6max HUD mostly color coded

[rubikcube101]

Hey every1. I was able to make a HUD for 6 max nl holdem. Its still a work in progress a few havent been color coded yet. mostly everything is. I use it on Fulltilt poker micros limits i thought i share with every1. I couldnt figure how to show a pic so i uploaded a pic to show. Its set for 4 tabling.
first panel vpip/prf/agf/hands
second panel 3bet/f3bet/ thats preflop
line feed Cbet/fcbet/
third panel bturn/fturn
line feed briver/friver
fourth panel abb. name color coded on stack size
fifth panel steal

Tell me what u think. everything is color code except for bturn/river/fturn/river

[_Loki_]

Hi Rubik

I play micro 6-max NLHE @ PokerStars
I play 4 tables at once
I started out with 5 rows of stats in my HUD & realised they were a waste of space & hurt my brain

In My Opinion...

I can't see the point of all those stats because the pool of players is too large to collect sufficient hands in a short time to make it worthwhile doing anything fancy. If you have 300 hands on a player it must be over months & his *style* will have changed in that time interval

Now I just use:
Ab name / number of hands
vp$ip % / pre-flop raise %
Pre-flop Agg factor
Winnings for current session

These stats work well in a cash game if used with player notes & observing what type of hands a player will open with
Sometimes I use the pop-up stats, but very rarely

I might be wrong here, but all the deep stats are better used at higher stakes where it's possible to collect a big enough quantity of recent HH's on each player you encounter

Michael

BTW All your stats might be useful if you've bought datamined HH's, but I don't see the point of that at micro stakes

[_Loki_]

At the micro level at Pokerstars I'm adding about 2,500 extra players to my HM DB every month that I haven't played before !!

That's 100 NEW (to me) PLAYERS A DAY - deep stats are a waste of time at the micros - it's better to observe the characteristics of the tables you are playing on - & IMO table selection is the most important thing of all - the looser the table the better for your pocket

I use HM mainly for...
seeing what my leaks are &
studying what hands my ops are opening with in various positions

Michael

[rubikcube101]

deep stats are a waste of time at the micros - it's better to observe the characteristics of the tables you are playing on - & IMO table selection is the most important thing of all - the looser the table the better for your pocket
Michael

Hey thanks for the comment. I am still actually experimenting with my HUD. I have started to cut out a few stats. I am thinking of bring in wtsd & w$sd into my stats and cutting out a few stats like river bet and turn bet. its a work in progress gettin my HUD jus right. thanks for the info. i am looking into changing to keep it simple

[_Loki_]

Hey thanks for the comment. I am still actually experimenting with my HUD. I have started to cut out a few stats. I am thinking of bring in wtsd & w$sd into my stats and cutting out a few stats like river bet and turn bet. its a work in progress gettin my HUD jus right. thanks for the info. i am looking into changing to keep it simple

Hi Rubik

wtsd & w$sd are ok if you have 100's of hands on a player - you will never usefully have 100's of hands on a player at microstakes, because by the time you've collected them the data will be over a period of months not weeks - players change their styles. Also a player has completely different stats if he's sitting with rocks or maniacs

Just stick with vp$ip, pfr, ag factor & winnings in current session IMO

By the time you've got 100's of HH's on a guy you'll be ready to move up in limits & his stats will be useless. Unless you plan to eke out a living at microstakes...

Some players have stayed micro & developed profitable strategies for playing all the weekend soldier types - but with those sort of opponents who needs stats ? You KNOW they'll play any two cards the same colour, that they'll chase A/rag to the river, they'll go all-in with 44 from UTG & they think that 39o are their *lucky cards*

At micro just find tables with > 60% Ave pfr with a bunch of players from the Latin nations after 8pm their time on a Fri/Sat (particularly Puerto Rico, Argentina, Colombia etc etc), turn your HUD off (if you like) & HAVE FUN

Michael

[Jeffrey Lin]

When you played shorthanded table for a hour, you will collect about 100 Hands of your opponent. For some important stats like steal, cbet, fold to cbet, vpip,pfr,agr ....., 1000 hands is enough to evaluate their play style. And stats like raise range or 3bet range need far more hands.

[_Loki_]

I keep an eye on the lobby while playing & look for wild loose tables (very high ave pfr% mainly) so that means I'm constantly changing one table from the three I'm currently playing every 10 minutes or so - that's why I don't have loads of players with 100's of hands on my DB. My average time on a table must be 15 or 20 minutes?

Staying on a table for an hour doesn't make sense to me unless it's very fishy.

I've just looked at my 1c/2c 6-max NLHE PokerStars DB for the past 3 months & the most HH I've got on a player is 420 & that's because I keep bumping into him since he plays ROCK on around 16 tables at once.

30 players in the 300's. 20 of whom are NIT/ROCK multi-tabler robots
180 players in the 200's.
450 players in the 100's.
The remaining 6,400 players on my DB (who I've played in the past 3 months) average around 20 - 30 hands

When I join a table I'm very very lucky indeed if I have stats on 2 players with greater than 100 hands

I'm wild guessing that there's around 12,000 PS players at 1c/2c who play once or twice a week & maybe 4,000 who play more often (Does anyone have firmer figures?). I suppose there might be another 20,000?? who play every other Saturday or something...

In summary: There are far too many players at 1c/2c for observed stats to be truly effective except for the top 2 or 3 stats. The deeper stats are irrelevant, but of course I will start to use them when I'm swimming in a smaller pool at the higher stakes.

Michael

[Jeffrey Lin]

I am also a micro stake player. But my opinion is for micro and small stake, imporving your game is much more important than making the money in the long term.

I keep an eye on the lobby while playing & look for wild loose tables (very high ave pfr% mainly) so that means I'm constantly changing one table from the three I'm currently playing every 10 minutes or so - that's why I don't have loads of players with 100's of hands on my DB. My average time on a table must be 15 or 20 minutes?

Staying on a table for an hour doesn't make sense to me unless it's very fishy.

I've just looked at my 1c/2c 6-max NLHE PokerStars DB for the past 3 months & the most HH I've got on a player is 420 & that's because I keep bumping into him since he plays ROCK on around 16 tables at once.

30 players in the 300's. 20 of whom are NIT/ROCK multi-tabler robots
180 players in the 200's.
450 players in the 100's.
The remaining 6,400 players on my DB (who I've played in the past 3 months) average around 20 - 30 hands

When I join a table I'm very very lucky indeed if I have stats on 2 players with greater than 100 hands

I'm wild guessing that there's around 12,000 PS players at 1c/2c who play once or twice a week & maybe 4,000 who play more often (Does anyone have firmer figures?). I suppose there might be another 20,000?? who play every other Saturday or something...

In summary: There are far too many players at 1c/2c for observed stats to be truly effective except for the top 2 or 3 stats. The deeper stats are irrelevant, but of course I will start to use them when I'm swimming in a smaller pool at the higher stakes.

Michael

[_Loki_]

Hi JL I agree

I treat microstakes as a first step

Why have you quoted me though ? I can't see where I've written anything that disagrees with what you say

Michael

[Jeffrey Lin]

Hi, _Loki_

I'm not a engish speaker, so I possibly misunderstand your words. Sorry for that.

You keep finding fishy tables and didn't stay in a table for a hour. This's a way aim at making money. This is what lead to my misunderstanding.

Hi JL I agree

I treat microstakes as a first step

Why have you quoted me though ? I can't see where I've written anything that disagrees with what you say

Michael