i looked at the play of 16 top players on sky poker in each game over the past two weeks.
here are the results.
time
buy-in
players
top16
cash
%
%
strength
15:30
5.50
1766
9
2
22%
78%
soft
16:30
5.50
1660
13
2
15%
85%
ok
17:30
5.50
1620
29
3
10%
90%
hard
18:30
5.50
3457
45
2
4%
96%
omg
19:00
7.70
1791
62
6
10%
90%
omg
19:30
22.00
1354
111
21
19%
81%
ok
19:45
11.00
1184
104
21
20%
80%
soft
20:00
33.00
3564
116
25
22%
78%
soft
20:15
11.00
1484
111
20
18%
82%
ok
20:30
5.50
6200
113
24
21%
79%
soft
21:00
55.00
880
91
13
14%
86%
hard
21:30
3.30
2588
66
10
15%
85%
ok
21:30
11.00
2455
107
18
17%
83%
ok
22:00
22.00
923
118
20
17%
83%
ok
22:15
5.50
1554
49
10
20%
80%
soft
22:30
55.00
584
96
16
17%
83%
ok
22:45
5.50
2458
43
6
14%
86%
hard
23:00
11.00
1088
101
19
19%
81%
ok
0:00
22.00
988
87
17
20%
80%
ok
0:30
11.00
1063
41
4
10%
90%
omg
this is only to explore the principles. it is two weeks of games only. there are some games that have few players and therefore the strength assessment is of low confidence. there are sufficient events to take some meaning. that aside, it to test the principle.
you wont actually know if a tourny (say the 55 at 9 ) is gonna be any of the above due to not knowing who has entered , it was hard last night but if i satted in say, would it be classified as soft the next day
it must fluctuate throughtout the week in which case the stats are meaningless . or am i just being ignorant
hey aus. regarding the soft , ok , hard , omg . do you collate these results after the event im just thinking (which is hard) you wont actually know if a tourny (say the 55 at 9 ) is gonna be any of the above due to not knowing who has entered , it was hard last night but if i satted in say, would it be classified as soft the next day it must fluctuate throughtout the week in which case the stats are meaningless . or am i just being ignorant Posted by stokefc
hi stokey,
the stats will be after the game finishes. although i could do it in-play but i would need to be awake, on-line, on my own, not drinking, motivated etc.
the main info is to know that the 9pm £55 is usually hard. as we know, past performance is no assurance of future results.
i would like to get to being able to know whether i could expect a tough game or not, should i decide to buy-in. i don't want no information. i don't want to guess so often.
In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : hi stokey, the stats will be after the game finishes. although i could do it in-play but i would need to be awake, on-line, on my own, not drinking, motivated etc. the main info is to know that the 9pm £55 is usually hard. as we know, past performance is no assurance of future results. i would like to get to being able to know whether i could expect a tough game or not, should i decide to buy-in. i don't want no information. i don't want to guess so often. Posted by aussie09
In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : Ive had a good look at the 'pokersuperhero' site and its not possible to access whether a game is tough or soft based on the information provided. PS the site is VERY slow. PPS are sky OK with links being created to it ? Posted by sim_mo
thanks for the note about speed.
i did upgrade the site a few months ago, spending to go to unlimited bandwidth.
i have deliberately added spare areas to each day results page, just in case there ever was a need to show results from many more games. it is unused capacity and might be slowing things, i will go and get rid of that.
I'll start by saying I don't really want to get involved in the debate about which/how tables do or do not show what game strength is like but appreciate Aussie is just trying to come up with a way of measuring it and there's probably no perfect measure due to unknowns playing on mtts online. I just wish Gary's results thread would come back. I know aussie's site records all these results but I resent having to login/signup. Sharkscope and garys tables made my life complete lol Posted by jdsallstar
yes, i appreciate that jds. i wish i didn't have to log in to websites either.
i think you've hit the nail on the head about there being no perfect way to measure. i have only sought a method that has fewer flaws than other methods.
I'll start by saying I don't really want to get involved in the debate about which/how tables do or do not show what game strength is like but appreciate Aussie is just trying to come up with a way of measuring it and there's probably no perfect measure due to unknowns playing on mtts online. I just wish Gary's results thread would come back. I know aussie's site records all these results but I resent having to login/signup. Sharkscope and garys tables made my life complete lol Posted by jdsallstar
I must admit JD I'm not a massive fan of signing up to stuff either, but to be fair to Aussie you don't get any spam mail at all, don't even think I got a welcome e-mail. So if you sign up you can easily just have a quick scan through who won what. I don't think you get asked for much info when you sign up from what I remember.
In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : I must admit JD I'm not a massive fan of signing up to stuff either, but to be fair to Aussie you don't get any spam mail at all, don't even think I got a welcome e-mail. So if you sign up you can easily just have a quick scan through who won what. I don't think you get asked for much info when you sign up from what I remember. Posted by GREGSTER
Hi thanks for the info. I've no reason to doubt no spam but then why ask for it?
Don't know how secure the site is etc and still resent signing up for information that previously was just a click away on the forum.
Recognise some of the very good stats and extra stats on there and appreciate the time it must take setting all of it up etc but just doesnt sit right with me. I try to be pretty careful with all my details so prob just me being me lol
i have now completed the change to a fully objective table.
the first principle was to define those who are the control list of good players. this was prompted earlier in the thread, thank you. i have looked back over the last three and a half years and have taken every major tournament winner. there have been 22,406 major tournaments. there are 7,196 unique winners. these form the control list of names.
now, for each and every major tournament, the entrants are cross-checked to see if they feature on the control list. this gives a percentage of the field that have previously won a major game on sky poker.
the second part is how well the winners from the control group have played in a particular game. cashing is too narrow a range, so i count those who reached the top quarter in the game. this gives a second percentage.
these two percentages give a factor. this factor is banded to be either "soft", "ok", "hard" or "OMG".
thank you for all your comments. i have taken some ideas and changed the table to become objective. no longer skewed by volume play, it is much more a yardstick of tournament strength.
Have not got a clue whether the changes you have made make a difference, I hope they do, just wanted to say good on you for listening to the feedback and trying to do something about it.
Despite the site not being perfect, what poker tracking site is. I have to say that the information you provide, FOR FREE, is excellent. As you have stated it is up to the individual what they pick and choose to use the information for but for that information to be updated daily, be accurate and be free is truly remarkable. I just hope that some of the negativity on here doesn't put you off continuing as I, along with many others I assume, appreciate the hard work and get a lot of enjoyment from your site.
i looked at the play of 16 top players on sky poker in each game over the past two weeks. here are the results. time buy-in players top16 cash % % strength 15:30 5.50 1766 9 2 22% 78% soft 16:30 5.50 1660 13 2 15% 85% ok 17:30 5.50 1620 29 3 10% 90% hard 18:30 5.50 3457 45 2 4% 96% omg 19:00 7.70 1791 62 6 10% 90% omg 19:30 22.00 1354 111 21 19% 81% ok 19:45 11.00 1184 104 21 20% 80% soft 20:00 33.00 3564 116 25 22% 78% soft 20:15 11.00 1484 111 20 18% 82% ok 20:30 5.50 6200 113 24 21% 79% soft 21:00 55.00 880 91 13 14% 86% hard 21:30 3.30 2588 66 10 15% 85% ok 21:30 11.00 2455 107 18 17% 83% ok 22:00 22.00 923 118 20 17% 83% ok 22:15 5.50 1554 49 10 20% 80% soft 22:30 55.00 584 96 16 17% 83% ok 22:45 5.50 2458 43 6 14% 86% hard 23:00 11.00 1088 101 19 19% 81% ok 0:00 22.00 988 87 17 20% 80% ok 0:30 11.00 1063 41 4 10% 90% omg this is only to explore the principles. it is two weeks of games only. there are some games that have few players and therefore the strength assessment is of low confidence. there are sufficient events to take some meaning. that aside, it to test the principle. Posted by aussie09
Any reason why you dont include the £22 bounty hunters at 12,3, and 6pm?
In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : Any reason why you dont include the £22 bounty hunters at 12,3, and 6pm? Posted by HAYSIE
yes, the number of runners is too low.
i try and keep the "test" consistent. the major games are those with a guarantee of £500 and over, they need a buy-in of £3 and over (recently lowered in order to include the 9:30 rebuy) and finally should be likely to have 30 entrants or more.
the £500 guarantee bounty hunters at 12, 3 and 6pm were the three games that prompted me to add the third condition. sometimes they were getting only 20-odd entrants and cash was paid only down to 3rd place. Half the final table didn't get paid. Comparing performance requires a consistent test.
i used to include all three. i like them, they are fun games. i will include them again if they gain numbers, they are probably the next best games.
i aim to measure performance in the top games each day. generally 20 a day. capacity for 30+.
Comments
i looked at the play of 16 top players on sky poker in each game over the past two weeks.
here are the results.
this is only to explore the principles. it is two weeks of games only. there are some games that have few players and therefore the strength assessment is of low confidence. there are sufficient events to take some meaning. that aside, it to test the principle.
the stats will be after the game finishes. although i could do it in-play but i would need to be awake, on-line, on my own, not drinking, motivated etc.
the main info is to know that the 9pm £55 is usually hard. as we know, past performance is no assurance of future results.
i would like to get to being able to know whether i could expect a tough game or not, should i decide to buy-in. i don't want no information. i don't want to guess so often.
thanks for the note about speed.
i did upgrade the site a few months ago, spending to go to unlimited bandwidth.
i have deliberately added spare areas to each day results page, just in case there ever was a need to show results from many more games. it is unused capacity and might be slowing things, i will go and get rid of that.
thanks for the heads-up.
i think you've hit the nail on the head about there being no perfect way to measure. i have only sought a method that has fewer flaws than other methods.
thanks for all the input and debate.
the answer is to have a control group of 1,000 who are known to be good players.
for each tournament the number of cashes of the control group players will give a percentage.
the lower this percentage the stronger the game.
the results will be banded into soft, ok, hard and omg.
the only problem now is the mechanics of it. i am working on that bit.
Don't know how secure the site is etc and still resent signing up for information that previously was just a click away on the forum.
Recognise some of the very good stats and extra stats on there and appreciate the time it must take setting all of it up etc but just doesnt sit right with me. I try to be pretty careful with all my details so prob just me being me lol
I don't use any sites that force me to log in just to read content. To post, yes fair enough, but to observe, no thanks.
STRENGTH
that's it, done.
i have now completed the change to a fully objective table.
the first principle was to define those who are the control list of good players. this was prompted earlier in the thread, thank you. i have looked back over the last three and a half years and have taken every major tournament winner. there have been 22,406 major tournaments. there are 7,196 unique winners. these form the control list of names.
now, for each and every major tournament, the entrants are cross-checked to see if they feature on the control list. this gives a percentage of the field that have previously won a major game on sky poker.
the second part is how well the winners from the control group have played in a particular game. cashing is too narrow a range, so i count those who reached the top quarter in the game. this gives a second percentage.
these two percentages give a factor. this factor is banded to be either "soft", "ok", "hard" or "OMG".
i have redone the strength table, here...
www.PokerSuperHero.com/strength
thank you for all your comments. i have taken some ideas and changed the table to become objective. no longer skewed by volume play, it is much more a yardstick of tournament strength.
NEW WINNERS
two players won their first major tournament yesterday
amdycaz won the £5.50 at 22:45hrs and longdrop won the £5.50 at 22:15hrs.
well done both, especially having never won one before.
they are now added to the strength control list making a total of 7,198 unique winners of a major tournament since january 2014.
NEW WINNERS
2 more players won their first major tournament yesterday; Juniort0ng and Tweaks7
Both players are now added to the strength control group, which now lists exactly 7,200 winners of a major tournament since 1 january 2014.
The other 18 major games were won by players who were previous winners.
www.PokerSuperHero.com/strength
Can I just say THANK YOU!
Despite the site not being perfect, what poker tracking site is. I have to say that the information you provide, FOR FREE, is excellent. As you have stated it is up to the individual what they pick and choose to use the information for but for that information to be updated daily, be accurate and be free is truly remarkable.
I just hope that some of the negativity on here doesn't put you off continuing as I, along with many others I assume, appreciate the hard work and get a lot of enjoyment from your site.
THANK YOU!
i try and keep the "test" consistent. the major games are those with a guarantee of £500 and over, they need a buy-in of £3 and over (recently lowered in order to include the 9:30 rebuy) and finally should be likely to have 30 entrants or more.
the £500 guarantee bounty hunters at 12, 3 and 6pm were the three games that prompted me to add the third condition. sometimes they were getting only 20-odd entrants and cash was paid only down to 3rd place. Half the final table didn't get paid. Comparing performance requires a consistent test.
i used to include all three. i like them, they are fun games. i will include them again if they gain numbers, they are probably the next best games.
i aim to measure performance in the top games each day. generally 20 a day. capacity for 30+.