Pacific vs Party

[DeepCroak]

I'm a lowly $.50/$1 player, got maybe 10K hands on Party, winning maybe 2BB/100. Trying to build my roll from very little. I know that's not a huge sample size, but it's all the data I have.

Anyway, so after the last Party reload cleared I decided to whore around a bit, and signed up to play Pacifics first timers bonus. BW said Pacific's even softer than Party (is that possible?). But I'm getting killed at Pacific (roughly -6BB/100). (I suppose that's what I deserve for whoring around, but I digress).

As far as I can tell, both games seem about the same. Many to the flop, players playing loosely preflop and too far postflop. I don't have a lot of hands at Pacific (1K?) so my results could simply be normal variance. I don't want to be a results-oriented thinker, but the trouble is, I'm not statistically competent enough to judge when "its just variance" becomes denial of evidence that I'm in over my head.

Any opinions on Party stacks up against Pacific in game play? Did I inadvertantly get into a harder game? or maybe one that requires some adjustments to my style? or am I simply suffering the bi*chy side of Lady Variance?

Thanks for your opinions!

[bkholdem]

Why don't you go check out the internet bounus forum. There are threads there and people that can direct in building your bankroll at various sites. I think it's a particularly good idea for someone with a very small bankroll.

You're observations are right on, in my humble opinion, as I have just done the reverse. I bought handgrabber PT but it wouldn't work for me so I finally had enough. Without PT my game won't improve so I joined Party.

I think when people bash the fish at Pacific they misunderstand something. They are not quitter, get run over fish. They're cap all the betting rounds with my 2/4 offsuit fish. They're crazy and very hard to deal with. In the end, at .50, I was winning, but it took awhile.

The other major issue, is that Pacific has .05/.10 and .25/.50 games which Party does not. This means that all the TV fans will play at .50 on Party so .50 and 1/2 at Party will, naturally, be far weaker than Pacific. As for the upper strata of both sites, I have nothing meaningful to say as I'm terrified of those guys.

[LImitPlayer]

The only place that is fishier then Party is........

Pacific

However due to a few problems such as no multi-tabling and no Rakeback I dont play there.

[HesseJam]

[ QUOTE ]
or am I simply suffering the bi*chy side of Lady Variance?

Thanks for your opinions!

[/ QUOTE ]

This is probably it. -6/100 over 1K in a loose game is quite possible for a winning player. This is 60 BB or 4 hands more than your fair share where you've been miracle rivered by donks.

[HesseJam]

BTW, winning consistantly 2BB/100 at .5/1 is nothing to be shy about. The rake at Party is huge, that means you beat the game at about 6/100 before rake.

10K is too early to say something about your real winrate though, but you already know this.

[timprov]

It's been nine months or so since I've been to Pacific, so my experience may be off, but I think the .5/1 games between the two sites are pretty comparable. The reason Pacific players have a reputation for being so bad is the higher limits -- at Party, the level of play changes between .5/1 and 3/6. At Pacific, it doesn't.