PDA

View Full Version : how good is your average winning 109er???


10-25-2005, 06:37 AM
i recently moved up to the 109s and righ now im gettin my balls handed to me....im running real bad too....whats the difference between a good 55er (17+roi) and a winning 109er(10+roi) in terms of skills......is the skill level that far apart....im getting to bubble play too often to have a less than 30% itm.....any advice adapting to the tighter players and to the higher number of players at higher levels

tigerite
10-25-2005, 06:39 AM
How sure are you that you're 17+ ROI at the $55s? What is your sample size (at both 55s and 109s) ?

Big Limpin'
10-25-2005, 06:43 AM
folding your first 30 hands, then going apeshit... wont cut it anymore.

10-25-2005, 06:46 AM
at the 55s im actually 18.8 at 1600sngs.....and at the 109s i have only 100 or so(negative roi /images/graemlins/crazy.gif).....but i feel that the 109s are a lot harder...i can sit down at 4 55s and have confidence that i can win cash in at least 2 of them or all them....but at the 109s...i hate to say this, but it scares me a little....should i just play through it.....and see how the next 100 or so goes before i think about a drop to the 55s

10-25-2005, 06:50 AM
[ QUOTE ]
folding your first 30 hands, then going apeshit... wont cut it anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]
i always play everyhand and build a lot of my huge leads in the early levels..and in the later levels i always played it smart...not too many crazy maniac moves

AbelM
10-25-2005, 06:57 AM
If you play like that you should be fine in the 215's.

10-25-2005, 06:59 AM
r u being sarcastic...if ur not thank you, but i know i cant soooo yea....

AbelM
10-25-2005, 07:03 AM
Well basically you said that you play good early and smart late, so that should be a recipe for succes i think.

10-25-2005, 07:08 AM
better question: are there things i should be doing at the 109s that i didnt need to do at the 55s to win....any new tricks i should know...whats the biggest change in play from the 55s to the 109s

Double Down
10-25-2005, 07:10 AM
Do you multitable? If so, you might want to cut down on how many you play at a time when starting at a higher level. I find that when my stats start to droop it tends to be from getting into too much of an autopilot way of playing, which comes from not paying attention to the action at the table, which comes from playing too many at a time.
I haven't played the 100s in a while, I play the 200s mostly, and I gotta tell you, I think the play up there stinks as well! At every table there seem to be 2 or 3 donks just ready to call an early game pf allin with AJ. If you think you can afford it, you might want to just play the 215s because I really don't feel like the skill level is that much better than the 100s. It's certainly not that much better than the 55s, which is what I played a bunch of recently before starting up again with the 200s.

So I'd say just play one or two at a time, pay a lot of attention, take notes on the players, be sure you're being good and aggressive on the bubble, play the 215s if you can afford it, and I think you'll see your numbers improve.

And for what it's worth, don't be sweating it after 100. Yes, play a couple hundred more before questioning your game.

I know that people like to multitable, but at the higher levels ABC poker just doesn't cut it anymore. You need to know how the 2 players on your left are playing so that you can know what sort of hands they'll call with late. You need to know if the guy who suddenly has 3500 is a good player or some donk who got really lucky. When playing too many tables, we don't tend to pick up on these things.
I find a DRASTIC improvement in my game and my results of when I'm playing 2 at a time compared to 4 or more. In fact, after 1000 sngs at the 215s, my results are right around break even for the 200 or so where I was played 4 or more. But for the other 800, when I was really concentrating and playing my A game, playing only 1 or 2 at a time, there is not even a group of 100 where I'm down, and I've got a 15% ROI. (yes, I know 1000 still isn't hitting long run. You get my point though.)
Good luck and let us know how it goes.

10-25-2005, 07:19 AM
great post.......and long....but great and very informative and a picker uper.....i think im just gonna pull it through the 109s...i cant afford the 215s yet...i like to have 100x buyin for the stake im playing....and yes i do play 4-6 at a time...im going to give the 2tablin for a run.....i just won one as i was reading your post.....thx again....also...how long ago were you playing the 55s??....

Michael C.
10-25-2005, 07:48 AM
I think sometimes it just takes a bit to adjust mentally to playing at higher stakes. I remember when I first moved from the 55s to the 109s and then when I added the 215s, I always felt intimidated at the new level at first, and couldn't play my normal game. I don't mean to imply that I'm anything that special or that the higher levels aren't tougher, but I think that once you relax and play your normal game, you will probably be fine. There are some good players in the 109s, but there are also enough bad ones there that if you have an open mind and read this forum you can beat it.

Double Down
10-25-2005, 07:51 AM
Last year, I played about 500 215's over the course of 8 or 10 months with an ROI of about 15%. I then played about 50 where I got killed, brought me down to about 9%. Because of that, but mostly other reasons (bankroll, playing in casinos more, got busy with work, etc) I took a break for a while, probably 3 or 4 months.

A couple months ago, I started up again this time playing 55s with a new vigor and appreciation for the late pushing game, played about 400 with an ROI of 10% and found there as well that playing 1 or 2 at a time is just better for me. I decided to start up again with the 215s and have been rolling ever since, playing another 500 with an ROI of 15%. I only play 2 at a time, and try to play between 20-25 a day.

Those who multitable put a lot of emphasis on the fact that it increases hourly rate, and yes, that's what it's all about. But always keep in mind that the closer your advantage is to 0, the larger of a bankroll you need because your ROR increases as does your variance. I know a lot of 2+2ers would fall asleep from the boredom of playing only 2 at a time, but I think they'd be surprised at how much info is givcn away at the tables that they're missing.

I think a good way to tell if you're paying enough attention is if you're able to put a note on at least half of your opponents during the course of a game.
Yeah, sorry for the lengthy post before. I guess I'm compensating. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

tigerite
10-25-2005, 07:53 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
folding your first 30 hands, then going apeshit... wont cut it anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]
i always play everyhand and build a lot of my huge leads in the early levels..and in the later levels i always played it smart...not too many crazy maniac moves

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not a good strategy.

10-25-2005, 07:57 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
folding your first 30 hands, then going apeshit... wont cut it anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]
i always play everyhand and build a lot of my huge leads in the early levels..and in the later levels i always played it smart...not too many crazy maniac moves

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not a good strategy.

[/ QUOTE ]
why isnt this a good strategy....in most cases im a huge favorite when i put my money into the pot when the blinds are low
please explain why you and others dont play hands in the early levels of play

Melchiades
10-25-2005, 08:04 AM
[ QUOTE ]
in most cases im a huge favorite when i put my money into the pot when the blinds are low

[/ QUOTE ]
Rigged.

Double Down
10-25-2005, 08:05 AM
I'm with you effin. People undervalue the profitability of having 1500 or more by level 3, especially when you think about the fact that at every table, there are a few donks who are ready to give their money away, and if you don't get it, someone else will. Folding until the later levels and then pushbotting increases variance and takes away the poker aspect of the game.
One could argue that it increases your ITM finishes because of the reduced chance of early bust outs, but I would argue that it makes it even harder to get ITM because often 2 players at your table HAVE doubled up and they both now have decent chances to get 2 of the 3 ITM spots.
If anything, it decreases your chances of getting 1st.

tigerite
10-25-2005, 08:06 AM
1500 by level 3 doesn't even make much difference compared to 1000, you aren't even close to 25% more likely to reach the money, so what's the point?

This has been discussed so many times before.

tigerite
10-25-2005, 08:07 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Folding until the later levels and then pushbotting increases variance and takes away the poker aspect of the game.
One could argue that it increases your ITM finishes because of the reduced chance of early bust outs, but I would argue that it makes it even harder to get ITM because often 2 players at your table HAVE doubled up and they both now have decent chances to get 2 of the 3 ITM spots.
If anything, it decreases your chances of getting 1st.

[/ QUOTE ]

Utter crap.

10-25-2005, 08:12 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Folding until the later levels and then pushbotting increases variance and takes away the poker aspect of the game.
One could argue that it increases your ITM finishes because of the reduced chance of early bust outs, but I would argue that it makes it even harder to get ITM because often 2 players at your table HAVE doubled up and they both now have decent chances to get 2 of the 3 ITM spots.
If anything, it decreases your chances of getting 1st.

[/ QUOTE ]

Utter crap.

[/ QUOTE ]
how do you play...do you just fold and only play kk or aa until level 3or4.....and what stakes do you play for and whats ur roi at

tigerite
10-25-2005, 08:13 AM
No of course I don't play only AA or KK but I don't play every bloody hand either. I play decent hands with position and odds, and look to raise with good hands (not necessarily the best) in late position and limpers.

It also is very dependent on the table. Some I will play AJs in early position for instance, other more aggressive ones I will not, because obviously, these hands cannot stand a raise and what's the point in limping, if I'll just have to fold and lose 15 chips?

I play $55s and do very well thanks.

Melchiades
10-25-2005, 08:16 AM
[ QUOTE ]
what stakes do you play for and whats ur roi at

[/ QUOTE ]
Yawn...

10-25-2005, 08:17 AM
[ QUOTE ]
No of course I don't play only AA or KK but I don't play every bloody hand either. I play decent hands with position and odds, and look to raise with good hands (not necessarily the best) in late position and limpers.

I play $55s and do very well thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]
well then ive totally misunderstood your prior responses...i also play tight hands and raise in position....i was under the impression that you just sat out till or only played the nuts in the early stages...
i also playd and still play the 55s...we polly play similar styles..

tigerite
10-25-2005, 08:18 AM
But that's not what you said

[ QUOTE ]

i always play everyhand and build a lot of my huge leads in the early levels


[/ QUOTE ]

10-25-2005, 08:20 AM
i meant i pay attention to everyone of my hands....i fold a lot of them.....

tigerite
10-25-2005, 08:22 AM
Ah, well, in that case yes I agree. Misunderstood the meaning, I thought you meant you literally played almost every hand. Mind if it's something crap like 94 off I'll often just click fold in the preaction buttons, lol.

Double Down
10-25-2005, 08:24 AM
This is what I do too. I wasn't trying to give the impression that one should limp with any 2 early on. I was merely arguing against the idea of playing really tightly preflop early on, not wanting to get involved in pots. This seems to be the preference of a lot of 2+2 SNGers because they're playing 10 at a time and usually just wait until they have a raising hand before they play.

And at the 215s, having 1500 by level 3 or 4 DOES make a huge difference, because by then you have a lot of stacks of 700-800 that you can push around.


In the future, I urge you to elaborate on your argument instead of just saying "utter crap." We're all here to learn and improve our game. If a subject has already been discussed to death, then I'm sorry that I didn't know about it, but every time I feel like responding to a post, I can't be expected to research it in the archives to make sure that I'm not repeating something from the past.

tigerite
10-25-2005, 08:27 AM
Well, doubling up or whatever early on helps there's no doubt about that. But you can still run into a short stack with AA/KK/QQ late on and have it screw up your ITM/HU/winning chances just as well as you can pick up AA/KK/QQ late on with a shorter stack, double up a few times and go on to win.

I don't think there's that much correlation between going into level 4 with 1500 and level 4 with 800 having as huge a difference as you think to winning. It depends more on how you play the stack in both situations. And how the cards fall naturally.

zambonidrivr
10-25-2005, 08:34 AM
maybe this is the problem

10-25-2005, 08:36 AM
[ QUOTE ]
i always play everyhand and build a lot of my huge leads in the early levels..and in the later levels i always played it smart...

[/ QUOTE ]

Stanzee, is that you?

Double Down
10-25-2005, 08:37 AM
Agreed, of course it's more about how you play your stack, be it 800 or 1500, but all things being equal, 1500 you have so much more room to do things. You have more options as to what to play, how much to raise to, how often you need to steal, etc. And until it gets to level 8 where the blinds are 200/400 and there is little fold equity, I think it gives you a distinct advantage, more so than just the fact that mathematically having more chips means more $.

Big Limpin'
10-25-2005, 08:38 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think there's that much correlation between going into level 4 with 1500 and level 4 with 800 having as huge a difference as you think to winning.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am baffled. What? I mean, seriously...WHAT?!?!?!? /images/graemlins/confused.gif /images/graemlins/confused.gif /images/graemlins/confused.gif /images/graemlins/confused.gif /images/graemlins/confused.gif

psyduck
10-25-2005, 01:44 PM
This thread is all sorts of funny.

Mr_J
10-25-2005, 03:19 PM
"So I'd say just play one or two at a time"

"I know that people like to multitable, but at the higher levels ABC poker just doesn't cut it anymore."

Some people would prefer to make as much multitabling lower buyins, and experience much smaller bankroll fluctuations.

handsome
10-25-2005, 03:27 PM
[ QUOTE ]
1500 by level 3 doesn't even make much difference compared to 1000, you aren't even close to 25% more likely to reach the money, so what's the point?

This has been discussed so many times before.

[/ QUOTE ]

tigerite is the truth.

10-25-2005, 04:03 PM
I recently dropped from 109's to 55's. This was somewhat difficult transition at first. IE at 109's I dont expect my AK to meet up with 2 pair on a A 6 3 flop! I played a slightly more passive yet not quite as tight 109 game. The biggest difference does seem to be the bluff frequency and the " how on earth do you play those cards " in the 55's. The 109 bubble play is a killer!! Had a positive ROI on 109's but to large a variance for the roll I was carrying.

Bonafone
10-25-2005, 04:14 PM
Not that good! I would say I'm about the average winning 109'er and I definately have room to improve. Just be confident, and practice a little table selection and you should be fine if you can beat the 55's for more than 15%.