How are the 33s these days?

[1C5]

Well I have played 1000 or more 22s now (Can't be sure since Eurobet sometimes decides not to send HH for months at a time) and am ready to start adding some 33s into the mix. ROI at the 22s is close to 25% so I am confident I have the game to beat the 33s but just not sure for how much.

I know some have skipped them and jumped to the 55s but I feel like I should conquer the 33s first.

[Seth Money]

The 33's are good right now. I've been playing them for a bout a month now and just recently 4 tabling them. There are a lot of regulars, I generally play at night so... I'm not sure what time you usually play and if that has a major difference.

[The Don]

Well my ROI after 1600 $22s was 22.5%
My ROI after 300 33s is 1% (after dropping 30 buyins right off the bat)

Obviously I have been running bad and the $33s are very beatable. The rumors are true though, way more multi tablers (I have played with a few players 20+ times in this 300... unheard of at the $22s) and everyone seems to be at least fairly competent on the bubble. I prefer the early play in the 33s though, everyone's actions are far more transparent. I have definitely stacked more players per game at the 33s than at the 22s. The downside is the bubble play. WAY harder to find spots at the 33s and play that I would consider to be over aggressive at the 22s is justified at the 33s.

My goal was 20% after 1000 but I think at this point 15% is more realisitic and very doable.

Im interested to hear people's response to this as well. I recently started playing 2 33s and 2 22s instead of the 4 22s I had been playing the past two weeks or so. I'm running well at them and will probably be playing all 33s soon. In my small sample size(50 or so 33s in the past three days) I have seen very little that would lead me to believe these are any less profitable in terms of ROI than the 22s.

[Mr_J]

Don, maybe you're just not a 20%+ EV player, and 1c5 maybe that 8% 'correction' is just around the corner.

Well that's what I got told by people who knew nothing about my skill level and just made assumptions /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[fisherman112]

im really amazed that people play 33s. you get 25% more chips in the 55s, the competition is not that much harder. the extra chips are a HUGE bonus for players with good bubble play.

also moving up allows you to analyze leaks in your game when better players exploit them, so you'll soon notice what you're doing wrong. and with an ROI of 25 in 22s, there have to be a couple.

[Myst]

[ QUOTE ]
im really amazed that people play 33s. you get 25% more chips in the 55s

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously you dont play the 55s then. You get 20% more chips in the 55s then the 33s.

And contrary to popular belief, the 55s are harder than the 33s.

[Seth Money]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
im really amazed that people play 33s. you get 25% more chips in the 55s

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously you dont play the 55s then. You get 20% more chips in the 55s then the 33s.

And contrary to popular belief, the 55s are harder than the 33s.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good call. I agree, i have been slowly integrating the 50's into the rotation. My ROI compared to that of the 30's is definetely lower.

Why insult his math? He means you get 25% more chips in the 55s than you get in the 33s. 1.25x800=1000

[Myst]

[ QUOTE ]
Why insult his math? He means you get 25% more chips in the 55s than you get in the 33s. 1.25x800=1000

[/ QUOTE ]

Oops. Lol. I was doing 200/1000, not 200/800. Made the comparison the other way around.

[AliasMrJones]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
im really amazed that people play 33s. you get 25% more chips in the 55s

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously you dont play the 55s then. You get 20% more chips in the 55s then the 33s.

And contrary to popular belief, the 55s are harder than the 33s.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummm, no you don't. You get 25% more chips. 800 / 200 = 25%. But, the 55's are definitely harder than the 33's. There is a reason to beat the 33's before you tackle the 55's. I'd say the largest difference in average player ability I've seen yet is 33->55. (I've played 6-55's so can't say anything about the higher games.)

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd say the largest difference in average player ability I've seen yet is 33->55. (I've played 6-55's so can't say anything about the higher games.)

[/ QUOTE ]

The jump from 55->109 is MUCH bigger. IMO.

eastbay

[Vetstadium]

I 8 table the 33's around 15% ROI(also while 8 tabling usually in one multi table $33 at Ultimate as well). I have been slowly jumping to $55's bigger swings in bankroll I am not that comfortable with yet. The $33's winnable though at night see absolutley horrible plays, improper bettting, sets get paid off on unraised pots etc.

[fisherman112]

800 chips/4 = 200, which is 25%
800 + 200 = 1000

[fisherman112]

people play much better in the early portions of the tournaments in the 55s and 109s than the lower buy-ins, but it's really not until the 215s that you see a real jump in play at the high blind levels.

[The Don]

[ QUOTE ]
Don, maybe you're just not a 20%+ EV player, and 1c5 maybe that 8% 'correction' is just around the corner.

Well that's what I got told by people who knew nothing about my skill level and just made assumptions /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

If you reviewed my HHs I'm sure you would agree with me (not to mention 300 and WAY different than 1350)... The problem has been that I have been losing a TON of huge pots where I get my chips in with a big edge. A few more firsts would do a lot to boost my ROI. Also... it is a whopping 5% now after the last 2 sets /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[kyro]

good

[Shillx]

There is an amazing amount of luck in these things. Are the 33s tougher then the 22s? Yeah probably, but it takes huge samples to know for sure. There are a lot of problems with doing statistical analysis on SNGs (mainly due to the fact that distributions are tetra-modal and not normal). Anyway here are my numbers....

22's:
ROI = 13.7%
n = 398

33's:
ROI = 2.9%
n = 371

s(pooled) = 1.56 buy-ins

So on the surface, you might say that the 33's are a lot tougher. But if you run a 2 Sample t-test for ROI22's > ROI33's you get a p-value of about .17, so this could easily be explained by varience. It would take a big effin sample to show that the 33s are tougher, and I'm not quite there yet. So at this point all I can say is "I don't know".

Brad

[Mr_J]

I'm not going to disagree because the same thing happened to me. I'm just having a go at all the "good results = variance, bad result = lack of skill" posters.

[Myst]

[ QUOTE ]
(I've played 6-55's so can't say anything about the higher games.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, and that makes you the expert?

Dont even PRETEND you know what you are talking about. 6 55s? Ha!

[Mr_J]

I think he means $6s to $55s...

[Myst]

Ahh give my brain a break. Im tired.

[junkmail3]

In July I played 33s, in August I'm playing 55s.

In July I didn't have to think and got to watch a lot of movies.

In August I have more headaches.

[ZeroPointMachine]

I've played about 700 22's with a 28% ROI. I've been 3/4 tabling the 33's for about 300 with an 8% ROI. Started out strong but I've had a bad case of "IT" for the last 200 games. You will definately see more multi table players and the bubble play is a little more competant. I've found a few leaks in my bubble play since moving to the 30's. But, there are still plenty of terrible players (BB spite calls with 34 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif). My bankroll is fine and I don't need immediate income, so I'm committed to staying here and working on my game until my ROI gets up to 20%+ or "IT" kills me.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
Well I have played 1000 or more 22s now (Can't be sure since Eurobet sometimes decides not to send HH for months at a time) and am ready to start adding some 33s into the mix. ROI at the 22s is close to 25% so I am confident I have the game to beat the 33s but just not sure for how much.

I know some have skipped them and jumped to the 55s but I feel like I should conquer the 33s first.

[/ QUOTE ]

IC5, mix in your $33s on the weekends first. Or any time you think the games are fishier than normal.

This point about difference in levels has been discussed ad nauseum. In fact, I think there's a link in the FAQ about this. Anyway, I'm confident there's more postflop play involved in the 1000 chip games. If you're considering a move up, the primary reasons to consider not moving are pretty simple:

1) Doesn't fit into your bankroll guidelines
2) You understand, and know what kind of variance this game can bring, and a 30-50 downswing on the $55s is too much to stomach at this stage of your poker playing.
3) You want to progress up the buyins in a logical order, as OP is suggesting.
4) You crush some other lower level game, and you're comfortable staying there.

Good luck at the tables...
Scuba

[quinn]

This has been discussed many times, and a lot of people think about this the wrong way.

Face this fact:

If you play 1000 SNGs at the 20s for 20% ROI and then you play 300 SNGs at the 30s for -10% ROI, this does not mean that the 30s are that much harder than the 20s. In fact, it is well possible that they are about the same difficulty (although I am 95% sure that the 30s are harder, just from experience)

If you want to make decisions on the difficulty of each individual level, you're going to have to play a bunch and pay attention to the quality of play at and after the bubble (this is where most of the money is made). If everyone seems aggressive at the bubble, then the level probably isn't easy to beat. If you often feel yourself dominating the table at the bubble, then the level is probably really easy to beat.

[ QUOTE ]
Don, maybe you're just not a 20%+ EV player, and 1c5 maybe that 8% 'correction' is just around the corner.

Well that's what I got told by people who knew nothing about my skill level and just made assumptions

[/ QUOTE ]

Fix your avatar, you will get more respect /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
This has been discussed many times, and a lot of people think about this the wrong way.

Face this fact:

If you play 1000 SNGs at the 20s for 20% ROI and then you play 300 SNGs at the 30s for -10% ROI, this does not mean that the 30s are that much harder than the 20s. In fact, it is well possible that they are about the same difficulty (although I am 95% sure that the 30s are harder, just from experience)

If you want to make decisions on the difficulty of each individual level, you're going to have to play a bunch and pay attention to the quality of play at and after the bubble (this is where most of the money is made). If everyone seems aggressive at the bubble, then the level probably isn't easy to beat. If you often feel yourself dominating the table at the bubble, then the level is probably really easy to beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Regardless, OP clearly has enough sample size, and bankroll from his $22 results to move up. Enough said.

[AleoMagus]

In my opinion, the biggest obsatcle to overcome when rising up the levels is NOT tougher opposition. I hear so often how the 20s are so much tougher than the 10s and the 30s are so much tougher than the 20s, etc...

Yes, I know this is true to a degree, but I really think this gets exaggerated because people so often tend to lose when they move up. The thing is, these losses are not always due to tougher competition, but often are induced by our own discomfort and unease with higher stakes.

Not to mention the fact that so often we experience (say) a 10 buy-in downswing at our 'usual' stakes, but just stick it out and make it all back plus more. At the higher limits, players tend to panic and drop levels again, and after even ridiculuosly small samples proclaim "that level was just way too tough"

I said it once long ago, but I'll say it again here...

your primary concern should not be whether or not the higher stakes are different, but whether or not YOU will be different at those stakes.

Regards
Brad S

[Slim Pickens]

[ QUOTE ]
(mainly due to the fact that distributions are tetra-modal and not normal).

[/ QUOTE ]

This has been discussed at length on this forum. Although the distribution isn't strictly normal, the results approach a normal distribution by taking fairly small groups, say 25 tournaments at a time. These will be normally distributed.

As for the OP, I can't say I've noticed a difference playing 33's over the last month after moving up from the 22's, but I didn't notice a difference between the 11's and 22's when I made that move. I've been playing some 11's lately while adding tables and now it seems the 11's are played by people who enjoy moving the slider bar to random places and clicking "Bet" at random times more than they enjoy having money. Perspective I guess. You're forced to improve against better competition.

[ripped]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
im really amazed that people play 33s. you get 25% more chips in the 55s

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously you dont play the 55s then. You get 20% more chips in the 55s then the 33s.

And contrary to popular belief, the 55s are harder than the 33s.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ripped]

This was an excellent post and you are 100% correct.

[The Don]

[ QUOTE ]
In my opinion, the biggest obsatcle to overcome when rising up the levels is NOT tougher opposition. I hear so often how the 20s are so much tougher than the 10s and the 30s are so much tougher than the 20s, etc...

Yes, I know this is true to a degree, but I really think this gets exaggerated because people so often tend to lose when they move up. The thing is, these losses are not always due to tougher competition, but often are induced by our own discomfort and unease with higher stakes.

Not to mention the fact that so often we experience (say) a 10 buy-in downswing at our 'usual' stakes, but just stick it out and make it all back plus more. At the higher limits, players tend to panic and drop levels again, and after even ridiculuosly small samples proclaim "that level was just way too tough"

I said it once long ago, but I'll say it again here...

your primary concern should not be whether or not the higher stakes are different, but whether or not YOU will be different at those stakes.

Regards
Brad S

[/ QUOTE ]

Eh... I don't think many are intimidated by a mere 50% increase (20s to 30s) in stakes. I dropped ~30 buyins over my first 150 30s and it didn't affect me emotionally or hurt my play (I had 3-4 ~25 buyin downswings at the 22s... not too much of a difference).

A good point you made though is that you DO have to get lucky to successfully move up in stakes at a fast pace. There was a good discussion about this in the 'High Stakes NL/PL' forum about theBruiser. His roll dwindled all the way down to a little over a hundred dollars and he has since managed to build it to well into the six figures over the past year. Not taking anything away from his ability but the big names in that forum (El Diablo etc...) noted that he had to be IMMENSELY lucky to move up in stakes so rapidly.

There are exceptions though. I have played under my bankroll for a while and it was large enough so that when I did hit the downswing, I wasn't too concerned about moving down in stakes. Additionally, I was confident enough in myself as a +EV player. Had this have been at the 55s it definetly would have been a different story.

[Vetstadium]

"your primary concern should not be whether or not the higher stakes are different, but whether or not YOU will be different at those stakes."

VERY good point I am very comfortable at the $33's when I jump to the $55's get a little nervous don't feel I am as comfortable therefore my game not as good. Don't know why this is only $22 more a tourn and I play tons just the way it is I guess.

I think the jump from 33 to 55 is unique though...at least on party. Not only is it a pretty big jump in the buy-in amount but the starting chips increase by 25%. You need to adjust to a different pace as well as different stakes.

[tigerite]

[ QUOTE ]
I've played about 700 22's with a 28% ROI. I've been 3/4 tabling the 33's for about 300 with an 8% ROI. Started out strong but I've had a bad case of "IT" for the last 200 games. You will definately see more multi table players and the bubble play is a little more competant. I've found a few leaks in my bubble play since moving to the 30's. But, there are still plenty of terrible players (BB spite calls with 34 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif). My bankroll is fine and I don't need immediate income, so I'm committed to staying here and working on my game until my ROI gets up to 20%+ or "IT" kills me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whilst this is true the ITM play is absolutely atrocious, from my experience.