Are Party 100s actualy tougher than we think ?

[The once and future king]

I only ask this because I have just read another post by a respected poster about hitting their first major losing streak after moving up to the 100s.

I didnt realy know what it was to take a beating till I moved upto the 1OOs, having worked my way up the SNG ladder from 10s over a year and half.

Im not sure if the 100s are much tougher, its just that I keep reading these horror stories, and cant help thinking if there is some causal factor.

[DalaiLama]

Not really. There's a jump from 50 to 100, but the significant jump is from 100 to 200. I have a theory on this I'll expand on later.

[The once and future king]

Well that is what I thought all ready if you see what I mean. Its just all the I moved upto the hundreds and then got wacked posts have made me wonder if there isnt more to this issue.

[Mez]

I've moved up similarly, from the $5 tourneys to the $50s and now dabbling in the $100s. They are tougher IMO, but - Knock on wood -I've been doing ok in them. Maybe I've just been lucky with the tables I've been on.

[Grivan]

Have you made both of these jumps before you make this comment? The jump between the 50s and the 100s is way bigger then any other jump. In fact the 200s might just be easier then the 100s they aren't all that much harder in any case.

[Hickboy]

I play in the 100s a lot. The games are much tighter than the lower limits in my opinion. Often times towards level 5 and 6, there are 5+ players left, which turns it into a crapshoot.

Good luck [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[MrX]

[ QUOTE ]
Not really. There's a jump from 50 to 100, but the significant jump is from 100 to 200. I have a theory on this I'll expand on later.

[/ QUOTE ]

I personally am looking forward to when you decide to expand on this thought.

MRX

[Irieguy]

I don't know, because I can't play enough of them to find out. After a month of rebuilding my bankroll from my last attempt at moving up, I finaly got enough to try again. I played 4 $109's last night and finished OOTM all 4. That's the third time in a row I've tried to move up, and gone either 0 for 4 or 0 for 8.

My ITM/ROI numbers are good enough at the 55's for me to be inclined to think that I just keep getting unlucky. What would be helpful is if somebody could respond to this thread with results from 500+ SNGs at both the 55's and 109's, so I can see an example of the magnitude of difference between the two.

Irieguy

[Gramps]

If you don't have a fat bankroll (like 5k) to play the 100's, and you multi-table, work them in slowly (1 to go along with your 50s). Good way to gain some experience/confidence at a new level without playing above your BR. Heck, if I'm getting my arse beaten up at my current level, I still drop down for a while to lick my wounds, even with a sufficient bankroll to stay where I'm at.

...but if you're taking a stab at 100's only on a short bankroll, you have a very real ROR. That's bad poker, and if things start going against you, it can only further affect one's game for the worse (no matter how determined one is not to tilt, etc.). No shame in working into a new level slowly - minimizing your downside risk is good investing (which is all poker is for a winning player). It's a good long-run exercise in discipline too that can only pay dividends down the road.

If you're crushing the 50's, you will do very well in the 100's in the long run - just always respect the BR requirements and inherent variance of the game.

[eastbay]

I've played 1000+ 55s and 200+ 109s. My long-term ROI in the 55s is about 35%. My ROI in the $109s is 2%. YMMV.

eastbay