winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

Long time lurker, first time poster. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I've been beating the 20/40 game for about 1.75BB/100 over 80k hands (4-5 tabling). Recently I decided to started to mix in some 30/60 in and my results have been disastrous.

Over about 25k hands I'm down 300BB for a very impressive winrate of -1.23BB/100. I was curious if there was any chance that this could simply be variance kicking me in the balls, so I punched these numbers into StatKing. It basically told me that there's almost zero chance that I could be a winning player, based upon this run.

So I guess this is a 2 part question. Firstly, has anyone else experienced such a dramatic difference between the 20 and the 30 game? We've all had 300BB downswings before, but to still be down that much after almost 25k hands makes me think there must be a serious flaw in my game that doesn't translate well into 30/60.

Secondly, for people who are playing at these limits, what are some of the adjustments that you've had to make when moving up from 20 to 30? I suppose I can just sit and play the 20 game for the forseeable future, but I think most of us can agree that growing as a player and conquering higher limits is almost as fulfilling as the money we make from grinding it out at a comfortable level.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Re: winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

The trick probably is not to make any significant adjustments.

Maybe you have been "overadjusting" the more aggressive nature of the game?

Re: winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

how do your numbers compare between the two games? I think particularly interesting would be WTSD and W$SD.

Re: winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

I experienced something similiar when I moved up to 30/60 from 20/40.. I'm currently back at 20 trying to put together a new game plan.. any suggestions?

Re: winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

30/60 is tougher. Not a ton harder, but you really have to develop good hand reading to survive. It's very aggressive.

Re: winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

I agree. I think the aggressive nature of the game is what really threw me off.

Re: winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

I don't have much experience in the 20/40 game, but I used to play the 15/30 before the 30/60 opened up, so I can tell you what I think are the main differences between the 30/60 and the old 15/30 (which may be somewhat similar to the new 20/40).

First, most people have already mentioned that 30/60 is very aggressive. You need to push back frequently to make sure you don't get run over, but you also need to know when just having your opponent bet into you is the preferred play to pushing him out.

Second, the players are better. 2-3 LAGs at a table frequently constitutes a good game at this limit. In the old 15/30, there used to be more like 4-5 LAGs at a table. And even many of the LAGs are much better postflop players than their VP$IP/PFR stats might suggest.

Third, hands are frequently contested heads-up or 3-handed. This means your postflop short-handed game needs to be extremely strong. After some practice, you'll start seeing certain patterns and recognizing certain common moves -- some preferred by TAGs, others preferred by LAGs, some designed to extract more money out of you when you're behind and your opponent thinks you have a piece of the board, others designed to try to push you off a hand.

I would say that these are the main differences.

As for your 300 BB downswing over 25K hands, that doesn't sound good. My guess is that it's a combination of poor cards and poor play, and the solution (at least for now) is probably to move down.

Re: winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

[ QUOTE ]
how do your numbers compare between the two games? I think particularly interesting would be WTSD and W$SD.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interestingly...they're not terribly far off.

WTSD:
20/40 37.66
30/60 37.49

W$SD:
20/40 53.31
30/60 51.49

Any thoughts on what this might mean? How could I be winning more than 50% of my showdowns yet be an overall loser?

What other stats should I be looking at? VP$IP and PFR are pretty similar. I'm playing just a hair tighter at the 30, but not by much.

One thing that I find interesting is that my SD at 30/60 is actually LOWER in terms of BB/100. That confuses the hell out of me. Not quite sure how that could possibly be.

Most of my aggression numbers are fairly close, as is the Won $ when saw flop stat.

Now I'm even more dumbfounded.

Re: winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

where do you play?

i know a few sites where the games differ a lot

Re: winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

I've recently been playing the 40/80 at paradise and I've been getting my ass handed to me. The Sb vs BB blind battles are insane at this level online. Live I've played 40/80 for sometime but online it's something else

Re: winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

I have approximately the same showdown numbers at 30/60 (actually almost exactly the same, 37.5/51.5) and am an overall winner (around 1BB/100). Don't know if this matters much though.

Re: winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

there's a guy who posts here named TxRedman who had a similar problem jumping from the 15 to the 30, and, despite a run of good play/cards for the first 10K hands, jumped back down to the 15 after he lost 150 BB's over the next 70K hands.


hmmmm...

Re: winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

You should post your complete stats. My WTSD is lower than yours by 2 percentage points, but my W$SD is 58. You may be calling down too much with unimproved A high when it's clear you're beat, or perhaps it's something else.

As for how you can be an overall loser when your W$SD is above 50, it's simple. You're winning the small pots and losing the big ones. Determining why that is happening is much tougher.

Re: winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

i have about 10k hands at both and 30-60 seems much much tougher.

Re: winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

80k hands is still very much the short term online especially when multi-tabling. I suspect you've ran well at 20-40, are running poorly at 30-60, and are also having some adjustment problems in the tougher 30 game. It is most certainly some combination of all three.

If bankroll isn't an issue, I'd suggest not giving up on the 30. Yes, the 20 games play looser and more passive, but if you really can beat the 20 for over 1/100 while 5-tabling, there's no reason you can't beat the 30 (although for slightly less per 100).

Re: winner at 20/40, loser at 30/60?
 

i'm not usually involved your conversations over here, but one thing i didn't notice is the way you are mixing in your 30 tables. In my experience, it is a bit easier to play less tables at a higher limit while adjusting (FWIW im usually playing 6 max nl). based on your stats you certainly seem to have the ability to beat the 30, so maybe you should narrow your focus till you feel more confident at this level. again, this may help you to make the adjustments necessary to beat the 30.

just my 2c, happy holidays

p.s. post full stats too!