$11 to $22 What's the Difference?

[SuitedSixes]

November was my first month playing SNGs and first, thanks to this forum I reached my November goal, which was to pay my rent with SNG profits . . . so thanks!

2nd, I can beat the 10+1 (+250 SNGS: +35 ROI +40ITM) but I cannot figure out the 22's (smaller sample size, but -40ROI 23 ITM). Everyone here says there is only a small difference. So what's the small difference, because obviously I haven't adjusted. The play seems tighter so that when I am short-stacked I am against 7-8 rather than 3-4 at 10+1. How did everyone else ever get over the adjustment to a next level? It seems counterproductive to move up if I can't beat it, but I know that I need to as some point. I have the 30+ BIs for $22. Thanks again for everyone's help.

-66s

[tigerite]

Maybe post some key hands and get some feedback that way. They really aren't that much harder at all. If players are tighter, that means you can steal from them more in the later stages, and so forth..

[Ogre]

The play is a bit tighter in the early rounds and more aggressive in the later rounds then in the 10s. I also run into alot more 2+2ers in 20s then the 10s.

[SuitedSixes]

[ QUOTE ]
If players are tighter, that means you can steal from them more in the later stages, and so forth..

[/ QUOTE ]

It's wierd that you say that, because that's what, I think, separates me from the normal $10+1ers is my stealing ability. I wonder if the <GASP> extra $11 has me tightening up. If everyone says there is not that much difference, than maybe I am creating the difference.

[Irieguy]

As you move up in limits, the field of players becomes slightly more experienced and slightly more knowlegeable. It's not possible to really perceive this difference by looking at specific plays or players, but the cumulative affect changes the texture of the game. The changing game texture dictates a slightly different strategy as you move up.

At the lowest limits (5's + 10's), the play is as bad as possible. The field is inexperienced, and therefore will call too much and not raise enough. This type of field allows you to see a few more flops than you would think is correct, because you are at less risk of being raised or outplayed. You practically never bluff. Impied odds are very important because you will get paid off handsomely with sets, straights and overpairs. As the bubble approaches, you have to be pretty value-conscious because you are likely to get called when you push. Folding equity is less important than values... so ABC shorthanded poker will bring home the money at these limits.

When you move up, the cumulative experience of the field increases slightly. This means fewer preflop calls with garbage, but more preflop raises with garbage. The MAIN strategy change as you move up is to PLAY FEWER HANDS EARLY. You wont be getting the same pot or implied odds as you did at the lower limits, and the hands will cost you more. So it's not worth it. As the bubble approaches, players will be less eager to call big bets because the prize is bigger for placing, and players call a little less frequently. Folding equity becomes more important, and therefore a more aggressive bubble strategy will pay off.

These are the general differences, but you need to know what type of players are still alive on the bubble. That's where the money decisions are made at any level.

Irieguy

[tigerite]

Completely agree with all of that, and don't be afraid to get your money in the middle even if you have enough chips to survive a few more orbits, but not enough to have much/any folding equity after the next round of blinds, as and when you get the opportunity. I've won SNGs at the 20 and 30 level despite getting two or three pairs all game, and one AK. It becomes much more about playing position, stacks and players than cards.

[skirtus]

I am having similiar problems adjusting to the 22s. I maul the 10s but have been mugged at the 20s. I could be just variance or it could be Im playing less confidently. I play both now. If I lose 10 or 20 buyins at the 20s I move back to the 10s and make it up before I step up again. Hopefully I make the adjustments before frustration sets in. Ironically Ive played as many at the 30s as the 20s. Ive done well at the 30s so I suspect it could be just variance that is plaguing me at the 20s.

[SuitedSixes]

Thanks, all for the replys. I am going to buy a new monitor today so I can four-table without overlap. I currently 2 table with serious overlap. My plan is to mix in one $22 with the other three $11's. This will allow me to "hedge" a little bit without psyching myself out. The reality is that I can make a very comfortable amount of money at my current pace at the $11's so I am not going to worry about it very much. Success at the $22s and beyond will come, I'm sure. For only playing one month at SNGs, I am very happy with my results. Ill write this in a thread later, but it seems like success has come in stages. I became a winning player when I started following the FAQ. I really became a winning player when I began applying TGC and stealing more and playing more aggressively. Thanks, again.

[1C5]

[ QUOTE ]
I am having similiar problems adjusting to the 22s. I maul the 10s but have been mugged at the 20s. I could be just variance or it could be Im playing less confidently. I play both now. If I lose 10 or 20 buyins at the 20s I move back to the 10s and make it up before I step up again. Hopefully I make the adjustments before frustration sets in. Ironically Ive played as many at the 30s as the 20s. Ive done well at the 30s so I suspect it could be just variance that is plaguing me at the 20s.

[/ QUOTE ]

Easy answer, just skip the 20s and play the 30s. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[SuitedSixes]

What's the consesus on the 30's? How do they compare to the 10's and 20's?