Are some people meant to play high stakes?

[wray]

Looking for input from others with similar experience. After playing 200,000+ hands online I can conclude that that my BB/100 is better at 5/10 to 30/60
versus, say 2/4 & 3/6 (FL). I've recently gone back to play 2/4 and honestly found them tougher to beat.

A couple of my thoughts

--are some people's games simply better at countering stronger/more aggressive opponents?

--does the poor play of small stakes players to some extent nullify hand-reading ability? (e.g. average 2/4 player open limps, defends their big blind, whatever, and take unorthodox lines such as donking the pf raiser, check-calling strong hands, etc.)

--do some simply rise to the occasion for higher stakes games? (e.g. less willing to call-down marginal holdings due to the monetary value involved)

--Would Sam Farha be a winner in a 2/4 FL ring game?

Any thoughts?

[Nsight7]

All the billionaire donkeys only play 5/10 to 30/60, hence their being easy money.

Nah, seriously, I have no clue. I play too small, but I would say that hand-reading is more or less out the window. I know I can't really do it too well at the micro/small stakes games that I play and I am still a massive winner in the games I play. I put my opponents range on pretty much anything, hehe.

[silver book]

Your natural playing style might be better suited to higher stakes. But you can learn to change.

I personally think that what is possible for one is possible for all. I got that from gandhi, btw

[Gonso]

[ QUOTE ]
After playing 200,000+ hands online I can conclude that that my BB/100 is better at 5/10 to 30/60
versus, say 2/4 & 3/6 (FL). I've recently gone back to play 2/4 and honestly found them tougher to beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't typical. If you're good enough to beat 30/60 you should be crushing 2/4 and 3/6. I imagine maybe you had a bad run when you dropped down. 5/10 & up are far less forgiving of mistakes than are lower limits.

[itWASaDREAM]

I cant image the higher stakes being easier. Im with gonso and think that you may have been runnig bad or not playing your A game.

[AaronBrown]

The most obvious explanation is you play worse at small stakes, perhaps you get bored or overconfident. The next most obvious explanation is you happened on some relatively soft big games or tough small ones. But it's certainly true pepole play differently at different stakes, both because the people are different and because the stake affects their play, and you might be better suited for one stake level than another. If so, I would consider it a problem to be resolved, not just so you can play small stakes profitably, but to improve your overall game by eliminating weaknesses.

It's not true that ability increases steadily with stake. For example, the no-money play at on-line sites is considerably better than the lowest stake play. For another, thinking about money hurts your play, the higher the stakes, the harder it is to forget about the money.

In my experience, the hardest games are at middle stakes, where someone can make a decent living, but any decent player can afford the necessary bankroll. How that translates to limits depends on what a decent living is, how easy it is to find a game, how loose people play and other factors, but generally $3/$6 and below is not going to attract pros unless they're grinding or waiting for bigger stakes, and $50/$100 no-limit ($200/$400 limit) weeds most of them out, except in Las Vegas where some of them get up to $200/$400 no-limit.

This assumes the game is open to the public (in Nevada, all legal games must be open to the public). Obviously you can find some very easy $10/$20 and $20/$40 no limit games in private clubs or other "friendly" surroundings.

[jipster]

surprisingly no one has mentioned that there are probably more TAG grinders ; quite possibly a higher proportion of pros to amateurs at 2/4 as opposed to 10/20 and up etc etc

quite feasable although i'm just pontificating

i'm guessing a LAG game isnt going to beat good positional TAG's at 2/4; esp if they just want 2 or 3BB per hour or whatever.... i'm not a limit player obv

[hoyasaxa]

I personally cant win below nl 50. My game just doesnt work on them.
Not to say that I couldnt adjust to beat it. I just cant with my current game.

[6471849653]

Lower the limit the easier it's to beat if the rake is not counted in. This is because there are more fishy players and more players with less than top ability, people still on the way. The only argument I know for beating more easily medium limits than low limits is that the medium limit players rate to have a brain so one can use one's superior reading ability to profits and completely outplay those "bots." Two other things come in mind: The pots may be heads up rather than three handed (at low limits) - that's tougher to play than heads up pots; The medium limit opponents respect the bets more (on average) making it possible to be on control - it's tougher to play when one does not have the control (this last point is partly included in when the opponents have more brain but this is an additional respect point).

The people who have a better brain find their place from above. The people who do not have a higher brain can't read their higher brain opponents correctly enough, and can't play well enough. While wasting one's time at lower limits reading people who can't think well enough is a pain and asking something one may not be able to do as well as the people who have a lower brain and so understand lower level thinking. It also seems to get more difficult to beat lower limits when one learns the game better - I don't know how to explane this but one is thinking so well and the opponents so poor that it gets harder to make the best plays.

[El_Hombre_Grande]

I jump all around levels, from 15/30 to 2/4 limit depending on the softness of the games. I will multitable far more smaller games than higher limits. Low level players are far easier to beat, but with two caveats. One thing: they don't fold on the flop or turn. Thus when you have position and the flop missed you both or you have weak draw you have no fold equity. This makes it a different game, and semi-bluffs go way down in value. (This significantly changes the value of a hand like AK, for example) The second thing is a checkraise or a turn raise is far less likely to be a bluff or a draw in a 2-4 game --its most likely top pair, which is considered the nuts even if its 7s. in any event, one thing I will never do is mix in 10/20 tables with 2/4 -- even with PT and a HUD going I need to change my mindset so much.

So I think if you don't make adjustments, low level games can be frustrating. But I can profitably play 8 2/4 - 3/6 shorthand games and only 2 10-20s or 15-30s. This is because the game requires far more thinking and are far more aggressive. but if you can beat 100-200, you can surely beat 1-2; you just need to make a lot of adjustments due to looseness and the lack of fold equity.