I’m only 340,277,885 behind #1
Dear replay poker id like to have these topics that seem to be broken and not updating .
whats the deal ?
Ha, just checked-i only played 195, 408 hands-i would not qualify lol:)
So glad to see the Ranks back 
Thank You Replay for getting them back 
Rankings really don’t mean much but you can tell a few things.
If someone is in the top 1000, this is almost always one of the tougher opponents for me at my table, but I still see these players do fishy things like limp-call pre or try to play the streets in icm from time to time.
If someone is ranked 1500-5000 or so, it depends how long they’ve been here. If they’ve only been here a year or two they’re probably decent but if they’ve been here 10 years then they’re not a consistently good player.
If someone is 30,000 and down they’re probably just a fish, unless they’re brand new to the site.
The number 1 thing that I look for when checking someone’s rank is when a regular player that I see often has a ranking that fluctuates a lot or stays put. If I see this guy is at 30,000 today and then tomorrow he’s at 550,000 and then next week back up to 20,0000 I know that he just loves to get into it with no regard for his bankroll and usually that means that he has little regard for his stack at the table as well. Usually these are the LaG/maniac players who play very wild. When the ranking goes up and down a lot, it’s easy to tell their tendencies, which is more important than how good they are. ; )
If a player with a meh ranking is stable at that ranking, they are just plodding along with holes in their game, either too nitty or too cally, or are clueless in icm, etc, or there are certain board textures that they just don’t pick up on well enough.
I don’t care about rank. just play poker
Rankings should be back in everyone’s profiles. Have a great day! 
4 Likes
@chipsmama thanks for the update!
1 Like
I agree rankings are not good assessment of poker players. The weekly and monthly are good but that’s it
Lol!
Well, I hope everyone realizes that I just made up those numbers, %'s and evaluations to get some ideas rolling. There’s a lot of data collected especially in the Statistics section, someone can up with something meaningful. Just combining some would be necessary and not require something new that isn’t currently being tracked.
1 Like
There is hardly any data collected in the statistics section. Not even a bb/win rate or an RoI. Not even filters for ring vs tournament, etc. This is very disappointing actually.
I see what you mean. But I always attempt to use what is currently available instead of creating a new metric which would take long time to be meaningful. Uncertain if bb/win rate or ROI is available from the data being collected.
Some recent complaints of just using chip count have been players can just buy chips, and the current rank doesn’t indicate a skill level. I threw in the number of hands played in my example which to me would show consistency.
I would think given the available stats we (the forum collective) should be able to address these complaints. Or at least give it a try before starting new metrics.
I feel several stats would have to be shown like the chip count is now but not so many to make things confusing. Maybe only 3.
Only a win rate also wouldn´t be a good metric on it´s own. The relevant data are not ALL the hands someone has ever played, but the hands someone played during the last weeks or maybe months. That would give you a rather good idea of someone´s current strengh. Taking old hands from years ago into consideration would highly undermine recent learnings and improvements someone might have made.
Sure, fewer hands make less valid statistics, I know that. But what does your game from 5, 10 or 20 years ago tell you about your game today? Propably/obviously (and hopefully, if you work on your game) not too much.
Well Win% does take into account skill level as a moving average if the player has been playing on a consistent basis. Even if they played occasionally, I think it would all average out. Again, more than one metric is needed.
They are back!
Do you mean percentages of tournaments won or hands won? I’m assuming hands because I don’t think Replay tracks the former.
Unfortunately the hands won percentage tells you absolutely nothing about a players skill. That may seem counter intuitive but think of it this way - the players with the highest winning percentage will be those that just go all in every hand. They win the most pots uncontested, and are never folding out any of their equity. Poker isn’t about winning the most pots, it’s about winning the most chips (and tournament poker is even further removed from hand win% than that).
Yes win% which RP tracks. I’m not convinced Bingo players would have the highest win%. True, poker is about winning the most chips, but I was trying to recognize a player’s playing skill which has been one of the complaints. Again, I’ve mentioned that chip count should be one of the metrics.
Maybe instead of just a win%, it should be – win% / (total hands played - hands folded) = a win% (a ratio) which would indicate player skill and playing style — Bingo, LAG, TAG or Nit.
As an example, would it be helpful to be able to see an opponent’s info such as: 80 million chips, a ratio of .20, .40, .55, .75 or .90 and who has played at least 200k hands?
What would you be expecting from each type of player?
It’s a mathematical certainty.
It would give you some idea of playing style, but not much. It will basically just tell you if some plays mostly heads up, 6 handed, 9 handed, etc. That’s going to have far more effect than someones playing style, which doesn’t equate to skill anyway.
About the only Replay stat that’s any use at all is the Pots Won Without Showdown percentage.
Hand win % is a poor indicator of skill. When I started here I was winning 21 or 22% of pots as a cashed fairly consistently in freerolls. In the months that I have improved my game significantly and bankroll has taken off, my pot win % is away down. I think it’s currently at 17 or 18% which includes all those early wins. Yet the chips that I win is considerably higher when I do win pots. I don’t aggressively chase thin value, I’m much more sensible now, and I’m better at getting money in when I’m strong. I win less often but profit more when I do, and overall I am a much better player.
The stat that you are trying to invent has existed for years - bb/win rate. Unfortunately replay does not track this and doubtful that they have the data saved retro calculate it over hundreds of millions of hands.
1 Like
They do have the data - every hand is recorded, so they can extract bb/100 for sure - they likely just don’t have the bandwidth to implement that. Personally there’s many more things I’d like to see before that. (Letting us download our own hand histories so we can calculate/analyze whatever we want would be pretty high on the list though)