Limit Dilemma
Alright, at my home casino its all 1/2 NL, sometimes DC, sometimes straight holdem, pineapple, omaha you name it. Generally, you know 90% of the people that play there everyday. Poker room decides to start up some interest in a 10/20 NL game. Now I know this is a big jump in not only limits, but in skill level also, theres acouple angles to look at here.
1. I play with 95% of the players on the list....I think i didn't recognize one name.
2. I have faired extremely well in 1/2 NL and I have the BR to buy-in 10/20. ( So far its $500-$3000 buyin....that could change )
3. This is just too big of a jump for me, and I should stick to cashing 1/2 NL.
PS. I have a very respected persona at the table, smart, patience and sometimes dangerous!
1. I play with 95% of the players on the list....I think i didn't recognize one name.
2. I have faired extremely well in 1/2 NL and I have the BR to buy-in 10/20. ( So far its $500-$3000 buyin....that could change )
3. This is just too big of a jump for me, and I should stick to cashing 1/2 NL.
PS. I have a very respected persona at the table, smart, patience and sometimes dangerous!
Comments
Watch the game, check out the players and see how the game plays. See if you can spot mistakes in anyone's play and if you feel YOU are a favorite playing against that competition.
The money should not be an issue if you are properly bankrolled. The only question is if you feel comfortable playing against that lineup of players. Money should never affect your play, it's just chips. If you think to yourself - OMG I just got rivered in that pot and lost a month's mortgage - you're drawing dead in that game. You must detach yourself from the dollar value of the chips and just play the game - your best game.
Being properly bankrolled does not mean having a couple buy-ins. Properly bankrolled is having enough to sustain the ups and downs long term - I would suggest having a bankroll of at least 40-50 buy-ins to play a certain limit.
Ok seriously. Have you ever tried to do this at a live game? Just stand at the table over some guys shoulder for 3 hours? It doesn't happen.
I recommend a bankroll of ten thousand buyins. What's the point? Fact is, you should be constantly challenging yourself as a poker player. You'll never get comfortable with a limit by being scared. I recommended short stacking it because you'll either lose the minimum if you are just outmatched or you will gain comfort that you can move up and be a winner.
BBC's advise is sound. Buy-in for $500, play on the short stack and keep your eyes open. See what is going on at the table and how the game is playing. If the play is over your head you will figure that out in a hurry and you can return to your normal game. If you realize that you have 2 big fish on your right you may want to top up your stack. If the game is splashy and loose you may just find it to be profitable to short stack.
It is easy to play a pretty much flawless game short stacking.
If you go busto and it's ok - no problem, them go ahead a jump right in.
BTW - I always scope out the game before I play. If not before I sit down, at least during the first couple orbits I'm classifying players, and reading their tendencies. This is just a part of good game selection, and good poker.
I disagree with BBC in that you should just blindly jump into a game which is 5 times bigger then you normally play and just "take a shot". A prudent poker player will do some homework befor risking their money - this is no exception.
Yes, you should be constantly challenging yourself, but just making blind stabs at games which are 5x bigger then what you normally play is just plain gambling in my opinion.
If you normally play 5-10 LHE, would you just jump into a 25-50 game without thinking twice about it???
Take the short stack route if you're that uncomfortable at first. You'd be surprised at how quickly you can gain chips. Smooth has good advise in being very selective at first and classifying your opponents in the first couple of orbits. But you should already have MOST of them sorted out by now anyway.
Unless they play 1/2 a totally different way then they play 10/20, I don't see any disadvantage for you. Same people, you already know them and their styles, just mix it up abit.
So you were under the impression that he grinds 1-2NL to pay the bills?
He is thinking twice about he is polling the esteemed members of PF.ca for opinions. Fortunately for him we all have opinions just like we all have an asshole.
He knows all the players and their styles. He can short stack it long enough to see how they are responding to the jump in level (most likely all playing weak tight IMO).
I would bet any player who has made real money playing poker has taken a shot at one point or another where they were playing underrolled in the classical sense. Just ask Watts about short stacking $200- $400NL on Full Tilt.
The prob with this scenario is that your making a lot of money but playing with a full stack, and playing with that strategy. As long as you know how to play a good short stack, then by all means jump into the game.
Even if you don't rely on poker to pay the bills but you take the game as a serious hobby (say you have a separate poker bankroll), jumping into a game 5 times bigger then your normal game is not usually a good idea. You need compelling reason to do it.
If you feel you're a favorite in the game and the game is good, then you have obviously done your homework and you should play.
In shabs case, the players are the same as his 1/2 game so obviously it's beatable for him, and I agree he should give it a shot - even more so since going busto is no big deal.
My normal game is mid limit HE and I regularly play as big as 80-160, do you think it's a good idea for me to fly down to the Bellagio and play in the big game to "TAKE A SHOT" to "CHALLENGE MYSELF"?
I have played underrolled when I first started, I remember first sitting in a 50-100 game. Played as tight as a rock... But I had a reason to sit cause there were 3 bad players just gambling it up, and I knew I was a favorite.
There's nothing wrong with taking a shot - but I like my shots to be calculated. I'm sure when Sir Watts sat in a 200-400 game he had REASON to sit, and his decision was calculated.
The purpose of my posts is not just to help Shabs answer his question, but to get people to think about the things which should be going through their heads before making this kind of decision.
I interpreted Schabs post to be saying that he could afford to buy in, He knew the competitions game, and he was interested in sitting in the game (if he wasn't interested than why would he post it?)
My post was directed at him and that if he had interest and could afford it, why not take a shot. Nothing ventured, nothing gained and all that and he could easily sit with 20BB on a short stack and play a pretty solid game (strategically speaking) and feel it out.
As far as discussing proper bankroll management...I didn't realize that we were having that discussion.
Personally, I consider myself a bankroll nit and I always play with 25BI for what ever level is my main game but I have followed fish up in levels on lots of occasions.
I know a lot of people who jump up in limits to "take a shot" and I see so many of them go broke. That's why I just wanted to give my insight and opinion.
Just going to play my game the way I can, adapt to the table and the players around it, and see what I can do.
Any other suggestions?
Yes, once you begin winning, there may be no turning back. 10/20 NL is a big game for most and is a big jump from the limits you are use to playing. so don't just play because you know the other players, also be prepared that you may never look back to the lower limits.
Buy in for full if your postflop skills are better than your opponents.
If you want to just dabble in it... buy in short.
So... that's a warning or justification to move up?