Party Poker $50 vs $100 NL 1-Table

[Mouse1949]

I have been playing many $50 PP single table tournaments, doing well and just strated nibbling at the $100 tourneys. So far, I see no particular increase in the quality of play. Any oppinion about this?

[TomCollins]

I just made the switch and noticed a huge difference in play. First, the players survive much longer. There are less yahoos willing to get all in early. Second, players play better in the money. I was able to destroy players heads up in the $50 without much effort. However, in my small sample size, I am 50% when getting to heads up.

I also may have been extremely lucky in my $50s (I only did 100) and had a huge ROI. I lost my first 6 $100s, but managed to bring it up to a profit through 25.

I'll need a much bigger sample size to be sure, but from what I can tell, the 100s are definitely tougher, but not unbeatable. The 50s are a joke, however.

[Myst]

100? Try 5000 and then youll have an idea if you were even beating the 50s.

Daliman has had a losing streak that lasted 600 SNGs in the $215s. And I assure you, hes a better player than you.

[ThorGoT]

I did not think the $50s were a joke, over a reasonable sample size. The $100s are harder. There are at least a couple posts on this in the past, to which I do not have links, but you should be able to find them relatively easily.

[TomCollins]

Why would I continue to play 5000 of them? I know my sample size is small. I did a confidence interval, and even with a 100 sample size, it was between 5% and 95% ROI. I regularly saw 3 players gone before the blinds went up twice.

I also can assure you that the 200s are a ton tougher than the 50s. If Daliman had a losing streak through even 100 50s, hell would be freezing over next.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
I have been playing many $50 PP single table tournaments, doing well and just strated nibbling at the $100 tourneys. So far, I see no particular increase in the quality of play. Any oppinion about this?

[/ QUOTE ]

They are different, and tougher. If you don't believe me, do the following experiment. With two limpers in L1, raise to 75. Count how many times people follow in the $55 vs the $109. It's a big difference.

eastbay

[Myst]

[ QUOTE ]
Why would I continue to play 5000 of them? I know my sample size is small. I did a confidence interval, and even with a 100 sample size, it was between 5% and 95% ROI. I regularly saw 3 players gone before the blinds went up twice.

I also can assure you that the 200s are a ton tougher than the 50s. If Daliman had a losing streak through even 100 50s, hell would be freezing over next.

[/ QUOTE ]

I assure you, even Daliman would have a losing streak over 100 SNGs. He isnt Jesus.

[TomCollins]

The only way he would have a 100 series of losing is if he played about 1 million of them. Sure, even he will get unlucky enough to be down after 100 of them.

The confidence that he would be up after 100 tournaments is somewhere in the neighborhood of 99.999%.