Does the quality of play always increase as you move up in limits?

kimchi · #1 07-13-2006, 03:07 AM

Discounting B&M, as I have little experience of that.

I've played the nanos and micros upto 2/4 limit holdem and haven't noticed a particulary linear realtionship between the quality of the play and the size of the stakes.

Granted, there may be more calling stations at lower limts, and more maniacs (and generally aggressive players) at the higher (micro)limits. While the style of play may be different, I haven't noticed much difference in the quality of play.

I've only experienced Party, Cryptos, and Stars.

I've read peoples' comments regarding vacuums of quality players lingering amongst the low-mid stakes (15/30, for example) and the higher micro stakes having relatively good players (3/6, for example)

One reason may be that some good players deposit a small amount and slowly grind their way up the limits, improving all the way.....and some bad (cash rich) players download the client software, deposit a few $K's and jump right into limits that they feel are worth their time.

Any thoughts?

Slappy002 · #2 07-13-2006, 04:01 AM

I'm more of a tourney donk. I've played from $0.10 + $0.01 to $20 +$2 SNGs regularly

I've found a slow decrease in the % of fish within that range of buyins. In a $0.11 SNG you will be playing
%99.9 loony gamblers/fish/recreational players. At the $22 it decreases to about %80 bad players.

Also, the higher the buyin, the longer it takes for the bad players to bust out.

sweetjazz · #3 07-13-2006, 04:34 AM

Players tend to be better as the limits go up, but it's not necessarily dramatic from one limit to the next, and there are often exceptions. Sometimes a 0.5/1 table can have a few good players and only a few weak ones. Sometimes a 30/60 table can have three terrible players and a few tight players with major postflop leaks.

In general, though, the tight players get better as you go up in limits. Also, the ratio of tight to loose players tends to go down a bit as you move up past the microlimits. Nevertheless, at every limit, there are plenty of players who play too loose and plenty of players who make significant and frequent mistakes after the flop.

Dazarath · #4 07-13-2006, 08:48 AM

This is just a theory of mine, so take it as you will. Let's say we measure "quality of play", by the potential BB/100 one can make in the long-run at a given set of stakes. If 20/40 was significantly easier than 10/20, many TAGs would notice, and would move themselves accordingly, which would result in a tougher game. So I believe that, in general, this is one of the reasons that the games get tougher as you move up. Now, I don't necessarily believe the whole setup is so perfect that you could come up with some equation to determine the quality of play, given the stakes, but I think generally, this is true.

Ness3 · #5 07-13-2006, 01:22 PM

i am not sure where the cut off is for limit. however, for NL most people seem to believe NL400 is where the skill level jumps (others say NL600). NL1-NL200 are all pretty much the same, just more competent players as you move up.

i would guess the jump in LHE starts at 10/20, but its just a guess.

nes

ness

Boris Yeltzen · #6 07-13-2006, 01:41 PM

Personally, I've found the play at $2/4 to be worse than the play at $1/2.

Ness3 · #7 07-13-2006, 02:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I've found the play at $2/4 to be worse than the play at $1/2.

[/ QUOTE ]

well, if you adjust properly it can seem that way. however, i would still argue that the player pool as a whole is considerably better than the 200NL players.

ness

Boris Yeltzen · #8 07-13-2006, 02:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I've found the play at $2/4 to be worse than the play at $1/2.

[/ QUOTE ]

well, if you adjust properly it can seem that way. however, i would still argue that the player pool as a whole is considerably better than the 200NL players.

ness

[/ QUOTE ]
I was talking about limit.

canada_dry · #9 07-13-2006, 02:28 PM

There is such a thing as an 11 cent SNG? WTF is the point??
lol

canada_dry · #10 07-13-2006, 02:34 PM

The level doesn't determine the skill. I frequent Limit tables from 10/20 to 30/60, occasionally 50/100, and you can find fight LAGS and TAGS on all the games. I wouldn't particularily say one is tougher than the other, only that 10/20 is easier on the bankroll so the beats don't hurt as much. For fun (and an experiment) I played .5/1 for a couple rounds just to see what the skill level was like. To be honest, this particular table was JUST AS GOOD as any I play on in the higher limits. SO in a final analysis: table selection is the key, not level selection. Play at a level you are COMFORTABLE LOSING AT, then choose proper table selection.