Some Poker Site Scout stats

[peterbirks]

I spent much of yesterday visiting PokerSiteScout at various times (and so, therefore, all credit for the percentages derived are due to that maginificent service, www.pokersitescout.com).

The reason was to find out how games were distributed between No Limit Hold'em, Limit Hold'em, Pot Limit Omaha and Pot Limit/No Limit Omaha 8OB. I excluded Limit Omaha high only completely. I have the numbers on Limit Omaha 8OB, but I haven't included them in this analysis.

So, here's the stats.

We have the site, then the percentage of limit HE players compared to NL players (number of NL players = 100) at that site over a roughly 24-hour period. Then the percentage of PLO/NLO players compared NL players, and then the percentage of PLO/NLO 8OB players.

................ LHE/NLHE ....... PLO/NLHE & NLO/NLHE ... PLO80B & NLO 8OB/NLHE
Absolute ....... 63% .................. 4% ................ 16%
Bodog .......... 17% .................. 7% ................. 4%
Boss Media ..... 26% .................. 5% .................. 1%
Crypto.......... 35% ................. 10% ................... 4%
Everest ........ 24% ................. N/A ................... N/A
Full Tilt ....... 19% .................. 8% .................. 6%
IPoker .......... 13% .................. 3% ................... 2%
Microgaming...... 20% .................. 6% ................... 3%
OnGame .......... 51% .................. 9% ................... 2%
Pacific ......... 94% .................. 6% ................... 2%
Party ........... 42% .................. 2.5% .................. 1%
Stars ........... 34% .................. 7% ................... 5%
Ultimate ........ 44% .................. 11% ................... 7%
Total weighted average .. 33% .......... 5% .................... 3%


That's quite a wide variation. Of the number of limit players compared to the number of no-limit players, it can hardly be a surprise that, the newer the site, the more dominant is no limit. But the low percentage on IPoker surprised me. Similarly with Microgaming.

Stars is the closes to the total wieighted average, although part of the reason for this is that Stars and Party are far and away the most significant constituents of the index.

Note that the above makes no reference to actual numbers (or to actual stakes). It just shows how popular a type of game is at a particular site in comparison with NLHE.

The next job would be to break down the distribution of players within particular games to stake levels. After all, it's not much use if your game is "favoured" at a particular site, but they are all playing at stakes of no use to you.

+++++++

Ultimate has come in with a reload bonus, reduced to 20% up to $150. But, hell, it'll do.

Comments

[countingmyouts.livejournal.com]

Interesting stats, Peter.

Could you clarify what the stats mean? For example, you have Absolute at 63% for LHE/NLHE. Does that mean there are 63 LHE players for every 100 NLHE players or is it that there are 63 LHE players for every 100 HE (= LHE + NLHE) players? Just curious.

Michael

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Hi Michael.

No site had more limit players than no-limit players. The percentage is the number of limit players relative to the number of no limit players. Pacific still had more NL players than limit players, but was the most evenly balanced. At Full Tilt, for every 100 no-limit players, there were only 19 limit players. Welcome to the land of seven-card stud, circa 2004. :-)


PJ