Re: 100 NL 6max vs. 50 NL 6max
 

Since when did he say anything about playing professional?

Re: 100 NL 6max vs. 50 NL 6max
 

he didn't, i did. I said one of the differences between 100NL and 50NL is that at the higher stakes you'll every once in a while run into a player who is very good, this may be because playing professionally at 100NL is possible while at 50NL it probably isn't.

Re: 100 NL 6max vs. 50 NL 6max
 

[ QUOTE ]
he didn't, i did. I said one of the differences between 100NL and 50NL is that at the higher stakes you'll every once in a while run into a player who is very good, this may be because playing professionally at 100NL is possible while at 50NL it probably isn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

it's possible to play NL50 professionally, it's possible to play NL100 professionally, but nobody who treats poker as a "full-time job" is going to play either of them for very long.

a good player can easily make 30+/hr multitabling NL50, i'd consider that a decent wage. of course, if you're good enough to do that you aren't staying at NL50 for very long if you put a significant part of your winnings into building your bankroll as any reasonable pro would.

there are probably a lot of part-time "pro" college students playing 100 NL (who may be as good or better as people making a "real" living), but basically zero full time pros who arent students.

Re: 100 NL 6max vs. 50 NL 6max
 

[ QUOTE ]
For example if you win 9ptbb at 50s, I am not surprised if you could only win 5ptbb at 100s simply because people don't pay you off like 50s.

[/ QUOTE ]

does anyone else think this is just plain wrong? i would be VERY surprised if someone won 9BB/100 for 50k hands at NL50 and then won 5BB/100 for another 50k at NL100 while playing "just as well."

Re: 100 NL 6max vs. 50 NL 6max
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For example if you win 9ptbb at 50s, I am not surprised if you could only win 5ptbb at 100s simply because people don't pay you off like 50s.

[/ QUOTE ]

does anyone else think this is just plain wrong? i would be VERY surprised if someone won 9BB/100 for 50k hands at NL50 and then won 5BB/100 for another 50k at NL100 while playing "just as well."

[/ QUOTE ]

Just base on my observation that while alot of people could sustain winrate >10ptbb/100 at 50 level, not a lot of people could do so at 100 Level.

Also I did not take into account that you gain exp after 50k hands.

I could be off here.

Re: 100 NL 6max vs. 50 NL 6max
 

[ QUOTE ]
but basically zero full time pros who arent students.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is wrong

Re: 100 NL 6max vs. 50 NL 6max
 

In my limited experience at the 100NL i noticed that i get paid off more on hands like top pair top kicker, especially if i've been playing pretty aggressive at the table for a while. Guys seem to look you more with middle pair than they would at 50NL. At 50 though it seems like people will go broke with top pair and medium to good kicker. Its like they can't fathom that two pair, a set, or an overpair are possible. Didn't really see this same chip spewage at 100NL.

Re: 100 NL 6max vs. 50 NL 6max
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For example if you win 9ptbb at 50s, I am not surprised if you could only win 5ptbb at 100s simply because people don't pay you off like 50s.

[/ QUOTE ]

does anyone else think this is just plain wrong? i would be VERY surprised if someone won 9BB/100 for 50k hands at NL50 and then won 5BB/100 for another 50k at NL100 while playing "just as well."

[/ QUOTE ]

I found the 100NL to be just about the same as 50NL. If fact, my winrate increased a little (i know small sample--shut it!).

Even if the players to play slightly better, which I do not think they do, the amount of experience you gain from 10-20K hands that you might play at 50NL should at least level the playing field.

Re: 100 NL 6max vs. 50 NL 6max
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
but basically zero full time pros who arent students.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is wrong

[/ QUOTE ]

and they havent moved up because...?

Re: 100 NL 6max vs. 50 NL 6max
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
but basically zero full time pros who arent students.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is wrong

[/ QUOTE ]

and they havent moved up because...?

[/ QUOTE ]

to me, moving up when poker is your sole source of income seems like the scariest thing imaginable. Especially if you went pro at the low end of the spectrum (100NL) and you need every penny to pay the bills. Maybe not the smartest long term decision, but professional poker probably isn't either.

Just playing devil's advocate here... I haven't seen anyone at 100NL that i could point at and say "that guy is definately doing this to pay the rent". But i HAVE seen a couple guys that could, and for all i know might be doing just that.