Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="zachvac, post: 826524, member: 26306"] ok so I've really been thinking about the showdown vs. non-showdown winnings discussion. There's good reason I've been considering this. Non-showdown winnings for my entire career are currently at ~-$10k. Now it's been a huge sample, and it includes when I lost, my total winnings are a little under $3k, thus my showdown winnings are at about $13k. Meaning if somehow I could simply break even in non-showdown pots I'd be up $13k. Now I don't think that's possible simply because the pots are connected and if I do better in non-showdown pots these pots don't reach showdown and thus I have less showdown winnings. Of course on the other hand when I successfully bluff before showdown I gain non-showdown winnings and also showdown winnings (from negative to 0). So I'm considering a common scenario, marginal hands. Say I have 77 and the flop comes 359, or a better example say like JJ and it comes A93 rainbow. Basically party wa/wb, although in examples like the early one overcards have 6 outs. So I will usually check this one, call one street at least, rest depends on opponents, but let's consider a different line. So in either scenario, the first because you suspect overs, and the second they could have KQ. So instead of checking you bet out to protect your hand. Let's look at the difference in showdown vs. non-showdown in these 2 examples. When villain has you beat the way I play you almost always lose a non-showdown pot. Top pair (especially in examples like the second one) will most likely bet 2 streets, you know you're beat, and you fold. If you're ahead you usually win a small pot at showdown, possibly value betting a river. Similarly, someone who bets out will take down most pots at non-showdown and when called will most likely be behind. Now depending on circumstances this behind can sometimes be a non-showdown pot as well, simply because villain may bet turn or river and we will fold. But we win a lot more non-showdown pots. So I used to think that it was just donks who had positive non-showdown winnings until seeing some stats here, not only of winning players, but of players who I knew played well (wv and SavagePenguin were two I'm pretty sure, thought maybe there were 1 or 2 more). So basically I'm curious as to this is one of the major differences, just the different style in playing marginal hands. Curious of different cbet % vs. whether they generally do well in non-showdown pots or not. I personally cbet 43.6% and am definitely a big-time loser in non-showdown pots. Curious of basically everyone I guess but mainly the people who win at non-showdown pots. This has just been eating at me for the last few weeks just trying to figure this out. If this doesn't yield a solution I'm going to ask if I can do a sweat session or if they would do a video of their play, because I really want to see the difference in style for a person who wins in non-showdown pots. I can definitely learn something from that. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us