8 tabling 11's vs 4 tabling 22s or 33s...

[pshreck]

Hi all. I have been 4 tabling 22's for about 8 weeks, with over 1k tournaments. Through my first 500 I had an ROI ending at 36% (a huge drop from actually where I was at 400 tourneys). Through 1000 tournaments I finished at 14%.

So yeah.... I had a bad last few weeks. I was convinced that I was losing more than my fair share of coinflips, but I have yet to analyze that theory. I also dipped into 8 tabling the 22's, and played roughly even money for 200 tournaments (still beating the 10% rake, but thats about it). Now... I felt even after I played well and didnt have too many bad beats in an 8 game period, I would expect to either lose 20ish or make 20is.... and occasionally losing a lot more, with rarely making much in a 8 game period.

It was ok with me, I simply am not ready for 8 tabling yet, atleast at the 22 level.

Now... here is my question. I have 4 tabled and 8 tabled 11's previously, with ROI's of around 36% through a few hundred (had no difference 8 tabling vs 4 tabling). I went back to 8 tabling the 11's for about 110 tournaments, and have had a ROI of 36%, playing formulaic.

After returning to the 11's these past few days... I am beginning to think they are so much more beatable than 22's and up its not even close. I get my sets to pay off, TPTK to pay off, players generally play very straightforward so when Im checkraised I can easily fold.... felt like paradise for someone who is 8 tabling, with very few real tough decisions.

Who thinks that the 11's are significantly different than the 22's (or 33's) in that ABC play and great bubble play can give a great long term ROI (30%+)? My strength has lied in my discipline for so long, and it started hurting me in the 22's and 33's... I wasn't aggressive enough when I should be and was getting tricked out of enough pots to hurt my ITM %... and consequently destroy my ROI. There are a lot of other theories I have about why 11s and 22s are so much different.

Is it wishful thinking that I can dominate the 11's playing really just ABC poker? I have no results to suggest otherwise, but is 35% ROI sustainable 8 tabling at this level?

On a more personal note, I had intended to make around 1000 a week or so doing this, and after about 2 weeks of breaking even (and buying xmas presents and paying all my bills today) I felt that a healthy thing to do would be to bump down to the 11's (for the sake of sanity and not losing my bankroll and having to dip into savings). I do this full time currently so I can get in around 400 per week (usually between 35-40 hrs of play, not as unhealthy as it sounds).

I think a lot of you can comment on this as many have played these levels... advice and comments please.

[adanthar]

The 22's are a weird limit at Party because they weren't around up until a few months ago and people had to go from the 11's straight to the 33's. I'm not sure what to tell you about them but I would guess they're closer to the latter than the former.

That said, since 4 tabling 33's is more profitable than 8 tabling 11's I would wait until Christmas when you don't need the money as much, start out 1 and 2 tabling them and then move to 4 tabling when you are comfortable. 30% ROI is definitely sustainable there on 3-4 tables.

[Vetstadium]

I have recently just starting 4 tabling $22's at PP was on fire at first but now out of 130 tourns 29% ROI had recent bad stretch of ten games where aces fell twice preflop etc. I was playing $55's had 400 of them and ROI was 13.8% I have noticed a big difference in quality of play. At the $22's just play straight forward poker DON'T BLUFF early virtually unbluffable has been my experience. When I get ACES bet them BIG out of proporition even early some fool will try to come over top of you. Once in awhile they get lucky but 4 out of 5 times you double up and I feel anytime I double up early at that level have a VERY high chance of making money.

[pshreck]

I know how to play 22s, Ive played well over 1000 of them.... I asking for opinions on the difference between them and 11s.

[FishBurger]

I exclusively play the Party 22s and 11s and the PokerStars $16 Turbos. I agree that the 22s are noticeably harder than the $11s.

It seems like the main difference is that there are more players at the $22s that play tighter, so you will have more players in the game at the higher levels. At the $11s, you might see 3 or more people go out before level 3 whereas only 1 or 2 will be out at level 3 in the $22s.

I usually play the $11s during the day and only play the $22s during the hours between 5 PM and 1 AM. I've never multied more than 2 SnGs at once, so I can't comment on 4-tabling.

I'd hate to see another good player at the $15 + 1 Turbo SnGs on P'Stars, but you might want to consider it. You pay 33% less vigorish, get to start with 1500 chips, and the blinds go up really fast (10/20, 15/30, 25/50, 50/100, 75/150, 100/200, 100/200 + ante, 200/400, 300/600, 400/800, 600/1200, 800/1600, 1000/2000, etc). I don't believe these games last much longer than the SnGs at PP and I believe the higher amount of starting chips reduces your ROI variance.

I like your idea of multi-tabling the lower limits as opposed to moving up. You read so many posts here about people that keep trying to move up, only to see their bankroll take a major hit necessating a move back down. I like the steady income I get playing the low-level SnGs without the stress of having to worry about my bankroll evaporating.

Anyhoo, as someone who has played the $11s and $22s at PP for over a year, I do find the $22s to be more difficult than the $11s.