[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
btw I have some theories about that article in that it's not completely true. There are plenty of situations where I believe a higher buyin opponent is MORE likely to call than a lower buyin opponent because they understand you may be pushing a very wide range and they will be correct to call with their mediocre hand in this circumstance, although its possible I'm wrong about this.

I just felt that I encountered less resistance in the $33-$109s when stealing late in a sit and go.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course my point in that article was somewhat simplistic (or actually was presented in a somewhat simplistic way, in order to deliver a basic point to people who were still completely unaware of it), and as a result it is obviously not completely true.

However, I believe that the main idea still stands and is true in general: the lower you go down in limits, people (you might say: the majority of people, or the "standard opponent") will be more willing to play more hands with you, with some important tendency to play the same very hands as the caller or aggressor without considering the difference (this is the meaning of not understanding the gap concept). As a result of this misunderstanding, a general approach would always be to play somewhat tighter as the aggressor, when the limits go down. That was the idea behind this FE article. Surely one can find many exceptions for this, as this is not a rule or law by any sense. And the notion that at some point when you cross a certain buy-in people will be actually willing to call MORE than at a previous point is also valid, and is an aspect of one of the more paradoxical phenomena in poker, that is, from a certain point and on the play of the best player and fish might _seem_ to be very similar, while different from the play of ok-"good"-"very good" players.