Pokerstars 16s vs. 27s

[Eric Draven]

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?

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]

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

[/ QUOTE ]

Ugh, come on my friend. Read the FAQ.

Edit: Sorry, I thought that Irieguys post on the different levels was in the FAQ. In summary, his comment was that it's naive to think that one level is easier than the previous. I'll let you think and fill in the rest.

[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.

[ QUOTE ]
I was frustrated at the $16s for awhile, mostly breaking even, before I took a shot at the $27s and started winning. Variance? Maybe. I suck? Probably. But I'm not the only one I know who thinks the $16s are unusually hard.

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
The $16s on Stars are unusually tough for their buyin.

[/ QUOTE ]

both by durron597 from the thread pokerstars turbo's - Prunch 10/25/05 08:32 AM

[valenzuela]

If you play with a certain style you might have better ROI on higher buy-ins. However if you play each buy-in with the correct aproach ROI should decrease.

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

[/ QUOTE ]Variance. I had no trouble making the move from 6s to 15s. But, I haven't had much luck in the few 25s I've tried. (If I were to win my next 25, it would swing my ROI ~20% -- it's a very small sample.) But, I thought I'd toss it out there to counter your small sample.

what would you say was the main difference between the 6's, 16's and 27's then ?