Mitigating "Moving on Up" Damages

[webmonarch]

What do folks tend to do when moving up to the next level? In the past, I have always moved up in one fell swoop. That is, my bankroll would hit a certain point, and I would stap playing the .10/.25 and move exclusively to the .25/.50.

Now, I'm trying to ease into the 1/2 games by playing say, one table of 1/2 while sticking with three tables of my old limit of .50/1.

Anyone have thoughts? Does this make the transition easier? Harder?

[thatpfunk]

I think it makes the transition much easier and is what I have always done. I make sure to focus all my attention on the new table to learn teh texture, etc of the new game while playing pretty standard on my 3 old games.

[fimbulwinter]

I always like to drop the number of tables when i move up as well as do it gradually. one way you ca do it is to "risk" the same, so if your normal game is 4x100NL, then do 2x200NL.

it helps because as you move up the playes still suck, but their sucks become more specific. playing fewer tables can help you key onto this and thereby reduce variance.

fim

[ryanghall]

I like playing only one game at a time. It lets you get the proper feel for the game. It's a shock at first but with time it comes with ease.

If things don't go well at first, you can always move back down and regain your money and confidence. I've had to do that almost every time I've moved up and I think I'm going to have to drop down from 400NL to 200NL now after moving up a little while ago, as things aren't going as planned.

Moving up can be stressful if you hit a bad run so keep these things in mind.

Ryan

[Benholio]

Anyone ever buy-in short at the new level when moving up? I've done this a bit moving from 50NL to 100NL (buying in for $50 at 0.50/1.00 tables), but now the more I think of it, it seems like a bad idea since a good portion of the money I make is on deep stack double ups with sets/full houses/etc.

What do you guys think of buying short? Good idea to stop you from being intimidated while you adjust to a new level, or costs you money when you hit a big hand against deeper stacked opponents?

[webmonarch]

Thanks for the reponses so far. I like your idea, fim. I think that's a good thing to try, and I will probably try it tomorrow as opposed to what I did tonight.

As for buying in short, I think it's a horrible idea. I can't tell you how many times I take chances against these 10% of the buy in stacks. I'll push them all-in with marginal holdings and win more oftne than not. So, in addition to the additional chances you are faced with, you don't get much when you have the nuts and someone willing to pay.

Just my opinion.

[Benholio]

Well, I didn't mean buying in for the minimum, but buying in for the max from the previous level, ie: buying in for $50 at the $100NL.

[ QUOTE ]
Well, I didn't mean buying in for the minimum, but buying in for the max from the previous level, ie: buying in for $50 at the $100NL.

[/ QUOTE ]

I started NL 100 by buying in for $60 but it wasn't long before I bought in for full.

[webmonarch]

Well, I think my answer is basically the same. I can see buying in for 80% of the max or so, but I think toping your stack off is one of the best ways to have an immediate advantage.

[Biggenx]

Not sure if you're already doing this, but you should start collecting data maybe a week before you want to move up. Maybe this method is common knowledge, but i have tables open nearly 24/7 just to collect PT data. I love it when i see a new fish join my table and i already have 300+ hands of his for GT+.

This has always been a huge advantage when i move up in stakes.