You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Sky Poker forums will be temporarily unavailable from 11pm Wednesday July 25th.
Sky Poker Forums is upgrading its look! Stay tuned for the big reveal!
Blocked Sharkscope Stats
There's been a bit of discussion about this recently on a few threads and I just wondered what the general consensus is...
If you see someone has blocked their sharkscope graphs do you think....
1) They're a terrible player, ashamed of their stats
2) They're a very good player, wanting to disguise their skillz/profit
3) They're just a secretive person
4) No information can be taken from it.
And why?
Discuss.
If you see someone has blocked their sharkscope graphs do you think....
1) They're a terrible player, ashamed of their stats
2) They're a very good player, wanting to disguise their skillz/profit
3) They're just a secretive person
4) No information can be taken from it.
And why?
Discuss.
Comments
My personal view is that it could be any of them........but, I would be more inclined to go with the fact they are a losing player more than any of the others. No matter what anybody says, poker players have big egos (the vast majority of them anyway) and if someone is thousands in profit then I very much doubt they would block their stats. Some people say they block theirs to try and disguise but if you are a good player then there really is no need to imo.
Word then spreads about the site.
Bad/very players get abused in chat after handing out a bad beat, about their stats.
They then realise how much money they have lost, and eventually end up quitting poker coz they realise it's costing them a fortune and it's no longer fun ....
Maybe some block it, just to avoid that kinda cr ap then....
I lean towards blocked stats = bad player, or at least bad sharkscope (maybe they're a good player now, but 3 years of being a bad player ruined their graph and they aint turned it round yet).
A guy I played the other day HU in a MTT had his blocked lol
Thought he was a good player, apart from Bluffing with 3 8.
Maybe Dohhh is right lol
Even -ROI players can pick up AA
CCF for TOTP?
I now, understand this defeats the object, and in turn my graph would look better when I execute my current game and start having good result. I do regret resetting my graph for PS.
Jonathan
For instance, my SS would probably be better if it only covered the last 12 months as I'm better now than I was 3-4 years ago, but I still wouldn't reset them, just play your game, you'll turn it round and it'll be nice anyway to see what it was and what it is now, and a true reflection of your progress on a particular site.
It's like when people say 'wooo I've spun up £100 into £300' but neglect to mention they've deposited £100 and busto'd 5 times previous to that. Obv it's your own business and you don't need to tell anyone but for me personally, I'm interested in how I'm actually doing in poker life-time not just 'look at this 2 week heater' where I did good, ignore everything else.
more likely a winning player who does very well and doesn't want the whole world knowing how much they going to crush
+ some people are just more secrative about how much money they win/lose -
Sorry, just playing devil's advocate
ss results are good for table/player selection, nothing else....
Big losers don't know, or don't care. It's only those that don't think that their SS is a fair reflection of their ability, that'll want it blocked. I.e., the small losers.
That, or rarely a medium winner? Those that think people SS you is a big deal and gives away a lot of information. When in fact, it doesn't. AT ALL.
Solid thread though, although surprised at the results.
I would just like to comment on a Smitalos comment. "Those that think people SS you is a big deal and gives away a lot of information. When in fact, it doesn't. AT ALL"
So, would you rather play 100 heads up games against the player that has lost £15,000 playing heads up or won £15,000 heads up? say for arguments sake, same sample size and same buy ins.
Lambert posted at 29/7/2013 12:38 AM BST on SkyPoker.com
"Yeah I don't understand blocking your stats at all either. There's very little anyone can take from a sharkscope graph... they can go 'oh look he's made quite a bit of profit, he's probably good'.
1) It is probably because having winning MTT results isn't always a result of being a good player
2) They know you're good, but good how? Are you 'good' cos you're a nit that just sits there waiting for the nuts, or because you are loose aggro and have a very good postflop game or lots of other permutations.
Look at some of the top players on Sky... TommyD, MattBates, etc. they don't seem to be being held back by the fact people can see their stats "
Calcalfold posted at 29/7/2013 12:50 AM BST on SkyPoker.com
"There are lots of stats available to check.
What games they specialise in, what stakes they usually play, how successful they are, how many games they have lost in a row, are they losing lots and moving up in buy ins. All that is information that can help to draw a picture of that player.
We can take a lot from that.
Do they understand heads up concepts?
Are they on tilt?
Are they likely to have understanding of poker related maths?
To name but a few
The biggest tool of Sharkscope, is to avoid winning players. You can look though the heads up games ready to go, and just avoid winning players. Now, tell me that isnt something a good heads up SNG player would want to hide....
As poker is a game of incomplete information, and applying the information you have more successfully than the information villain has, it makes perfect sense to withold any information you can.
With regards your comment about specific players, whom for the record I have not heard of.
That point you have made holds no basis for conculsions, they may win more, less or the same if they were to hide their data. But as we are unable to prove or disprove such a theory, drawing the conclusion that keeping their stats in the public realm has no impact on their results is not scientifically sound."