Joined: Nov '14
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 51 (M)
Posts: 9
Posted by yout85: I think the point Killie was making in the first post wasn't "I've won a couple of high buy ins, but lose at the low ones, does this mean I should just play high buy ins?"... I would say it was more to the point of "I seem to be getting unlucky a lot in the lower buy ins, but have less bad luck in the higher ones... is this down to my style of play, and the style of the opponents, and is it sustainable and therefore should I play more higher buy ins and less lower?"
The answer to which is... maybe you will do better in the long run at the higher buy ins, as your playing style may just be better suited to it - but without the required bankroll - the long run will not happen. First downswing... which WILL happen, and you're done.
Rise fast and risk falling all the way to the bottom. Rise slowly and steadily and it's much more likely to be sustainable.
That is the point I was trying to make yout85 (thanks for explaining it better than me ) Cheers again for all the advice guys.
Joined: Oct '12
Location: Ukraine
Age: 58 (M)
Posts: 296
Hi, everybody.
I think that after all it is necessary to adhere to classical tactics of maintaining a bankroll. At happy distributions you of course will win more on large limits but some bad cases and a bankroll will very quickly come nearer to zero.
Joined: Feb '11
Location: Germany
Age: 31 (M)
Posts: 1859
I always hear that argument of someones "playing style is suited better for higher stakes than lower stakes". Fact is, someone who can't even do simple adjustments to beat microstakes will for sure never be good enough to beat even higher stakes. There's no winning player in the world who has beaten midstakes but loses at micros.
Joined: Dec '10
Location: Finland
Age: 31 (M)
Posts: 429
Posted by BeMyATMplz: I always hear that argument of someones "playing style is suited better for higher stakes than lower stakes". Fact is, someone who can't even do simple adjustments to beat microstakes will for sure never be good enough to beat even higher stakes. There's no winning player in the world who has beaten midstakes but loses at micros.
I agree 100%...and even if their playing style was suited for higher stakes, the higher stakes players would adjust to it and eat the player alive...and then they would have to re-adjust...and how will they be able to do that if they cant adjust to micros :s
I like it when somebody asks for advice then get some very useful ones then ignores them all together cuz his/her actual mindset is not able to tell what is the right thing. Under right thing I mean playing at a level where a normal - inevitable - downswing couldn't hurt your bankroll as much as here. Nobody will try to tell you that u should play above your means but if that make you feel better about your pokerself, then do it, whatever, nobody will care either. It isn't our money after all.
Joined: Nov '14
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 51 (M)
Posts: 9
Posted by bowie1984: I like it when somebody asks for advice then get some very useful ones then ignores them all together cuz his/her actual mindset is not able to tell what is the right thing. Under right thing I mean playing at a level where a normal - inevitable - downswing couldn't hurt your bankroll as much as here. Nobody will try to tell you that u should play above your means but if that make you feel better about your pokerself, then do it, whatever, nobody will care either. It isn't our money after all.
Haven't ignored any advice all together bowie, i have taken all the advice on board and continued to play $7 SnG's which while I won an 18 runner and cashed a couple of times, on the whole I am losing. On the other hand I won $200 last night playing a $30 SnG and I am profitable in these games. Goes to prove that advice is just that, advice (and opinion). There is no absolute right answer - what is right for one person may not be right for another. Maybe the fact that I am performing better at the higher levels is because I am more focussed, so it maybe does suit my game better - who knows?
When you have at least a couple months long statsheet about your production and ROI playing $30 SnG I will definitely believe that you are profitable in it. As of now you just had a good run. I don't doubt your dedication nor achievements or anything but you wouldn't start a topic about doubting 2 play this much above your average stake if you are that confident as you saying.
Joined: Nov '14
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 51 (M)
Posts: 9
Posted by bowie1984: When you have at least a couple months long statsheet about your production and ROI playing $30 SnG I will definitely believe that you are profitable in it. As of now you just had a good run. I don't doubt your dedication nor achievements or anything but you wouldn't start a topic about doubting 2 play this much above your average stake if you are that confident as you saying.
I am not confident at the higher stakes Bowie, just stating that I am performing better. You are right, after a couple of months, if I haven't lost my entire bankroll and continue to be in profit then I can say it has been a success. Will still take me a lot longer to recoup what I have lost over the years though
Joined: Feb '11
Location: Germany
Age: 31 (M)
Posts: 1859
Posted by KillieDan:
Haven't ignored any advice all together bowie, i have taken all the advice on board and continued to play $7 SnG's which while I won an 18 runner and cashed a couple of times, on the whole I am losing. On the other hand I won $200 last night playing a $30 SnG and I am profitable in these games. Goes to prove that advice is just that, advice (and opinion). There is no absolute right answer - what is right for one person may not be right for another. Maybe the fact that I am performing better at the higher levels is because I am more focussed, so it maybe does suit my game better - who knows?
The reason for you performing better at higher stakes is luck. The $30 18 mans are one of the toughest formats on stars during primetime, you won't find many formats that are more reg-infested %-of-field-wise, and even people who play fulltime (people that grind for supernova elite) are hardly profitable in such games or even losing pre rakeback/VPPs. So I guarantee you there is a 0% chance you will be profitable in them in the long run, if you open such a topic then every regular there is far,far ahead of you. I'm profitable over 600 SNGs (this is no proper samplesize) in the $30 18 mans and I wouldn't say I'm profitable in them over the long run either (unless I game-select hard)
Edited by BeMyATMplz (16 November 2014 @ 18:19 GMT)
)
