Difference between $16's and $27's

[mattiesmat]

I am trying to move up to the 27's, but so far without good results.
My sample size is too little to know where I stand.
I would like to know what other people experienced when moving up in these buyins.
How did the skills difference and (more) rake influenced your ROI and do you use any different strategy?
I know there is a moving up thread, but I lack search skills (I get all irrelevant posts/topics).

[AMT]

there arent that many differences IMO except among some of the regulars....i guess one thing is that you'll be able to push looser at the 27s because a couple less ppl suck. I made a video for Donkit 2 tabling 1 16 and 1 27 and I discussed some of the differences, you may find it useful to check out. Anyways, I really think its a matter of just getting used to the regs and feeling your way around the late game and your ranges.

[mattiesmat]

Thanks AMT.
How does the rake difference (1/15 vs 2/25) influences ROI?
I 'was' a ~14% ROI winner at the 16's, can I assume I can also beat the 27's even after -10% ROI for first ~130 games? (I know sample size is small)
I might look to the video.

[Kevin8423]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks AMT.
How does the rake difference (1/15 vs 2/25) influences ROI?
I 'was' a ~14% ROI winner at the 16's, can I assume I can also beat the 27's even after -10% ROI for first ~130 games? (I know sample size is small)
I might look to the video.

[/ QUOTE ]

What was your $16s sample? If 14% is close to your true ROI then ideally you would beat the $27s for some amount of profit. Even if the cause of your losses is just you getting unlucky it is probably best to recover and take shots until things go well instead of finding that you just aren't beating it and losing a lot of money after a lot more games.

[AMT]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks AMT.
How does the rake difference (1/15 vs 2/25) influences ROI?
I 'was' a ~14% ROI winner at the 16's, can I assume I can also beat the 27's even after -10% ROI for first ~130 games? (I know sample size is small)
I might look to the video.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think once you learn the differences and get used to game play that it will have minimal effect, maybe a couple ROI points at most, I really never noticed a detrimental difference, though I did suffer some higher short term swings,partly due to the nature in which I play STTs, but also because I was adding a lot more tables while i played 27s.

[mattiesmat]

Can you give me some advice on the bankroll required to moving up or taking shots? My bankroll was $1928, but now dropped to $1550 because of the bad results in the $27's.
Where should I go from here?
Should I move down again or when should I?
I have read the FAQ, but what about taking shots or mixing 16s and 17s?

Thanks for all your advice and hand reviews, ATM.

[jukofyork]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks AMT.
How does the rake difference (1/15 vs 2/25) influences ROI?
I 'was' a ~14% ROI winner at the 16's, can I assume I can also beat the 27's even after -10% ROI for first ~130 games? (I know sample size is small)
I might look to the video.

[/ QUOTE ]
You can use rvg72's ROI simulator to help you answer questions like this. For example: Say you want to ask "as a player who has a ROI of -10% over the last 130 games, what is the chance my 'true' ROI is really better than breakeven?", then:

Set the 1st/2nd/3rd values to 11%/11%/11% (which gives an ROI of 0%). Then set "Games per Sim" to 130. Finally set "#Simulations" to a huge value like 1000000. Hit Simulate Results and wait for it to be done.

Now if you look in the first table ("All results") and scroll down to where it says "-10" you can see the cumulative frequency shows that (as a 11/11/11 0% ROI player) you would expect 78.2% of the time to run better than or equal to -10%, or in other words you can say that there is a 21.8% chance that you could really be a breakeven (or better) player running at -10% ROI after those 130 games (If after 500 games you are still running at -10% ROI and you repeat the process, then you'll see that you can be nearly 95% sure you're not a winner).

You can use other 1st/2nd/3rd percentages which give different ROIs to ask similar questions (I just chose 0% ROI arbitrarily as I assumed you would want to move down if you were not reasonably certain of being able to beat the new level...). Also, realize this method makes some assumptions (which aren't 100% correct) that you are playing in a static environment, but even so it should still help with "should I move back down?" type decisions.

Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[runhot]

$11


hehe


where is this rvg simulator located?

[vers]

I sharkscoped a lot of good stars players for their stats at 16s and 27s. Out of 19 v solid players, 14/17 of them had rois about 10 at the 16s (2 didn't ever play 16s) but only 5/19 had rois above 10 at the 27s. If you want the whole list of players and their figures at both I can send those to you too.

Game selection is more important at the 27s imo. I don't have much experience at the 27s, like maybe 150 and I'm a loser so far. They do seem slightly tougher tho, better regs.

[runhot]

like vers said- differnce is you start to see regs at the 27s.. or maybe there are regs at the 16s and i just dont remember.. i think usually there should only be at most 2 other regs at a clip on there 20 tabling tho... as opposed to the 60s where i played this morning with 4 winners at the tables.. i guess i shouldnt have continued to open tables at that point, but that would be the extent of my 'game selection'