holdem. Be a man.
          Last edited by Moxie Pip; Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:44 AM. Reason: spelling,grammar...the usual suspects...

          Comment


          • #6
            Good post there Moxie, very interesting,but i think you missed the point off it. The training surely shows an own players progress throughout the years ,whether they have improved or not.
            And as for manning up , my stats have been open for a while now on Sharkscope.

            And if you check back and look at my posts, you will in fact see that my so called stories do add up, in line with the story of my graph.

            And I am still a 93%+ grandmaster on opr.

            As for silver and so on, I am not ranked as could not earn enough vpps at my buyin level.
            And certainly not if im spewing.

            I agree Moxie if we had the means we would give the higher buyins a good run. It does hurt to take down a tourney and win $3 and you know if you had a bigger buyin its a days wage.

            I believe opr to be quite good, if im loosing i drop in the rankings, if i win im up in the rankings, so seems fine to me.

            BUt yes I agree there is some luck boxes who dont deserve a rank on there.
            MY rank is mainly grinding, a true rank, a good mtt finish, but not luck boxing as my late finishes etc show.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by holdemace486 View Post
              Good post there Moxie, very interesting,but i think you missed the point off it. The training surely shows an own players progress throughout the years ,whether they have improved or not.
              And as for manning up , my stats have been open for a while now on Sharkscope.

              And if you check back and look at my posts, you will in fact see that my so called stories do add up, in line with the story of my graph.

              And I am still a 93%+ grandmaster on opr.

              As for silver and so on, I am not ranked as could not earn enough vpps at my buyin level.
              And certainly not if im spewing.

              I agree Moxie if we had the means we would give the higher buyins a good run. It does hurt to take down a tourney and win $3 and you know if you had a bigger buyin its a days wage.

              I believe opr to be quite good, if im loosing i drop in the rankings, if i win im up in the rankings, so seems fine to me.

              BUt yes I agree there is some luck boxes who dont deserve a rank on there.
              MY rank is mainly grinding, a true rank, a good mtt finish, but not luck boxing as my late finishes etc show.

              Where do I even begin with this drivel?

              I hope you're leveling the Forum again because you can't possibly be this obtuse.

              ALL the trainee level on OPR does is track your games of $1 and less for a buy-in.

              THAT'S IT!!!

              It doesn't have a thing to do with anyone's progress,it simply tracks your numbers at that level. Period.

              Whether you progress,regress or run in place like a hamster on a wheel...it DOES NOT MATTER.

              The Bronze and Silver have nothing to do with Silver here (you DID notice that they have Bronze at OPR but not here,yes?...),nor do your VPP's.

              Bronze on OPR tracks your stats for buy-in games of between $1 and $5 holdem and Silver for games between $5 and $20,that's all they do.

              It has NOTHING to do with your VPP's on Stars,your star status on Stars,whether you got elected Queen-of-the-May in Stoke last Spring or anything else.

              Just YOUR performance in games of that buy-in level. Period.

              You want proof?

              Easy,you HAVE rankings in both the Bronze and Silver levels on OPR holdem.I've seen them,I'm looking at them right now. And they count towards your Grandmaster rank,which AGAIN tracks your performance in ALL games that you have played and OPR tracks,from .02 to whatever the biggest buy-in you ever paid is. ALL games.

              That's why I say to you again that you,or anyone else for that matter,who only looks at their stats for one buy-in level and ignores other ones where their performance has been not as good,and it could even be a LESSER buy-in that the lesser numbers were put up holdem,then that person is cherry picking their stats.

              This IS what you are doing holdem. Because you either do NOT understand how OPR works and therefore should not be posting advice to people here on what they should and shouldn't be looking at to assess themselves via OPR,or you are being less than truthful.

              As for OPR "being quite good" it was decent enough before the opt-in decision came down,at least as far as it goes. It was certainly better for what it DID track than Sharkscope in my estimation as SS missed LOTS of my results,both good and bad. SS says it tracks everything (besides rings,though they may have a separate ring feature,or not,I never looked...). I say SS may endeavor to track everything but they catch nothing.

              So I wouldn't look for you there as I consider them deeply flawed.

              And to be honest,since the opt-in so is OPR. At least as far as looking at other people's numbers if they haven't opted in. Since I did it still does what I would want to look at MY numbers,but as I said,I already do that. YOU on the other hand are NOT getting a true read on your numbers at OPR because you won't opt-in,so you're not getting true feedback in what it's saying about your progress or lack thereof.
              Last edited by Moxie Pip; Mon Dec 31, 2012, 07:04 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Now im more confused, my average buyin is about $1

                so bronze, silver, gold, pink with black spots as no relevance

                I am a pro at my buyin level, im certainly ready to step up and play a bronze buyin level.

                So OPR as relavance, it depends how you use it. ITs not bad advice to tell people use this for a goal Mox.

                But it does not matter if i won the WSOP, you would still have to disagree with me.

                Sorry Mox, you are not taking this away from me, I can see the improvement in my game that adds up to the trainee stats from when I first started playing poker.

                OPR as a string of results yet to be calculated, I have nailed it this year, met my own personal goals which was to stop the slide and start to grind back some losses.

                Look at my graph on sharkscope, pokerschool as worked a blind man can see it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Them stat sites just confuse the hell out of me, lets take my full tilt SNG stats, on one site, the one you mention my stats are really poor, yet on another site that gives you a card ranking I am classed as a 4 star king in SNG with a 27% ITM over 87 games and have a good ROI, so depending on who checks me out on what site I am either a good player or a really weak one.

                  Personally I think I am none of the above, I class myself somewhere in the middle, really trying hard to iron them creases out of my game and the more I learn, I find the more there is to be worked on.


                  GL

                  Paul.

                  The worse leaks are the invisible leaks.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Well it does not matter which site I check on, they all say I am good at microstakes.
                    I start my goals tommorrow, slightly changed, but going into the year with confidence.
                    Be glad see your self exclusion up on the 6th bro, you will have to come sit and play these PSO games.
                    Theres some good players in them, its a good challenge.

                    And I am a member of a poker group now bro, thats a cool group.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      all thee best umbup:
                      3 Time Bracelet Winner


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by holdemace486 View Post
                        so bronze, silver, gold, pink with black spots as no relevance
                        100% correct. Someone's level is 100% irrelevant.

                        There are bronze stars that are great winning players. There are also golds, platinums and even higher... that are awful, losing players.

                        All that the stars show is how much money you're playing for.. that's IT.

                        John (JWK24)
                        Super-Moderator



                        6 Time Bracelet Winner


                        Comment


                        • #13
                          In poker, if you are making money, all those other stats mean nothing. If you are not making money, you got work to do.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Results-oriented thinking in the thread.

                            While looking yourself up on OPR/SS/PTR might give you a confidence boost, it's already been noted that these sites are far from perfect in rating how good a player is.

                            You shouldn't even need to look up your results online to know if you've improved your play: You just KNOW.
                            (I remember when I started out 18 months ago. I was absolutely crushing, despite barely understanding a hand chart. I guess it was just beginner's luck, because my poker skills have improved hugely since then, but my winrate still goes up and down.)
                            Bracelet Winner

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by holdemace486 View Post
                              Now im more confused, my average buyin is about $1

                              so bronze, silver, gold, pink with black spots as no relevance

                              I am a pro at my buyin level, im certainly ready to step up and play a bronze buyin level.

                              So OPR as relavance, it depends how you use it. ITs not bad advice to tell people use this for a goal Mox.

                              But it does not matter if i won the WSOP, you would still have to disagree with me.

                              Sorry Mox, you are not taking this away from me, I can see the improvement in my game that adds up to the trainee stats from when I first started playing poker.

                              OPR as a string of results yet to be calculated, I have nailed it this year, met my own personal goals which was to stop the slide and start to grind back some losses.

                              Look at my graph on sharkscope, pokerschool as worked a blind man can see it.

                              What,pray tell,am I trying to take away from you,holdem? I clearly state in my first post in this thread that you ARE taking steps to improve and should be congratulated for it. First you respond saying I "miss your point"----deflection,and now you say that I'm "taking something away from you"---projection.

                              You didn't start this thread to talk about your progress holdem,it's titled "Tips for Beginners",not "Holdem's Progress".

                              And your "tip" is to tell peeps to go to OPR,change the default setting (grandmaster--which tracks ALL of your plays,at ALL buy-in levels,so far as OPR tracks...) to the "trainee" setting,which tracks ONLY your plays of $1 and less. This is BAD advice to anyone who wants to take their OPR stats as a baseline to see whether they're improving or not,which in and of itself is very debatable advice to begin with.

                              Your brother is much more on point on this subject---ALL these third party tracking sites should be taken with a big grain of salt.

                              Hell,I'll use myself as Example 1A: ProPokerLabs has me as a 1 star Ace in scheduled MTT's and a 2 star Ace in SNG's. I was a frigging $0.22 ABI player in my time here and will state categorically that in my opinion having me anywhere near Ace status with such a pittance of a buy-in level is a complete and utter joke. I know that my ROI,ITM and profitability per game played were all good and the result of consistency and not the odd bink or three,but still...TWENTY-TWO CENTS average buy-in.Not in a million years should I be an Ace,or anything approximating one,with that ABI. But THEY say I am,so I say THEY and their methodology are flawed at best.

                              They miss results,sometimes have erroneous results and are just not very trustworthy at all. As I said,when US peeps could play here and before OPR went to the opt-in procedure I DID use them as a starting point for player notes and color coding,but I did so full well understanding the limitations of the site.

                              As to the relevance of the stats within the levels above "trainee" holdem it's simple---you've played games at those levels and,for good or bad,those results ARE part of the picture. IF you want to be judged by the stats on a 3rd party tracking site then drink in ALL the stats. To deny this is doing yourself a disservice. If that's how you want to play it then that's YOUR problem and not my lookout so knock yourself out.

                              But when you tell others that doing the same is the way to go then you're being irresponsible and giving bad information to the community. THAT'S the issue I have with this thread.

                              holdem,let me ask you this---if we should only go by your results at "trainee",which again is for games 0f $1 and LESS,then should we act as if that $2.50 180 man that you won for $123 back in July NEVER HAPPENED? That's an excellent result,very well done by you and you should be proud as a peacock of it,but going by what you're putting forth here,it shouldn't count in any estimation of your skills and how they have grown. Because the "trainee" level that you insist on being judged at alone DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR THAT GAME.

                              Lastly I'm going to offer you this piece of advice ans then I'm done with this subject. If you really are as stats conscience as you apparently are then you may want to seriously reconsider your position on having a HUD.

                              Not for the HUD itself but for the self-tracking tools in the software holdem.

                              You want to REALLY see you progressions and regressions in a true light?

                              Get a HUD.

                              You want literally hundreds of options in that software that let you go deep inside the numbers and let you see results in any scenario that you could possibly imagine and then be able to spot and correct leaks?

                              Get a HUD.

                              For you to be as stats obsessive as you are and be relying on 3rd party tracking sites instead of a HUD is akin to NASA trying to run their space programs with information gleaned from a hand held telescope and a sextant.

                              GET A HUD.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              X Cookies Information

                              We have placed cookies on your computer to improve your experience on our website. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.