Difficulty levels in micro limits

[Downrock]

Does anyone find that as they advance through the micro limits that the games get harder and harder? As I've progressed through the stakes, the difficulty has seemingly not increased at all. This could be due to the fact that ive gained experience along the way, but i was just wondering on others opinions.

Basically, I've been moving up everytime i hit 300BBs for the next level, it's been a long grind but worth it, started at 0.05/0.1 and am currently at 0.25/0.5 working on moving up to 0.5/1 at paradise. I've probably only put in about 25-30,000 hands during that time. So far so good. I read a post in the pyschology forum saying that it was possible for a poor player to run really well for extended periods (ie 9 months) or a good player to run badly for a long period. Anyone find that to be the case? Always having doubts about my abilities. Thanks guys, sorry for rambling.

[kenberman]

[ QUOTE ]
Basically, I've been moving up everytime i hit 300BBs for the next level, it's been a long grind but worth it, started at 0.05/0.1 and am currently at 0.25/0.5 working on moving up to 0.5/1 at paradise.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never played at these levels, but it wouldn't surprise me if these levels were all wuite similar to one another. In other words, as you move up in the levels, the quality difference between them also increases.

[gvibes]

From what I understand, the first "big" jump in difficulty occurs from .5/1 to 1/2.

However, I too have never played levels less than .5/1.

[Aaron W.]

The overall curve gets steeper as you go higher up. But it's also the case that there are wild fluctuations from table to table at any level. I have no doubt that you can find 15/30 games as soft as 3/6 games and 1/2 games that are as tough to beat as some 5/10 games. Remmeber that the players, not the stakes, determine the quality of a game.

[Greg J]

Nanolimit games do not have rake. That will add about 2 bb/100 to yr winrate right there. Downswings are much rarer there, but they do happen.

As for difficulty levels, the .25/.5 game at Paradise is, IMO, comparable to the .5/1 game at Party. It's hard to quantify game diificulty though, since it's mostly subjective evaluation. I guess if someone wanted to take the time they could dig through PT stats.

[ckmj23]

For some reason I find 1/2 Full Easier than .50/1.00.

My BB/100 reflects this as well. I have no idea why this is, perhaps because aggression is paid off more at 1/2??

As long as you feel comfortable, keep doing what your doing. The downswing will come I promise you that. Just as I began to dabble in 2/4 I went on -130BB 10 day downswing.

Small world, I live in the same city as you.

CK

[atnels]

The lowest I've played is .25/.50, but I personally feel UB .25/.5 was a tougher game than UB .5/1 (and UB .5/1 is tougher than Party .5/1). This is speaking in terms of BB/100.

A lot depends on how you define "tough." I can sit at a table of weak-tights and steal blinds all day long and win with pure aggression - so in that sense the game is "easy," but I might only average 1-2BB/100. If you're at a table of calling stations and LAGs, the game might be "tougher" in the sense you need to make more and better decisions, but you can do a lot better than 1-2BB/100.

[ckmj23]

Does weak-tight exist at .05/.10 and .25/.50?

[Greg J]

[ QUOTE ]
Does weak-tight exist at .05/.10 and .25/.50?

[/ QUOTE ]
Players? YES! Games? They are a rare animal, but occassionally the correct mix of players can make for such a game.

[Downrock]

I find weak-tight players pretty rare at this level, the most common are the LAGs. Thanks for the replies guys. As to the other question, does anyone think it's really possible to run well for months on end, fooling yourself into thinking you're a winning player?

[ckmj23]

Post some of your stats/hands.

It depends how many hands you've played, etc.

[rafct]

I started with 0.05/0.10 too. But played at the Prima sites, and first of all Pacific.
Pacific 0.05/0.10 is the closest to play money, but not the same as it.
Prima 0.05/0.10 is harder than pacific but still very easy.
0.10/0.20 is harder, but also great. At 0.25/0.50 then I felt the players are better, few to the flop, I would win less with my big hands and get trapped a lot more.

[Downrock]

Unfortunately I haven't invested in PT yet. That's top priority when i move up to .5/1 though, which should be in the next couple days.

[Simplistic]

perhaps i'm a minority here but i jumped right to 2/4. at the B&M i play 3/6 so why not play a similar limit instead of the micros?

i've been playing online poker since last summer and am primarily a tournament player, although that has changed, i decided to sign up for rakeback @ UB and jumped into 2/4. so far over a micro-sample size i'm crushing the game. i see no reason for that to change as there are many tight-passives, some tight-aggressives, and a few LAGS. but all yo ugotta do is re-raise those lags to put them in their place and they don't bother you too much anymore /images/graemlins/smile.gif