Ok in one of my posts an arguement developed regarding cash games. My arguement is that it is easier to win at higher stakes than micro stakes.
1) Micro stakes players are very loose and aggressive and aren't too bothered about losing less than $5 a hand because it's a very small amount of money. And therefore these players are harder to bluff and get away with it because the money doesn't mean a great deal to them.
2) In mid stakes the pots are bigger therefore players would think twice about calling a bet greater than $10 if they felt they didn't have the best hand, therefore easier to win money and a better level of play.
Joined: Feb '08
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 35 (M)
Posts: 1886
I already made my point in the other thread but just to clarify...
That's not really correct. Just cos players are more loose and aggressive doesn't mean it's harder to beat them. In fact it should be the opposite. However, it might be easier for you as an individual to make money playing at low stakes rather than micros due to your style of play.
You don't need to bluff to make money at poker. And you shouldn't bluff so much at low stakes or micro but if being aggressive in draws and on missed flops is your technique then you are better off playing at slightly higher stakes.
Joined: May '09
Location: India
Age: 37 (M)
Posts: 4873
not saying that higher stakes are easier/difficult to win/bluff etc
but like ATM said - if u cant win at micros, u'll get crushed at higher stakes. just need to play abc to win at micros, if u cant handle that - there's something wrong with you.
Joined: Apr '08
Location: Finland
Age: 35 (M)
Posts: 1613
If people cant lay down anything why should you try to bluff them ? If you are losing money it sure isnt the opponents fault. (Im not accusing YOU for losing money, im talking about players in general...)
One cant simple win every hand, when you are beat you are beat and the only thing you can do against a donkey is then to fold ...
Joined: Apr '11
Location: Romania
Age: 35 (M)
Posts: 6669
I guess that you started playing at a higher limit and you make profit you are okay but keep in mind that if you play out of bankroll it's enough just a short period of tilt and you can lose all your bankroll...
If you can have a good control over tilt then i guess you are okay... for now at least
Joined: Jan '10
Location: Indonesia
Age: 60 (M)
Posts: 1875
Posted by godward89: Ok in one of my posts an arguement developed regarding cash games. My arguement is that it is easier to win at higher stakes than micro stakes.
1) Micro stakes players are very loose and aggressive and aren't too bothered about losing less than $5 a hand because it's a very small amount of money. And therefore these players are harder to bluff and get away with it because the money doesn't mean a great deal to them.
2) In mid stakes the pots are bigger therefore players would think twice about calling a bet greater than $10 if they felt they didn't have the best hand, therefore easier to win money and a better level of play.
Is this not correct?
Of cource you right. Also many gambling play there. Just make us upset, frustating.better play s n g or MTT, at least they play well at middle or late of tourney
You are wrong OP. Oh and btw your mindset is totally wrong.
It doesn't matter if you have to call a 0.50 cent bet on 2c/5c or a 1$ bet on 5/10c because it's the same amount of big blinds. You have to think in big blinds and buyins, not dollars.
You are clearly not even good enough to crush micro's yet, so you better go study and play more.
Joined: Feb '11
Location: Germany
Age: 31 (M)
Posts: 1859
Posted by jc1337: You are wrong OP. Oh and btw your mindset is totally wrong.
It doesn't matter if you have to call a 0.50 cent bet on 2c/5c or a 1$ bet on 5/10c because it's the same amount of big blinds. You have to think in big blinds and buyins, not dollars.
You are clearly not even good enough to crush micro's yet, so you better go study and play more.
This^
A good player calculates in Big Blinds rather than $,thus it doesnt matter at all if it's $5 in a $0.50/$1 game or $20 in a $2/$4 game. Fishes might have the $ thinking,it is wrong though. Besides,any decent player has a good enough bankroll for what they play to not worry about "omg if I lose this I can't buy my daily ratio of cheeseburgers tomorrow",so they calculate in pot odds postflop
Joined: May '11
Location: Canada
Age: 34 (M)
Posts: 979
i think your kinda right, its easier to make money at higher stakes but i think this is cuz everyone at micro cash tables is an outright nit, barely play anything, if your more lag you should just jump limits
------------ i dont mean jumping huge limits though, but going to like at least small limits from the micro but higher limit also means better players too, so i really think its preference
Joined: Feb '11
Location: Canada
Age: 39 (M)
Posts: 1660
I too disagree with you there Godward89, no offense. I've just found as my roll has increased and I've jumped stakes, I've usually encountered better resistance. I still have a lot to learn though, I don't even understand half the acronyms that fly around here, just playing basic ABC strategy.
Joined: May '08
Location: Netherlands
Age: 53 (M)
Posts: 6197
Posted by godward89: Ok in one of my posts an arguement developed regarding cash games. My arguement is that it is easier to win at higher stakes than micro stakes.
Is this not correct?
No its not why wud it Look at your question, totally makes no sense
Joined: Nov '09
Location: Canada
Age: 55 (M)
Posts: 2387
Posted by godward89: Ok in one of my posts an arguement developed regarding cash games. My arguement is that it is easier to win at higher stakes than micro stakes.
1) Micro stakes players are very loose and aggressive and aren't too bothered about losing less than $5 a hand because it's a very small amount of money. And therefore these players are harder to bluff and get away with it because the money doesn't mean a great deal to them.
2) In mid stakes the pots are bigger therefore players would think twice about calling a bet greater than $10 if they felt they didn't have the best hand, therefore easier to win money and a better level of play.
Is this not correct?
Is Tom Dwan a micro stakes player? Because he sure is loose and aggressive. I have played everywhere from NL2 to NL2000 and let me tell you there are loose and aggressive players at all levels of cash play. These are the things I look at before determining whether or not I am going to sit down at a cash table:
1. How much time do I have? If I don't have minimum one hour for a session I will play some SNGs instead. Why? Because it takes a few hands to start getting a read on the other players, and if I have a dip at the beginning of my session and the end is already approaching I will start to loosen up, and then usually the bottom starts to drop out. A proper amount of time lets me adjust my style to the players at the table and start to make profit.
2. How am I feeling? Do I feel sharp and ready to multitable, or is it the end of a rough day and I just want to play for entertainment? Sometimes I start a session by playing a microstakes turbo SNG just to see if I am making good calls and slaying, or making bad mistakes and I should do something else.
3. What is my bankroll? If I am not properly rolled for the level I am playing at, chances are I will be too tight and not playing my usual game. You need to be comfortable with the level and not start freaking out if you get bad beat out of a couple of buy-ins.
4. Who are the other players at the table? If you are using software it will tell you right away. I don't so I rely on previous encounters and notes I have taken. If the table is full of good seasoned players, what do you think your chances are of having a profitable session versus a table full of average (or even better weekend) players?
Joined: Jan '11
Location: Romania
Age: 36 (M)
Posts: 167
if you consider that at higher limits you ll find better players ,aware players,that you can outplay then yes...it s easier to beat a good player than an idiot.. in the end it depends on your playing style..you can make as much money in nl 2 as in nl 25
