An interesting (?) observation about limits

[Arnfinn Madsen]

I have played very much 5/10 lately at Action Poker Network. I then stepped up to 10/20 and played a lot of hands there. Much of the time half of the table were 5/10-regulars and I noticed how weak-tight they played at 10/20 compared to 5/10. At 10/20 I could run them over, even if they were LAGs at 5/10.

I did not think the psychological effect of playing above your roll/comfort sone (as I guess they were) was that significant. It confirms that playing above ones bankroll/ comfort zone for most players is bad (probably even when taking shots).

[bicyclekick]

How do people who spell zone sone find this site?

[Arnfinn Madsen]

[ QUOTE ]
How do people who spell zone sone find this site?

[/ QUOTE ]

They hand out free memberships as a comfort prize (price? prise?) to all non-money placers in spelling competitions.

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
How do people who spell zone sone find this site?

[/ QUOTE ]



misclick? nit.

[ QUOTE ]
... nit...

[/ QUOTE ]
If there's a nit to be picked, some nit's gonna pick it.

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

I think you're right about the comfort zone. They forget to remember, "It's not a $n chip, it's a unit in this particular game." It's been discussed in a few other threads. It's one of those "things" (the move up in limit) you can look for and if you spot it, take advantage of. I guess you could put it in the "tell" column.

[Webster]

That's interesting - I was in 3/6 for a while and moved to 5/10 and I thought THEY were weak tight! Basically 3/6 players with scared money. Now you say 10/20 is weaker tighter.

20/40 nobody plays ANY hands??

[Arnfinn Madsen]

[img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]. Just to clarify, the 10/20-regulars are more aggressive than the 5/10-regulars (I know you understood this, but just realized my opening post could be misunderstood this way).