Note: Not at the old Poker1 site. A version of this entry was originally published (2010) in Bluff magazine.
Today I’m going to teach you the easiest way to know whether you’re playing poker profitably. It’s a rough measuring method that almost always tells you correctly whether you can expect to win.
In courseware I’m developing for Mike Caro University of Poker, we call it the Fast Selectivity Index (FSI), but I’ve referred to it by other names over the years, and you can call it anything you want. The concept behind FSI is simple: Your opponents’ main flaw is that they aren’t selective enough about the pots they enter and play too many hands. Fine. But sometimes when you’re playing the aggressive style that I teach, which means pushing small advantages with daring bets and raises, it’s hard to keep track of whether you’re actually playing more selectively than your opponents. You can get blinded by all the betting.
Will work wonders
First I want to provide a disclaimer. FSI doesn’t work well in heads-up games or short-handed games where opponents may be playing too tight and you have an opportunity to run over them through frequent bluffing. It isn’t intended for rare ultra-tight full-handed games, either. But you don’t run into those very often, and if you do, you’re unlikely to be in a very profitable situation and should probably seek a different game where players are surrendering money through too-loose play. Most players seldom play in any of the games covered by this disclaimer. And FSI will work wonders in the games you’re likely to encounter over and over again.
Here’s how it works:
- Each time an opponent enters a pot voluntarily, score one point. You don’t count blinds, because those aren’t voluntary investments, unless that player bets more money at some point during the hand.
- Under the same rules, each time you enter a pot voluntarily, add the number of opponents that were dealt cards to a separate tally. This is the number of opponents only and doesn’t include you.
So, you can see that you’ll be keeping two totals — one for your opponents and one for you. Even though these numbers may grow large over the course of the game, you should be able to keep them in your head, especially after a little practice. If not, just write down the scores on paper. Oh, and obviously you shouldn’t count hands played by opponents anytime you weren’t dealt in.
Now, this is the key to interpreting your FSI. In typical games, you always want your score to be less than your opponents’ score. How much less? Well, this is really a looseness/tightness gauge, and you’ll usually make the most profit if you play at least 10 percent (and often as much as 20 percent) more selectively than your opponents do, on average. So, let’s say that after two hours of play your opponents’ tally is 120. Ideally, you want your score to be less than that. Ten percent more selectivity would mean 12 fewer points or 108. But here’s the glitch. Two hours isn’t enough time to really know. You could have been on a rush and played many more hands than you usually would. Your score might be 180 (50 percent higher than your opponents’ score) or even greater. Or you could have been in a drought and have a ridiculously low score of 20. So, you need to use common sense in interpreting your FSI in the short term.
But over time, your FSI will tell you if you really are in a profitable situation versus your typical too-loose opponents. If you keep these scores totaled at home day after day, the picture will come into focus and will be extremely accurate. And even in the course of a single session, your FSI — though volatile — can keep you from straying too far from profitability, if you use good judgment in interpreting it.
Here is a chart illustrating a typical, imaginary 10 hands. It shows how your FSI scores are calculated:
Opponents dealt in*
|Opponents who played||Did you play?||
* This is the number of opponents and doesn’t include yourself. If you were dealt a hand in a nine-handed game, then opponents = 8. ** If you played, then you add the number of opponents to your score. *** You’d score a “1” for the number of opponents who played if a single player raised the big blind and took the pot without seeing a flop or if someone just called the big blind, who never put additional money into the pot. **** You’d score “0” if nobody called or raised the big blind, who won by default, because nobody added money voluntarily to the pot.
Yes, you need to use finesse to get the most profit. So, of course, it will matter how well you play the hands in which you’re involved. Still, the miracle is that you usually can expect to win in the long run in typical games, as long as your FSI score is a bit less than your opponents’. When a game is very loose, you can play some hands that seem weaker than your usual guidelines and still win, because your FSI will indicate that you’re playing more selectively than they are. Profit exists whenever your hands average better than theirs. So, you can generally relax your standards in loose games — just not as much as your opponents do. That’s important, because often you don’t want to appear too tight for the game.
I recommend that you begin monitoring your FSI. Some students have been shocked to find that after a week, their score was higher than their opponents. That meant they weren’t as selective as they thought, and it explained why they were losing. There are many other reasons why you might be losing, but your FSI will often tell you whether hand selection is the cause.
Go win! — MC
13 thoughts on “FSI — My easy poker profit monitor”
I want Mike to make a Poker 1 HUD with this in it. Or whatever else he thinks we can use. Just something simple. Please. You’re a programmer, Mike, pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeze?
Great idea, Listening. I’m not doing any new types of poker programming at the moment, but I certainly will when the smoke from other projects clears.
I’ll keep that in mind.
I am making a personalized journal for my poker play that is including allot of things about my own play such as an hourly check on my up/down chip counts, scales 1-10 on how I am rating my skills against the table average, my emotion state, A tilt check and a few other things. I was trying to figure out a way to quantify my table image and if I am playing tight or loose and this is the perfect answer. Thanks a ton Mike.
Now all I need to do is to get back to the states from deployment (US Navy) and give it a try.
Also I know this is slightly off topic but do you have any suggestions about what should go into a poker journal?
Mike – How about an article about those stupid players who throw in their hands even when there is no bet to them. They are very inconsiderate of other players who might want to see a free card and their actions could very well influence other players to bet or bluff, which is very unfair to others. It obviously tells other players that this player is out and will NOT RERAISE – bacause he has folded his hand without cause !!! It makes me upset a bit sometimes !!!
wow!! works like a charm! havnt left a table below what i bought in..started with $2 playing .01 .02 blinds and got it up to $5.34 (+175% return on investment) in less that two hours… doesnt sound like much but whenever i needed to play i would usually win..even if it was with a pair. and sometimes i would bluff and never called..i used some finesse sure..i love this system..hopefully i keep this up!
WOW..this really looks profitable.. Im going to use it online today hope it all works well..
I really thought this was a gimmick. I figured you’d earned enough trust to invest the energy to count silently in my head, though; and thank goodness I did! It took a couple of rounds for me to understand the weighting of your own score, but once it’s clear it’s intuitive.
I did have to check myself at very first. “Maybe I should call here? Mike says I should be playing more pots. My numbers are too … nah.” The 2nd table I tried it on was ludicrously tight. The numbers were right there on my HUD, but this tool really helped me understand what was going on. The tables mean average VP$IP was 11%, and the median probably 20%. Thanks to this tip I was immediately able to see how much more bluffing I should be doing. And then, once I started getting some calls, I had some hard numbers to help me see how the table saw me; not the bored guy taking free money off the table, but UltraCrazyMan who can’t have anything – he just can’t!
I was going to link to this article on Facebook and Twitter. But it’s too good. I’m gonna keep it in my pocket for now.
Hi, Thomas —
Thanks for the feedback on your experience. I’m glad it was positive, but remember the FSI can be very misleading in the short term.
Also, if you’re playing online and using poker-tracking software, as you are, it may not be as meaningful. I’m glad to hear you found value in it, even online using poker tracking.
Doesn’t this mean that Phil Ivey/ Tom Dwan suck, coz they play more hands than the average player, especially Durrrr.
Hi, Anmol —
Some of the games they play are no doubt exceptions (see disclaimer, 3rd paragraph).
If opponents play too tight, you can play more hands then they do, picking up pots with small raises and bluffs. In general, these conditions are rare and aren’t representative of the games most players, who are serious about maximizing their profit, should be targeting.
I believe Mike suggests/recommends a tight/aggressive (TAG) style of play, like the majority of winning players do. Where as to Durrrr may be more on the loose aggressive type, which will get you to see more flops, but is a very difficult style to play. It works for Durrrr, but may not work for you or me..
The FSI index would keep you in line to stay TAG, is this correct Mad Genius?
Hi, Dan —
Yes. The main reason opponents lose money is that they play too many hands. The correct winning strategy, therefore, dictates that you play fewer hands than they do — and to often play those carefully selected hands aggressively.
I’ve seen super-aggressive, loose strategies win in some situations. But that strategy can be easily defeated. See: https://www.poker1.com/archives/4473/keeping-poker-bullies-broke
Thanks for pointing me to the story of Edouard, very insight Mad Genius! Following you on Twitter improves my game plus you’re a hell of a story teller!