[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe durron597 has mentioned it a few times, but I didn't find anything in the quick search I did, so I'm starting a new topic. I realize this is based on a small sample size, but that is part of the reason I am posting, to see if is simply varaince.

I started playing at Pokerstars again after clearing a bonus on Bodog, and was use to them going a little faster, so I started mixing in 6.50 with 11s. I then started concentrating on improving my turbo game, and started beating the 6.50s pretty easily for what I assume is a decent ROI (I don't really keep track of that kind of stuff, too cheap to get Pokertracker or SNGPT so far) as my bankroll grew stedily over the last month and a half (small sample size, I know). Anyways I moved up to the 16s about 2 weeks ago, which I was comfortable with, and had plenty of money in my account to do, but they seemed far more difficult than the 6.50, much more difficult than I thought they would be. Not that they aren't beatable, just more difficult than I think they should be.

Well Tuesday I started mixing in 27s. I think the 27s are have the same level of play, if not worse play than the 16s. Not nearly as bad as 6.50s, but still bad. Based on the last few days, I think I'm going to take a shot at them even though I only have around $600 in my Pokerstars account (~22 buy-ins) to test my theory.

In conclusion:
I think the 27s are even more beatable than the 16s, anyone else find this to be true?

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought the same thing when I initially moved up to the 27s at the end of 04...short term results are misleading. I'd be surprised if anyone could find any site with tougher lower buy-ins than higher buy-ins...I realize on-line poker is relatively new, but I just dont believe that these things arent efficient to at least some degree.