Are there differant stratagies for differant sites?

[Phix]

I play at sit&gos at 6 diferant sites. At two of these sites I can cash 2 out of 3 times. 3 of the sites 1 out of 3 and then there is Poker Stars where I have never made it to the money.

My statagy is to play tight until 6 players are left then lossen as plyaer are knocked out.

Do diferant stagaties work better at some sites than others?

or am I thinking to much

Phix

[pergesu]

[ QUOTE ]
I play at sit&gos at 6 diferant sites. At two of these sites I can cash 2 out of 3 times.

[/ QUOTE ]
Play at those two sites. Clearly they're monstrously profitable for you, so there's no real reason to play anywhere else.

[bluefeet]

[ QUOTE ]
At two of these sites I can cash 2 out of 3 times

[/ QUOTE ]

play at these two sites [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

seriously? depends. deep stack (PS) vs. short stack (PP) -- there is certainly a little more freedom in the deep stack game for exploiting an assumed post-flop superiority. without the post-flop skills, the deeper stack can actually be detrimental (assuming you participate post-flop too frequently regardless).

6 seated, 9 seated, 10 seated, start chips, blinds structures, etc. do have subtle (sometimes not so) differences. but employing the proper "tight early", "pushbot" late strategy will be relatively effective in most settings.

[SammyKid11]

[ QUOTE ]

or am I thinking to much


[/ QUOTE ]

With the lack of literacy displayed in your post, I find it difficult to believe that you're thinking too much. I also find it hard to believe that you're 67% ITM at any given site unless your sample size is ridiculously small.

First take English, then Statistics, take two Aspirin and call us in the morning.

He beat me to it.

[bawcerelli]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

or am I thinking to much


[/ QUOTE ]

With the lack of literacy displayed in your post, I find it difficult to believe that you're thinking too much. I also find it hard to believe that you're 67% ITM at any given site unless your sample size is ridiculously small.

First take English, then Statistics, take two Aspirin and call us in the morning.

[/ QUOTE ]

ouch! no need to be THAT harsh. lol, nh

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
At two of these sites I can cash 2 out of 3 times

[/ QUOTE ]

play at these two sites [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

seriously? depends. deep stack (PS) vs. short stack (PP) -- there is certainly a little more freedom in the deep stack game for exploiting an assumed post-flop superiority. without the post-flop skills, the deeper stack can actually be detrimental (assuming you participate post-flop too frequently regardless).

6 seated, 9 seated, 10 seated, start chips, blinds structures, etc. do have subtle (sometimes not so) differences. but employing the proper "tight early", "pushbot" late strategy will be relatively effective in most settings.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're too nice...you probably would humor Stanzee too.

[SammyKid11]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

or am I thinking to much


[/ QUOTE ]

With the lack of literacy displayed in your post, I find it difficult to believe that you're thinking too much. I also find it hard to believe that you're 67% ITM at any given site unless your sample size is ridiculously small.

First take English, then Statistics, take two Aspirin and call us in the morning.

[/ QUOTE ]

ouch! no need to be THAT harsh. lol, nh

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah - a little harsh...but come on. A typo here and there is one thing. A post like that is just hard to read. And I think if someone doesn't take themselves seriously enough to write competently, I find it hard to believe they'll take poker seriously enough for me to take them seriously.

[bigt439]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

or am I thinking to much


[/ QUOTE ]

With the lack of literacy displayed in your post, I find it difficult to believe that you're thinking too much. I also find it hard to believe that you're 67% ITM at any given site unless your sample size is ridiculously small.

First take English, then Statistics, take two Aspirin and call us in the morning.

[/ QUOTE ]

ouch! no need to be THAT harsh. lol, nh

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah - a little harsh...but come on. A typo here and there is one thing. A post like that is just hard to read. And I think if someone doesn't take themselves seriously enough to write competently, I find it hard to believe they'll take poker seriously enough for me to take them seriously.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless they're serious enough to know you're serious enough to know just how serious serious is. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[bawcerelli]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

or am I thinking to much


[/ QUOTE ]

With the lack of literacy displayed in your post, I find it difficult to believe that you're thinking too much. I also find it hard to believe that you're 67% ITM at any given site unless your sample size is ridiculously small.

First take English, then Statistics, take two Aspirin and call us in the morning.

[/ QUOTE ]

ouch! no need to be THAT harsh. lol, nh

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah - a little harsh...but come on. A typo here and there is one thing. A post like that is just hard to read. And I think if someone doesn't take themselves seriously enough to write competently, I find it hard to believe they'll take poker seriously enough for me to take them seriously.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless they're serious enough to know you're serious enough to know just how serious serious is. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

seriously