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.


No announcement yet.

Cumulative % IS important

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Cumulative % IS important

    For the majority of players I've checked, cumulative % ups and downs have a direct correlation to PPT. In this informal research, it appears to me that fluctuations in cumulative % are directly related to profitibility of one's play. As cumulative % goes up, so do profits. As it goes down, profits go down.

    Of course this seems obvious - but some have argued that cumulative % is meaningless, or that it has little to do with "money". A few examples:

    rggator multi trend

    minpin multi trend

    apryllshowers multi trend

    thehazyone multi trend

    And a satellite example:

    dreams32097 sat trend

    Of course there are exceptions. Remember, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics .

  • #2
    there are correct ways to measure things, there are not quite so correct ways to measure things, there are approximate ways to measure things- but in the end the only accurate way is the correct way.


    • #3
      but some have argued that cumulative % is meaningless, or that it has little to do with "money".
      I have never argued this. However, I have argued that the cumulative ranking, if one were to play with that in mind, encourages students to develop/learn/practice a style of play that is not optimal for making the big money places in a tournament. Obviously, beginners will not realise this and think they are learning the best way....survival.

      I will admit though, that it is better than playing to the other extreme. i.e. loose and reckless. I also think the cumulative rank is a good thing as it encourages semi-realistic play in the games. It just isn't the best possible feedback system with regards one's tournament ablity. Neither is it a rank of which player is better than another as some seem to think, (which is probably a good thing as it will again encourage serious play from those motivated by such a thing).


      • #4
        The PSO percent, when compared over a fixed number of similarly sized events, is a good barometer for a moderately aggressive style of play. It rewards those with early patience the most. It penalizes those that tend to bust-out early twice as often (and more) as they make it past the midway point.

        If a tournament strategy with more early aggressiveness is the optimal play, PSO will not recognize that. If, as geezer states, the opimum B&M tournament strategy is to build a HUGE stack early or bust out and get into lucrative side-action, PSO is a long, long way off in how they measure performance and prepare future poker players. However, with their stated mission of producing Tournament Poker Champions they are probably fairly close to providing a decent metric.

        As it other RL situations, it is rarely possible to develop ONE measure that considers everything.



        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.