Online poker sessions are like a string of discrete decisions: fold, call, raise, then onto the next table. Hand history provides the sequence of those decisions in a form that allows you to play back your session, filter specific parts of your session, and compare your decisions to other hands. The important questions aren't if you end up profitable; they're about if you keep making the same decision pattern under similar conditions.
If used properly, these records will convert your memory into evidence. They'll help you identify areas to focus on and will give you insight to see if there's an area where you might want to spend some time looking (even though a short sample can still have distortion due to random variation).
How a Text-Based Hand History Actually Documents Your Decisions
The actual detail of the hand history will depend on which company provided the hand history. For example, PokerStars has given its customers options to download either a hand record for a specific hand, a record of the player's past 100 hands, a record of all hands played over a particular time frame or a record of all hands played during a tournament. Their desktop client has allowed customers to save a local copy of hand histories while mobile users can access previous hand histories or ask for hand histories to be sent but do not automatically save copies of hand histories to their devices.
It also shows who made the first bet, how big each bet was and what information was available. Visual replays add context to the log entries but are harder to search through multiple hands.
Converting Single Hands to Searchable Decision Patterns
Single hands may indicate mistakes that were made. Multiple hands provide patterns. Companies such as GGPoker's PokerCraft organize your hands by session and allow viewing by hole card, table position and opponent. PokerTracker 4 provides additional filtering criteria for stake level, game type, date, player position, pot size, win/loss status, community card texture and betting action for each stage of play. By allowing players to select filtering criteria based on category, players can eliminate vague complaints such as "I lose too much from the blinds" and replace it with a testable question.
Standard statistical metrics require clearly defined parameters. VPIP represents how frequently a player enters the pot prior to the flop as part of voluntary action except for mandatory blind posts. PFR represents pre-flop raising frequency. The six-max cash game and full ring tables differ significantly enough to require comparisons of like with like.
A Leak Is a Repeated Decision Pattern That Loses You Chips Not Necessarily Losing Individual Hands.
The tools available for this type of review also vary between top poker sites: some provide downloadable hand histories and detailed replayers, while others rely more heavily on built-in analysis tools. Players should therefore check what histories, exports and post-session review features a room supports before choosing a workflow.
Players may find useful review questions including:
- Is calling from the small blind repeatedly resulting in difficult-to-play out-of-position pots?
- Are continuation bets consistently being made on connected boards with little reason?
- Do river calls continue to occur at high rates when aggressive opponents use large bet-sizes?
- Are tournament decisions being reviewed under relatively equal effective stack levels?
Losing a hand does not necessarily reveal a leak, just as winning a hand does not prove the underlying decision was correct. A questionable call can remain a mistake even when it wins the pot. Similarly, winning after a suspect call doesn't prove it wasn't one. Stronger reviews rebuild what was known prior to the outcome; compare your decisions against a standard strategy; and look for the same situation occurring in more hands.
In practice, there is a clear distinction between studying your hand history from last night's sessions and having some sort of tool assist you during the session where you are currently playing. Rules vary depending upon the site and at times they can even change. Therefore, prior to implementing a HUD, solver integration, automated importer, or cloud database players would be well advised to review the site's current rules regarding these issues. Additionally, when posting a hand for others to discuss, please omit all screen names and unnecessary identifying features so that the focus remains on strategic elements as opposed to focusing on someone else.
Repeated Analytical Process
Useful processes for analytical review need to be sufficiently small that you can easily repeat them. For each session of poker you play, mark hands that were questionable rather than simply the largest winning or losing hand. Once the session has concluded, complete the first part of the analytical review by analyzing the hands previously identified as questionable. Then complete the second portion of the review by narrowing your search to a specific type of hand; e.g., blind defense, response to a 3-bet, or river bluff-catch.
Record three items for each category: the decision that was made, the assumption(s) supporting that decision, and an alternate choice that could have been tested. If a player identifies 10 different button vs. big blind situations, he/she can examine different variables including betting patterns, board texture, etc. rather than solely relying on memory of a single significant hand.
The final item should be very specific; i.e., "examine larger river bets against low aggression boards" versus making a global statement about how poorly a player performed in an entire session.
When used effectively, hand histories provide a way to slow down and examine the decision-making process after a session. Hand histories provide evidence of exactly what occurred, allow players to visualize repetitive choices and create questions for verification.
Sign in to leave a comment.