The difference between 30-60 and 80-160

[mikelow]

Returned from a quick trip to the Bellagio.

Won about $2800 playing 30-60 (+600, +1200, and +1000), but lost 1900 at 80-160 (game started out good but deteriorated when tight passive [checked a full house on the river with position!] old lady left. Baseball bets finished a slight plus.

Now I think there are significant differences between the two limits I played and why I think making this step up might be the most difficult in poker.

1. Aces are very seldom slowplayed UTG in 30-60. I was the victim of that in the 80-160 game, making two bad calls with KT after being turn check-raised with the board of T75A.

2. Position really counts for a lot more at 80-160. You can't play marginal hands up front and get away with it. Even in the big blind, having defended with A9o and dealing with a flop of 975 (two spades) is really difficult (at least for me). At 30-60 you can get away with this more as your opponent won't be putting you under so much pressure.

3. It's hard for me to come back from being stuck 5-6 big bets at 80-160. At 30-60 it's pretty easy. There are far fewer multiway pots, and your opponents are constantly looking for any sign of weakness. Admittedly my style of play is more based on catching opponents' mistakes.

So, I have concluded that my ceiling is 40-80. I just can't seem to step up in class? So should I be content with this?