Sharkscope does NOT handle Bounty Tournaments well.

[frob23]

As you can see (from my less than steller record):

 6-Aug-08  18:42 	 NL  Holdem 	$1	6	$3
 6-Aug-08  17:56 	 NL  Holdem 	$5	10	-$5.50
 6-Aug-08  11:03 	 NL  Holdem 	$1	6	$3
 6-Aug-08  10:45 	 NL  Holdem 	$1	6	-$1.20
 6-Aug-08  10:24 	 NL  Holdem 	$1	6	-$1.20
 6-Aug-08  10:01 	 NL  Holdem 	$1	6	-$1.20
 5-Aug-08  12:01 	 NL  Holdem 	$1	6	$3
 5-Aug-08  11:48 	 NL  Holdem 	$1	10	-$1.20

Those $1 games were $1+$1 bounty games... and none of the bounty wins get recorded. So my stats are weird. It's showing I have a 17% average ROI and I am down $4. The actual numbers are 19.19% and +$0.50 at this time.

These numbers are all over the place. I am glad I am keeping track of them on my own accord. I don't know what I really expected... I could see why bounties would be hard (or impossible) for SS to track when I look at it now. But this will just end up being another example of how SharkScope... despite its usefulness... has its limitations. If you were to look at this... especially as time goes on and I play more of these freaking bounty games... you'd be completely confused about my play.

[powrdragn]

That's actually good to consider if you are reviewing other people's SC history.

[phosphorescence]

i don't think they consider MTTs either do they?

i remember coming 2nd in a 95 man MTT and it didn't seem to record it.

[Huskers314]

i don't think they consider MTTs either do they?

i remember coming 2nd in a 95 man MTT and it didn't seem to record it.

Sharkscope is for SNGs only, but they CAN be multi-table SNGs.

EDIT: After some research, it appears Sharkscope DOES record MTT scores for a few of the poker sites.....just none of the ones I play.

[powrdragn]

On a side note, I'm amused that so many people here seem to use sharkscope and keep reporting various issues with it.

I've always used officialpokerrankings.com and found all the useful info that I needed.

[Huskers314]

On a side note, I'm amused that so many people here seem to use sharkscope and keep reporting various issues with it.

I've always used officialpokerrankings.com and found all the useful info that I needed.

Until very recently, OPR did not include SNG's with less than 18 players in it's rankings. So, if you're primarily a single table SNGer or a HU player, the info on OPR was pretty unreliable. I've always used both in the past, although since OPR now includes SNGs from Full Tilt in its rankings, it's becoming much more useful.

[frob23]

Until very recently, OPR did not include SNG's with less than 18 players in it's rankings. So, if you're primarily a single table SNGer or a HU player, the info on OPR was pretty unreliable. I've always used both in the past, although since OPR now includes SNGs from Full Tilt in its rankings, it's becoming much more useful.

Right... and it still doesn't include STT from PokerStars (where I play most of my sit and gos) or any games from the Merge network. So Sharkscope does still have its uses.

I have used OPR in the past. But since I am not an MTT player, I found Sharkscope to be closer to what I needed most of the time for the tournament games I played.

[iceveins0901]

On a side note, I'm amused that so many people here seem to use sharkscope and keep reporting various issues with it.

I've always used officialpokerrankings.com and found all the useful info that I needed.

that site was pretty neat, I see my most profitable poker tourney month was after I read Super System 2, and really only played in tournaments.

30 May 06 No Limit Hold'em HENL $3+ 2194 232 $30
22 May 06 No Limit Hold'em HENL $6 1761 104 $12
20 May 06 No Limit Hold'em HENL $2 1198 56 $6
06 May 06 Pot Limit Hold'em HEPL $11 225 1 $619
01 May 06 No Limit Hold'em HENL $11 986 94 $19

I didnt know nearly as much then as I do now about poker, but apparently I used to be good at tournaments, which I absolutely suck at now

[ungarstu132]

that site was pretty neat, I see my most profitable poker tourney month was after I read Super System 2, and really only played in tournaments.



I didnt know nearly as much then as I do now about poker, but apparently I used to be good at tournaments, which I absolutely suck at now

about super system 2, i dont beleive the style that the book teaches can be ued in present day poker, that book is quite old, and the game has changed enough, that those strategies are probably unreliable.

[liladypokerpro]

I dunno.....I mean they can't be totally unreliable, the man that used them and wrote the book based on them is still playing to this day. Something in there must still be useful.

[phosphorescence]

yeah but to be fair doyle isn't pulling up many trees these days is he?

[liladypokerpro]

True, but also to be fair he has out-lived his life expectancy given him by his doctors, so he gets nothing but respect from me. He's a real gem of a human being too.

I think these days he just plays because he can and because he enjoys it. I'm pretty sure he knows these new kids have a few tricks up their sleeves by now.....Lord knows he's been around long enough to see it all.

[iceveins0901]

Super System 2 is a revised edition of SS 1 with new authors for the chapters. I think that the information is still very reliable, being that the authors that wrote it only wrote it a few years ago.

You might be thinking of the original Super System, which I still think is very reliable for a poker book, it has a great amount of information about poker that anyone can take in. If you understand the game and play alot but havent looked into studying the game, this book is definitely a great first step.