more than just Bankroll to move up a level?

[LimpinAintEZ]

Hey everyone - I've been thinking about moving up to 50NL for a couple weeks now but im wondering if im ready - like really ready - I've been playing a lot of 6max 25NL, running about 18/9 (this feels really nitty to me, but i've been winning and the variance is low) - Even though i've been running about 6-7 PTBB/100 for the last 10k hands, i still am not sure if i'm ready to move up - I read another forum that says if your winning 2-3BB/100 you are ready to move up (assuming your following the BR guides and what not) but that doesn't even seem close to a decent win rate - right now my confidence is sky high, but i like to pick tables with easy pickings - At a 6 max table if im up against 2 or 3 good players, i tend to move on to somewhere else - Do you all feel like you should WANT to play against better players? Personally, i like to take easy money over and over...i don't play scared - I guess i am at a level where im making some pretty easy money over the last month, and i was thinking of staying there for a few more weeks...Do you all try to move up as soon as possible, or do you try to log a ton of hands before you move up? Maybe i should just do another 10k hands and see...

thoughts would be appreciated -

[Warpe]

If you're rolled and you're winning, move up. You can always move back down. No big difference between $25NL and $50NL.

[jyms]

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...oker-40782.htm

Some interesting points made in this post.

[biondino]

You'll almost certainly be fine. You have discipline, your stats are okay (a bit conservative maybe, but that's probably a good thing whyen finding your feet at a new level), and your BB/100 is very healthy.

However, you might feel that now that your basic game is owning $25, it might be time to add more speculative hands and positional raises to your game. At 6max I am currently playing about 25/15 and I think it's close to ideal in terms of how many hands to play (though I still have only 40k or so 6max hands under my belt so I'm far from an expert).

For example, my button VP is about 34% with maybe 17% of those being raised - have a look at your position stats and see if there's more you can do in this area. If your button VP isn't AT LEAST twice your utg VP then you can certainly make adjustments.

[biondino]

I neglected to say - yes, I think joe average poker player DEFINITELY needs to have proven his ability to comfortably maintain a winrate before moving up. Personally I would want 5PTBB/100 plus at 100NL or under - 2-3 at the lower limits seems like the player still has clear leaks which may be exploited even at the next higher level. At $200NL up, of course, 2-3 becomes a pretty decent return.

[Miffed22001]

if you have the br move up.

Im not going to dig up the thread where i posted about br > winrate.
Winrate is so not important in comparison to your $$$per hour In other words, if you have the br and a +bbs/100 rate plz move up asap. If you find you cant beat the next game upwards THEN you come back here and they to find out why.
You wont go busto if you move up and drop 4 buy ins because you suck, it will just hurt your pride a little. But then most people have had to move down at one point or another.

[biondino]

Sorry Miffy, we will have to agree to disagree on this. If you are a marginally winning player at a level then you will almost certainly be a marginally losing player the next level up. Clearly you have leaks, so fix them at a level where it'll cost you less during the adjustment.

[LimpinAintEZ]

actually when i saw my position stats they were alarming - my button and late position stats seem way off - i will post my tracker stats tonight (sucks that there is a good $200 over like 800 hands in 2 nights that i kicked butt and Ultimate is being a pain in the ass to get the HH's - oh well, rate is still good enough i think) -

you guys are right - im giong to move up to 50NL in 2 weeks - going to do a bit more to have my BR at like 1200 or so, but i think its time to move up - can always go back

thanks Trainer for the link - that is good advice -

[LimpinAintEZ]

my rough 18/9 stats have been that way for 10k hands now - its weird because it feels like its ass tight but when pokertracker gave me the money bag label, i thought i must be doing something right for once I still feel like im making moves and semi bluffing and c-betting (turn c-bets are becming fun) but yeah, ive almost eliminated low connectors and stuff - just seems that unless im SB or BB with a stupid min-raise in front, i don't get enough value off them - plus, playing 5 tables on Ultimate is FAST - Full Tilt is at least 1/4 slower - and for that matter, it hardly seems i need to loosen up - i still get paid off plenty of my big hands, so i THINK i've found a good balance...but yeah, it won't work against better players consistently...

[martindcx1e]

i think i tend to agree with miffed on this. if you've played 10k hands and are winning and you have a br that makes you comfortable with the next level then move up. i think this is a must when talking about moving up in ssnl as the difficulty of the games don't differ too terribly much.

[LimpinAintEZ]

you did the same recently, right Martin? I think i remember you asking a similar type of question and you were thinking about moving up to 50NL, but you were asking if you should just move to 100, right? maybe not you though - since the avatar changes, hard for me ot keep up sometimes -

I guess at lesat part of it is that im winning for the past 6 weeks at 25nl pretty consistently, and i've tripled my BR (cashed out some for wifes b-day and stuff), but im just in the past 2 weeks getting really comfortable - but like i said above i avoid the better players and tend to try and just find suckers...maybe this won't be as easy at 50nl, or maybe it will be - Also, if i win 3 or 4 buy ins i'll leave usually just to 'bank' it which seems like a problem to me - I've had a lot of times where i get up a couple buy ins and have a tough beat or weird something that costs me 1/2 of it and those irritate me...when i know they shouldn't and actually its a big plus to have 3or 4 buy ins at a table (especially 6 max)...do those seem like problems to you?

[martindcx1e]

you did the same recently, right Martin? I think i remember you asking a similar type of question and you were thinking about moving up to 50NL, but you were asking if you should just move to 100, right? maybe not you though - since the avatar changes, hard for me ot keep up sometimes -

I guess at lesat part of it is that im winning for the past 6 weeks at 25nl pretty consistently, and i've tripled my BR (cashed out some for wifes b-day and stuff), but im just in the past 2 weeks getting really comfortable - but like i said above i avoid the better players and tend to try and just find suckers...maybe this won't be as easy at 50nl, or maybe it will be - Also, if i win 3 or 4 buy ins i'll leave usually just to 'bank' it which seems like a problem to me - I've had a lot of times where i get up a couple buy ins and have a tough beat or weird something that costs me 1/2 of it and those irritate me...when i know they shouldn't and actually its a big plus to have 3or 4 buy ins at a table (especially 6 max)...do those seem like problems to you?

Ya, that was me EZ. I stayed at 25NL a little while longer and slowly added 1 50NL table and then 2, then 3, then 4. Last couple times I've played it's been 1/2 50nl and 1/2 25nl, and I'm not impressed by 50nl at all. It was at Ongame if that changes anything, but the only difference was that cbets got more respect. People still can't get away from their overpair/2 pair when you have your set. So it's like more bluffing possiblities + still getting paid off...pretty nice I think. Now I'm just about rolled for 100nl so my stay at 50nl probably won't even reach 10k hands.

[KrazyBluffer]

Why not play at both levels??

For the last few days I have been playing 50NL to clear bonuses.
I also cleared the William Hill bonus at 100NL (for 5 hours of play)
I am a winner at all 3 levels so far, 25NL, 50NL, and 100NL.
Then yesterday I went to clear a PartyPoker bonus (real small $15 no-deposit bonus), so I played at 25NL to risk less. After playing 50NL and 100NL and moving back down to 25NL, it felt like I was doing circles around these players. I made about $30 in 200 hands or so + the $15, for $45 in 1 1/2 hours (3 tables).

So my point is , forcing yourself to move up will give you a better perspective on the game. In my experience it has made 25NL easier to play.

Anyway, I am up almost $1800 playing micro-limit poker and 25NL is starting to get boring, even though I have plenty to learn.

[LimpinAintEZ]

you mean 1 at a time, right? i know some players say they will multi table 3 reg. stakes and then 1 on the stake they want to move to, but this seems like it could get confusing (and induce me to make a big mistake)...maybe at a slower site i could do this, but im not sure - I guess that even though i've been on a nice 6 week win streak where im clocking solid wins most nights, i am still just getting to the point where I feel super comfortable and confident - To get there though I had to go back all the way to 10NL and start completely over with $100 - I think that was really good for me cause now i'm using bankroll management (i used to play 2-3 tables of 25NL with $150 online - i know, i know and im really playing a lot better than i have before -

still, i like to play 5 tables right now at 6 max and i lose track sometimes - i don't want to make those mistakes at double the level - course, maybe i should just 3 table or something til i get used to it...

[martindcx1e]

last couple times i've been playing 8 tables at a time...4 of 25nl & 4 of 50nl.

[LimpinAintEZ]

wow - do you have 2 monitors set up? you play FR or 6max? I have a hard time keeping up on what i do - I run 3 of the 6 max and then 2 FR in min-view and that is hard for me to keep up on...I keep hoping to get to the 8 tabling thing, but will probably go invest in a 19 or 20" monitor first...right now i'm on 17" so its not really possible...

do you make mistakes playing 4 of each? Or do you have 4 on 1 monitor and 4 on another?

[martindcx1e]

i have one 20"er and i play 8-10 tables usually. i don't ever make any mistakes like misclicks or anything. i play full ring as well.

[Miffed22001]

Sorry Miffy, we will have to agree to disagree on this. If you are a marginally winning player at a level then you will almost certainly be a marginally losing player the next level up. Clearly you have leaks, so fix them at a level where it'll cost you less during the adjustment.

i was a marginal winner at 25l when i first started poker and i destroyed 50nl and 100nl for a long time afterwards when i was told early on by one of the sites high-rollers that moving up > winrate despite the fact 80% of my br was built on bonus whoring and Casino whoring.

While your statement maybe true where their is a real difference in the level of players at two stakes (say 200nl to 400nl or 400nl to 1knl) at 25nl-100nl i would seriously disagree with your assertion. If anything, 50nl poses a much bigger test to a player than 100nl ever will simply because we have seen that 50nl is a rockfest compared to 100nl at many sites.

Also, fwiw, i have 25k hands at 25nl on varous sites an my bbs/100 is 2.3/100. My 50nl and 100nl winrates are 10+ over much larger samples (especially 100nl and 200nl)
Under your rules i would still be sat at 50nl tables against rocks trying to get paid. $$$$ per hr > bbs/100 always always always, and its not even close imo.

[martindcx1e]

Sorry Miffy, we will have to agree to disagree on this. If you are a marginally winning player at a level then you will almost certainly be a marginally losing player the next level up. Clearly you have leaks, so fix them at a level where it'll cost you less during the adjustment.

i was a marginal winner at 25l when i first started poker and i destroyed 50nl and 100nl for a long time afterwards when i was told early on by one of the sites high-rollers that moving up > winrate despite the fact 80% of my br was built on bonus whoring and Casino whoring.

While your statement maybe true where their is a real difference in the level of players at two stakes (say 200nl to 400nl or 400nl to 1knl) at 25nl-100nl i would seriously disagree with your assertion. If anything, 50nl poses a much bigger test to a player than 100nl ever will simply because we have seen that 50nl is a rockfest compared to 100nl at many sites.

Also, fwiw, i have 25k hands at 25nl on varous sites an my bbs/100 is 2.3/100. My 50nl and 100nl winrates are 10+ over much larger samples (especially 100nl and 200nl)
Under your rules i would still be sat at 50nl tables against rocks trying to get paid. $$$$ per hr > bbs/100 always always always, and its not even close imo.

AgReEd

[BankItDrew]

Also, fwiw, i have 25k hands at 25nl on varous sites an my bbs/100 is 2.3/100. My 50nl and 100nl winrates are 10+ over much larger samples (especially 100nl and 200nl)
Under your rules i would still be sat at 50nl tables against rocks trying to get paid. $$$$ per hr > bbs/100 always always always, and its not even close imo.

This is very encouraging to hear. I played @ 25NL for 8 or 9 months, jumping back and forth from 50NL. Finally I am @ 50NL with only 5000 hands but a 12.5bb/100 winrate. I am rolled for 200NL, but don't yet feel comfortable. I think I'll stay @ 50NL for at least a couple months 25k+ hands. But explain a little bit more for me please, why is moving up THAT much more important?

The only thing putting pressure on me to move up is making this game illegal, but from what I hear, I have no worries in Canada for a long time.

[martindcx1e]

But explain a little bit more for me please, why is moving up THAT much more important?

Because you will make much more $ per hour if you move up. Staying at 25nl with a 200nl BR is just hindering your ability to make lots more money. This is especially true at ssnl b/c the play is not too much different between 25nl-100nl with 50nl seeming to be the toughest.

[Miffed22001]

Also, fwiw, i have 25k hands at 25nl on varous sites an my bbs/100 is 2.3/100. My 50nl and 100nl winrates are 10+ over much larger samples (especially 100nl and 200nl)
Under your rules i would still be sat at 50nl tables against rocks trying to get paid. $$$$ per hr > bbs/100 always always always, and its not even close imo.

This is very encouraging to hear. I played @ 25NL for 8 or 9 months, jumping back and forth from 50NL. Finally I am @ 50NL with only 5000 hands but a 12.5bb/100 winrate. I am rolled for 200NL, but don't yet feel comfortable. I think I'll stay @ 50NL for at least a couple months 25k+ hands. But explain a little bit more for me please, why is moving up THAT much more important?

The only thing putting pressure on me to move up is making this game illegal, but from what I hear, I have no worries in Canada for a long time.

The easiest way to sum this up is with the old 'do i play at stars or party arguement'
Its obvious that party games were much much softer than stars games. But, to beat stars games you had to be a better player (plus stars had other good benefits like support/mtts etc)
So what do you want is the question? Do you want to learn to be better than the average player for your stakes, but with only an average br, or do you want to be a little less good player but with a bigger br?

While i dont want to be singularly money-orientated, their are life changing amounts of cash out there to be won, and moving up to play at those stakes where that is possible should be something we desire to do. You dont know if you are good enough until you try by getting there and playing.

You can go on ego trips all you want once you have enough money that it doesnt matter, but unil that happens i think making $$$$ is more important than raising your skill level; until you actually have to of course

[benny999]

I totally agree with miffed about winrates vs br and mostly about $ vs skill...you can still learn stuff but play on average worse ppl.

And I also had a really similar experience with winrates at 25nl vs 50 and 100.

[Rondavu]

10xBB per 100 at 25NL 6-tabling = $15
2xBB per 100 at 200NL 6 tabling = $36

Hmmmm. I'll take about $40 an hour sank you

[jyms]

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...Number=5911181

More reading and another good link EZ. Some interesting thoughts on moving up early, instead of late. And also about playing multiple limits and thoughts on labeling yourself as a certain stakes player. For those that don't read long posts, here's the coles notes:

>when your comfortable, move up and try the next level for a couple of buy ins.
>You don't need 20+ buy ins at the next level to move up but be willing to move back down immediatly when things are not working after a couple of buy ins.
>Don't think of yourself a s a certain limit player, I.E. $25NL,$50NL but use a range, it'll be easier to jump back down even if it's 3 months later, or you just aren't playing well. This also helps on smaller sites when it's sometimes hard to find some good tables, but some of your favorite fish from the past can be found at a lower limit.
>Don't mix limits, Just play less tables, and focus on the new limit. Give it your undevided attention and If things are working start adding back your usual number of tables.

[biondino]

I still abhor this assumption that people will earn more WHENEVER they move up. If they don't have the skill, they won't earn more, full stop! Let's say moving up a limit knocks 3BB/100 off your winrate (the figure is irrelevant, I need an arbitrary number to illustrate the point). If you're a 10BB/100 winner at 25 then you're a 7 bb/100 winner at 50, great, it makes sense.

However, if you're a 2BB/100 winner at 25 and therefore a -1BB/100 loser at 50, then the maths is pretty fucking clear. You won't just be making LESS money, you'll be LOSING money, and losing it at twice as fast a rate.

NB if this concept has any worth, then you'd need to be making 6BB/100 at 25 just to break even when you move up. What proportion of poker players make that much? 5%? 10%? While I'm sure many FTRers have honed their skills and are easily beating their current limits, it's a point of fact that only the small minority of players are in this situation, yet most of the posters on here are assuming that everyone can comfortably move up, remain a winning player and increase their BR.

[MiJ]

I still abhor this assumption that people will earn more WHENEVER they move up. If they don't have the skill, they won't earn more, full stop! Let's say moving up a limit knocks 3BB/100 off your winrate (the figure is irrelevant, I need an arbitrary number to illustrate the point). If you're a 10BB/100 winner at 25 then you're a 7 bb/100 winner at 50, great, it makes sense.

However, if you're a 2BB/100 winner at 25 and therefore a -1BB/100 loser at 50, then the maths is pretty fucking clear. You won't just be making LESS money, you'll be LOSING money, and losing it at twice as fast a rate.

NB if this concept has any worth, then you'd need to be making 6BB/100 at 25 just to break even when you move up. What proportion of poker players make that much? 5%? 10%? While I'm sure many FTRers have honed their skills and are easily beating their current limits, it's a point of fact that only the small minority of players are in this situation, yet most of the posters on here are assuming that everyone can comfortably move up, remain a winning player and increase their BR.

so how long before you know your true winrate? like 200 billion hands ..

one of the main reasons to move up is to play better competition , even if you lose money and have to do move back down , you get a feel of what the better players do and learn how to play against those players thus becoming a better player yourself ...

[LimpinAintEZ]

if your a marginally winning player at 25nl though, i don't think you should move up - It worked for Miffed but i don't think that would be considered standard - I think if you ARE a consistent winner though (like you are biondino) then you should try to move up - I think we are getting off the subject because we aren't talking about taking a 25nl player who is barely beating the game for 2bb/100 (i read on a 2+2 forum that 2-3PTBB/100 was enough to move up, but that seems absurd to me), we are talking about beating it pretty consistently - If you are winning 7-8PTBB/100 and you win 5PTBB/100 at the next level you are winning more money (i also think you would be learning more as well) - I believe there will be an adjustment period, but nobody is saying you have to stay there until you go bust - Just that you take a shot and if your not comfortable go back - I agree that some people just don't have the makeup or desire to move up levels, and that is fine - I think that gets back to poker being a hobby and maybe a little extra cash...But I think that like most people, i want to get better - I can't get much better if i don't push myself...

I think we should do it together biondino - you are already at the equivalent of 50NL - im going to do 50NL in a week or 2...if i hate it i'll come back down - But i gotta do it - My personal goal was to get to 100NL by the new year - That may/may not happen, but 2 months ago when i was grinding 10NL i didn't think i'd be in position to move to 50NL and here i am...and like renton, i would like to make a solid monthly rate playing - im way behind right now, but if i don't push myself, i can get stuck...before I found FTR i played 25NL (badly for like a year off and on - No plan, not really learning much, just playing cause i liked it - that isn't enough for me anymore though...now that i have seen peoples story's around here, i want that too...and i am seeing that i can do it - just gotta take shots and try

eye of the tiger

i know that was corny as hell

[MiJ]

if you read posts from the big time ballaz on 2p2 (aba20,cts, etc) they'll tell you that they didnt beat the microstakes for that much ...

[jyms]

must reading if your considering not moving up.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...fpart=all&vc=1

This guy aba20 was playing $50NL 1 year ago

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...n=&page=0&vc=1

[Halv]

Move up when the roll is there. Move down when the skill is not.

[Miffed22001]

I still abhor this assumption that people will earn more WHENEVER they move up. If they don't have the skill, they won't earn more, full stop! Let's say moving up a limit knocks 3BB/100 off your winrate (the figure is irrelevant, I need an arbitrary number to illustrate the point). If you're a 10BB/100 winner at 25 then you're a 7 bb/100 winner at 50, great, it makes sense.

However, if you're a 2BB/100 winner at 25 and therefore a -1BB/100 loser at 50, then the maths is pretty fucking clear. You won't just be making LESS money, you'll be LOSING money, and losing it at twice as fast a rate.

NB if this concept has any worth, then you'd need to be making 6BB/100 at 25 just to break even when you move up. What proportion of poker players make that much? 5%? 10%? While I'm sure many FTRers have honed their skills and are easily beating their current limits, it's a point of fact that only the small minority of players are in this situation, yet most of the posters on here are assuming that everyone can comfortably move up, remain a winning player and increase their BR.

Moving up doesnt necessarily lower your bbs/100 rate. If you are a nitty but fair winner then you are just as likely to run 2bbs/100 at 100nl as you are at 400nl imo. Certain hands will still get paid off and other wont.
Its a horrible assumption that your winrate automatically decreases so that when you are a 2bbs/100 winner you just become a breakeven player. I think its more likely 2bbs/100 at 100nl stays the same at 200nl, 400nl etc because certain situations will allways arise where your hand gets paid off. Look at Ilikeaces. His game isnt complex, yet hes an omgwtf big winner in fairly high stakes games.

I really wnat to mention something on bankroll babies and being scared but i wont. But ill mention it in passing anyway.
The single determining factor of what stakes you can play is your bankroll. Therefore, playing under rolled is a seriou mistake, and surely isnt being overrolled a similarily big mistake unless you have a lot of hands that prove you cant move up? Sure, if you play a number of hands and suck, you have proof tha tthe skill is not there, but until you do this it seems -ev to be playing small stakes when you could be playing higher ones.

[pgil]

if i win 3 or 4 buy ins i'll leave usually just to 'bank' it which seems like a problem to me - I've had a lot of times where i get up a couple buy ins and have a tough beat or weird something that costs me 1/2 of it and those irritate me...when i know they shouldn't and actually its a big plus to have 3or 4 buy ins at a table (especially 6 max)...do those seem like problems to you?

This seems like its going to be the biggest impediment to playing at the higher stakes. If you can't handle having $50-80 at a 25nl table, then how will you be able to handle having that same amount at the 50nl table, which should happen a lot more often.

If you aren't comfortable playing with that much money at stake, then you will have a hard time playing a winning game at the higher stakes. This was my problem as I have been overrolled for 50nl for a while now, but have been reluctant to move up permanently because I found I was not playing as well as I could because of the larger amount of money at stake.

Until you get over this psychological hurdle, you will not be able to beat the 50nl for as much as you should. I would suggest easing your way in by playing one or two full ring tables until you get used to putting >$50 in on a single hand. Once you are able to do this you should have no problem beating 50nl. its pretty much the same as 25nl.

On a side note, if you want to continue to move up you may want to attempt to beat the "good" 25nl players. I would imagine that the complete fish get fewer the higher up you go, and soon everyone will be targeting the same 1-2 players, making it harder for you to do this.

Trust me, the "good" players aren't that good at 25nl. When you start to play against them more you will learn what you can and can't do to/with them, and can adjust accordingly. You should be able to outplay almost everyone who plays 25nl.

Stop living in fear of the better players and tackle them head on now, while it's still cheap, and while they aren't really that good. It's not necessary to play against them to make money, but if you can play against them and still make money, this can only help both your current winrate and your future progress.

[Galapogos]

Didn't read any replies but here's my advice. Stop being such a puss and move up. At the worst you get smacked and lose some buyins out of your sufficient bankroll and have to move down for a bit. So what? You're not gonna get better at 25NL.

If you can lay down to a set you can kill 50NL easily!

[LimpinAintEZ]

If you can lay down to a set you can kill 50NL easily!

lost 2 buy ins this way actually...good palyer, i've got the obvious overpair, turn push me all in, i can't fold...i still need to work on this

[givememyleg]

But explain a little bit more for me please, why is moving up THAT much more important?

[martindcx1e]

If you can lay down to a set you can kill 50NL easily!

lol this is golden.

[LimpinAintEZ]

But explain a little bit more for me please, why is moving up THAT much more important?

this is a great answer - simple and to the point...

[biondino]

Its a horrible assumption that your winrate automatically decreases

It's a far more horrible assumption that your winrate will stay the same when you move up.

Just see my side of things as the cautious view, which should be given just as much consideration as any other view. All people owe to themselves is to consider all the factors, and then they can make an informed choice.

Honestly, I'm not being so anal because I want to justify my big roll/small stakes play - I know I'm a pussy! I just want to provide a counterpoint to the bald assumption that moving up won't harm your bankroll.

[LimpinAintEZ]

but when you have the right bankroll for the next level, you can lose several buy ins and still be adequately rolled for the lower level - I sat down at 50NL last night and was invigorated - im definitely moving up - i won't be stubborn. If i lose i will move back down - but i can lose 5-6 buy ins and still be rolled for 25NL -

to me its worth it to move up...100NL would be a big step for me but i think i might do that in 2 months or so

[Miffed22001]

Its a horrible assumption that your winrate automatically decreases

It's a far more horrible assumption that your winrate will stay the same when you move up.

Just see my side of things as the cautious view, which should be given just as much consideration as any other view. All people owe to themselves is to consider all the factors, and then they can make an informed choice.

Honestly, I'm not being so anal because I want to justify my big roll/small stakes play - I know I'm a pussy! I just want to provide a counterpoint to the bald assumption that moving up won't harm your bankroll.

moving up cant harm our bankroll because isnt that the reason we actually have it? To define what stakes we are able to play
Caution is all fine and good, but if its hurting your ev then that seems awfully dumb to me considering there is little if no difference between all small stakes poker games that a decent tight player cant take advantage of.
Also, by assuming our winrate drops are we assuming AA gets broken more often, gets no action more often or what? hands have an ev value right so we expect to win a certain amount of money with them. Fwiw, my opinion is that winrate at medium stakes games is determined by your aility to not pay off better hands with your own semi-monster/monster type hands, not getting paid off is less of an issue.

[martindcx1e]

moving up cant harm our bankroll because isnt that the reason we actually have it? To define what stakes we are able to play
Caution is all fine and good, but if its hurting your ev then that seems awfully dumb to me considering there is little if no difference between all small stakes poker games that a decent tight player cant take advantage of.
Also, by assuming our winrate drops are we assuming AA gets broken more often, gets no action more often or what? hands have an ev value right so we expect to win a certain amount of money with them. Fwiw, my opinion is that winrate at medium stakes games is determined by your aility to not pay off better hands with your own semi-monster/monster type hands, not getting paid off is less of an issue.

it's like i'm looking inside of my head. couldn't agree more.

[LimpinAintEZ]

quad tabled some Full Ring 50NL last night - bought in for $40 at each and tried to find tables that were mostly high flop % and full of people with the same or less than me (not hard to do)

ran into quads and higher set 2x, which seemed a little excessive got a guy all in with his 2 pair against my straight and be he boated his 4 outer on me for another big one...but overall, lost only 2 buy ins - played a bit scared though - tried to open up button ranges but found the tables much more aggro in general, so after i started off very poor i just went to playing my game and that worked well - Had $130 sitting in front of me at one table - that was cool still have to stop paying people off - folded an overpair only once and got stacked whne i couldn't fold my AA on a KQJ board with 3 others in (i pumped it preflop also, not sure why i got 3 callers) -

SO, gonna stay at 50nl and move down if i lose 3 more buy ins...try, try TRY to stop paying people off and not play scared...

it was fun though

[martindcx1e]

I'm sure things will be fine

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...86853d8851b823

Also, buy-in full man

[biondino]

I haven't played more than 100 hands of $100NL since my 8-buyin loss there. But I think I'm ready to concede - if you have the roll, play where you can afford while staying aware of your limitations and moving down if necessary.

So I should be playing $200NL. Gulp. I wonder if it's worth experimenting?

[martindcx1e]

I haven't played more than 100 hands of $100NL since my 8-buyin loss there. But I think I'm ready to concede - if you have the roll, play where you can afford while staying aware of your limitations and moving down if necessary.

So I should be playing $200NL. Gulp. I wonder if it's worth experimenting?

do it, do it

[LimpinAintEZ]

do it, do it

settle down - let him eaze into 100nl before you go pushing the 200nl

[biondino]

I played $200NL doing Dwarfman's challenge - pwned it Pwned $400 too, fwiw - it was $600 that got me