|
|
#21
10-10-2005, 02:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Fish at 100/200?
[ QUOTE ]
One thing you'll notice is that there are no passive players (they simply lose too fast). So instead of having some fish call you down with nothing (or meekly check and fold), they may raise you with nothing. This means you are now put in a position of having to play back at them (increasing your risk/variance significantly), fold (and potentially becoming the biggest fish in the pond), call w/ marginal hand, or check to avoid getting raised (giving up much value betting). [/ QUOTE ] Great post. I've just returned to mid-limits, after dropping down to rebuild my confidence at small stakes. I've been mentally comparing the two and figuring out why small stakes is so much easier, but this pretty much nails it. 
|
|
#23
10-10-2005, 08:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Fish at 100/200?
The thing about 50+ games is that they are so totally dependant on the players. At the the 15 or even the 30, you can just roll around to a few tables and find some decent ones, sit down and grind out a decent BB/100. At 50+ games, because the table selection is so much more limited, getting in a bad game can be very very costly. Expect much more variance than the mid stakes games and expect to find table selection very difficult. The good games are much better, the bad games are much worse, and the bad games outnumber the good significantly.
|
|
#24
10-10-2005, 08:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Fish at 100/200?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I have watched the 100/200 at Stars on and off and it seems like there are fish. I understand there are fish at every level but it seems no tougher to beat than a 10/20 game. What do you guys think? [/ QUOTE ] I think you should give it a try. [/ QUOTE ] Nh.
|
|
#25
10-27-2005, 07:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Fish at 100/200?
i'm currently playing 3/6 (i guess i shouldn't be in this forum) with a 350bb bankroll and i only play two full tables at once. if i was going to play the stars 100 game i would play one table with at least 500 bb's because of the ridiculous aggression at those tables.
|
|
#26
10-27-2005, 07:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Fish at 100/200?
[ QUOTE ]
i'm currently playing 3/6 (i guess i shouldn't be in this forum) with a 350bb bankroll and i only play two full tables at once. if i was going to play the stars 100 game i would play one table with at least 500 bb's because of the ridiculous aggression at those tables. [/ QUOTE ] why bump this?
|
|
#27
10-27-2005, 09:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Fish at 100/200?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] i'm currently playing 3/6 (i guess i shouldn't be in this forum) with a 350bb bankroll and i only play two full tables at once. if i was going to play the stars 100 game i would play one table with at least 500 bb's because of the ridiculous aggression at those tables. [/ QUOTE ] why bump this? [/ QUOTE ] I have no idea how i found this post. oops.
|
|
#28
10-27-2005, 09:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Fish at 100/200?
[ QUOTE ]
I have no idea how i found this post. [/ QUOTE ] impossible.
|
|
#30
10-27-2005, 10:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Fish at 100/200?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I am up in the game in the long run. [/ QUOTE ] So...How long is the long run ? [/ QUOTE ] Good lord I don't know. I've played a lot of hands on pokerstars. I don't think I'm up big or anythign. If I had to guess, I'd guess i'm at .5 bb/100 over 150k hands.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
