yet another moving up thread

Semtex · #1 08-31-2007, 07:16 AM

i've been sustaining 5 PTBB/100 past 50k hands now 9 tabling 50NL. I have more than enough to move up. What kind of a hit is my winrate going to take in your guys experience at 100NL? 200NL?

AlexB182 · #2 08-31-2007, 08:14 AM

My winrate is for some reasons far beyond my understanding 2BB more at NL 100 than it is at NL50, and no, it has not changed from -2 to 0...
I would also like to hear what some of the more experienced guys say to OPs question.

skydancing8 · #3 08-31-2007, 09:10 AM

If you are able to handle knowing you will lose $200 pots instead of $100 then I think you will be fine. The game is the same and the players aren't that much better. I had a problem with the money part of it when I was moving up.

Semtex · #4 08-31-2007, 09:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
i've been sustaining 5 PTBB/100 past 50k hands now 9 tabling 50NL. I have more than enough to move up. What kind of a hit is my winrate going to take in your guys experience at 100NL? 200NL?

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm retarded right now and i can't figure out how to edit for some reason so I will add that I have been playing pretty TAG. Thoughts??

kcheel · #5 08-31-2007, 09:27 AM

Like sky said, biggest adjustment for me was not getting upset over losing $200 pots instead of $100. I was playing really short as far as bankroll went when I moved up to NL100, so I played really weak/tight but it worked out for me.

Now I actually have an above recommended roll for NL100. Now I just need to quit sitting at NL200 and NL400 tables when I get a wild hair so I don't lose a chunk of it.

ayurice · #6 08-31-2007, 09:44 AM

I short-stacked 100nl for a few weeks until i got comfortable with it, then full-stacked. The only issue was getting used to losing bigger pots (which has been said). The players were not any better... maybe even worse on avg. My winrate went down slightly, but not significantly.

Mike Kelley · #7 08-31-2007, 09:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]
The players were not any better... maybe even worse on avg. My winrate went down slightly, but not significantly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Explain? Players same or worse and your winrate went down slightly?

diebitter · #8 08-31-2007, 10:16 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The players were not any better... maybe even worse on avg. My winrate went down slightly, but not significantly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Explain? Players same or worse and your winrate went down slightly?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably playing a little weak-tight to keep variance down whilst acclimating to a new level?

ayurice · #9 08-31-2007, 07:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The players were not any better... maybe even worse on avg. My winrate went down slightly, but not significantly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Explain? Players same or worse and your winrate went down slightly?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably playing a little weak-tight to keep variance down whilst acclimating to a new level?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yup. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] That and short-stacking didn't help my big hands. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

pete6969 · #10 08-31-2007, 11:07 PM

I will start by saying that 50k hands is nothing when it comes to your win rate. 50k is a small sample. I would first suggest playing 50nl for another 50k to 100khands before moving up. If you decide to move up, play less tables, it sounds simple but it will help with you moving up and staying up. Start by playing 6 tables and slowy add tables until you reach 9 tables again.
The avg players at 100nl are quite bad. Put in the work cont to post hands,and review hands from tracker. it takes time to learn and get good at the awesome game of poker. The rewards are great, and you can make a real nice income playing 100nl, but move up with caution and play smart.