Rush poker statistics analysis

by PokerAnon ~ February 28th, 2011. Filed under: Rush Poker.


In the past couple of weeks I’ve been playing $25nl FR Rush poker casually. By casually I mean only one or two instances while at the same time watching videos or working on a Lexulous game. During this period I’ve logged only 1,750 hands but I was curious to see how the $25nl players actually played. I should run the same analysis against the $10nl players, but I’m lazy and don’t have that data here.

From HEM I went to the xxx,xxx Players tab (where all players in my database are listed), selected the filters (in this case all 0.10/0.25 Rush after the beginning of February) and exported to CSV, generating a file that defaults to being called PlayerGrid.csv. That lists all 2,868 of my opponents plus myself giving total hands, bb/100, VPIP, PFR and other common stats.

Then I take myself out of the data and multiply each statistic against the total number of hands for that opponent. I do this multiplication to weight the “grinders” against the “casual” players because I’m going to see the “grinders” more often at my tables so I want to adjust for how often I’m going to see certain types of players. Before the weighting adjustment the VPIP/PFR averages are 21.3/8.9, after weighting 16.6/8.8; the “grinder”-nits shift the VPIP down without decreasing the PFR.

Comparing the first two columns you can see how the”grinder” nit/TAGs affect the averages. VPIP decreases, PFR stays constant. Any postflop stats become irrelevant after weighting because I don’t know how many times any player saw the flop, turn or river, so I can’t be multiplying by the number of hands any more. And the un-weighted values are still questionable because it goes by individual player rather than by a proper cumulative total, meaning that the results are skewed toward the casual and slower players who I see less often.

One player with 92 hands of history is 8.7/5.4 but never CBet, never won at showdown? Another with 59 hands is 6.8/6.8, but also never CBet and never went to showdown? In fact, from the players with the most history, the top 82 players, all with 25 or more hands, 32 players never went to showdown? If I look at the top ones in particular, these are nits with stats like 6/6 or 8/8 so I’m assuming that they are open shoving the few hands that they play and everyone is folding. I’ll have to go back and look at some of them and see what kind of stack sizes they are playing with. I think that the minimum is 40 big blinds or $10 so that’s a pretty risky strategy.

Postflop I’m still CBetting almost 90% of the time but slowing down on the turn/river when called. The reason for that is evident in the low Fold/Turn/River CBet percentage of the other players. They’ll fold somewhere around half the time on the flop but if they call the flop, 70% of the time they’re calling the turn CBet until they miss their draw on the river. I don’t play nearly as fit-or-fold on the flop but it’s always a judgment call, and I should look at my profitability when calling CBets. And I don’t think that I CBet nearly as often playing $25/$50/$100 FR cash tables because the flop texture means more there. Here I bet dry flops because they’re dry, drawy flops because the calling ranges are often any Ace or two big cards rather than good calling cards, and scary flops because those are the only ones that most players at this level recognize and can be afraid of. The only times that I don’t CBet is when it’s mulitway and I’m OOP, or I’m trying to get my opponent to bet.

The average number of hands is 4.9 and the median is 3, so there are a lot of 1 and 2 hand opponents. That’s to be expected given the random seating of Rush poker and the small sample size. The top quartile takes me to player number 107 with 21 hands of history. If I narrow down to just those players the VPIP drops to 12.5, PFR to 8.0, and 3Bet up to 2.9. The grinder stats.

Of course I affect the actions of other players. If I’m open raising wide including from early position, then there will be more folds than at the average $25nl Rush poker table. My stats are almost identical with the stats from the previous 14,000 hands at $10nl so apparently I haven’t found any reason to adjust. My bb/100 is 70% higher now but that’s likely just variance, unless the style that I used at $10nl actually works better at $25nl for some reason. The style stats haven’t changed. In the 107 there are about ten with really loose-passive stats and maybe 15 with LAGgy stats similar to mine, and the rest are TAGs or nits.

At the top of the postflop aggression list are some nits as well as few LAGs with stats like 19/15 with Agg/Agg% of 8/80, 19/19/8/67, 21/15/2.5/56.

I’m ignoring profitability at this point ’cause I don’t have enough hands, but overall it’s pretty much what I expected. The surprise that I’m going to have to do some more research in my database on is players who aren’t getting to showdown. The looser ones (VPIP over 12) include some winners, but of the tightest 20 of the top 107 (VPIP under 8.3) are all losers except for one. There’s likely some variance there as the tight ones might not be getting hands to play and I can certainly be down and playing tight over any randomly chosen or 30 hands in a row, but 20 out of 107 times?

Be Sociable, Share!

Leave a Reply