Moving up in limit questions

[Reqtech]

I've been playing .50/1 on Party since about May. Read Lee Jones WLLH and I tended to be a slightly winning player, probably around 1BBx100.

Couple months ago, I got tired of my mediocrity. I started reading this board more, and learned of SSHE and Poker Tracker and decided to take the dive and add them to my poker library. Couldn't recommend them (along with this forum's preaching of aggressiveness) anymore.

Now, with kicked up aggressiveness, 4 weeks, and 3,000 hands later, I'm at 11.5/BB.

Obviously, this is a small sample size and I'm definitely riding the crest of variance that can't last forever, so my question is this:

Should I move up to 1/2? I feel like I'm playing correctly at .50/1, but that could be just because I'm on a hot streak and catching the cards. I have the bankroll for it >200BB and I've been at .50/1 for half a year now.

[btspider]

get to 10K hands at .50/1.00 (try multitabling if you don't already). you are running ridiculously hot and may want to experience a downswing while its still cheap. after 3K hands, you have much more to learn and practice about SSH too.

[davelin]

I've heard 300BB seems to be the right bankroll for any limit. You seem to be a little short of it, so why don't you continue to play .50/1 and build up your bankroll and confidence at the same time. With any movement upwards, there's an adjustment period, but the SSH strategies work just as well in 1/2 as they do in .50/1.

[jrz1972]

I'm in a similar situation. My .50/1 bankroll is now up to over 800BB, which is absurd. That number is inflated by $300 in bonuses, but does include a little over $550 in outright profits. (The money I initially started with is going back into my savings account, so I'm no longer counting it as part of my bankroll).

On one hand, losing sessions no longer bother me. A few days ago, I lost 30BB in about 45 minutes at Stars .5/1 in a session where I was getting a never-ending parade of great pre-flop hands and losing with every single one of them. When it's $30, I can have a sense of humor about that kind of thing and intellectually write it off as normal variance, but if I were playing 2/4 and dropped $120 in the same session, I think I would probably be a little shell-shocked.

Also, I want to be sure I've had the experience of playing through multiple cold streaks at .5/1 before I have to weather one at higher levels. I've had several 50BB downswings, and I went through a string of ~1600 hands last month where all I could do was break even, but that's the worst I've had so far. I know I can realistically expect worse, and I'd prefer for my "worst ever losing streak" to not occur as soon as I move up. That would not be good for me psychologically.

Because I just play for leisure, I don't feel any incredible pressure to move up. My plan for now is build my bankroll up to 1200BB and then move straight to 2/4, but that could change.

[mack848]

I've just moved to 1/2, having 300BB and 8k hands. I'm interested in people's thoughts on the difference, compared to 50/1.
I play against afternoon US players + Europeans. The two biggest difference so far are tightness (averaging 30% VPIP)and aggression (loads of LAgs and sLAgs).
Rather than being a problem, I find that these, tighter Party players, will fold to a semi-bluff when they don't have the odds to call. At 50/1 I have been used to getting called wrongly and had almost stopped bluffing completely. It's a great feeling when you bet into 2 opponents with not a lot and 'steal the pot'.

I now find that targeting the overly aggressive players is as important as the fish.

[DMBFan23]

1/2 full ring has many more tight players. In my very limited experience, 1/2 is best for learning table selection and opponent specific plays (since you will have a mix of tight and loose players at each table), as opposed to grinding out xBB/100 from tight passives. sometimes 1/2 can be a "rock garden" but there are plenty of fishy opponents to seek out.

I personally can't wait for 2/4, although right now my table lineup is 2 tables of .50/1 and 1 table of 1/2.

[btspider]

1/2 is well worth playing. i don't know why its so popular to skip it. the opponents are more diverse than just a table full of loose-passives. you learn about table-selection and playing against a tight table (play a few sessions during the day). you can suffer a downswing more easily since your edge is smaller and there is a little more aggression. you learn to adjust to changing table conditions and learn how/when to win with overcards which miss on the flop.

[mack848]

So far, I find it more enjoyable. I have just been playing ABC poker up to now, at 2/1 I feel that I can practice using aggression on occasions other than when I have a massive hand or draw. You can actually get people to fold (sometimes!).

[Reqtech]

Thanks for the comments everyone. As a little further background, I have endured a few bad backswings, but nothing really comparible to what I'm experiencing now in the other direction.

I think that what I'll do for now if work on my multi-tabling skills (need to swap in my old 19" CRT for my 17" LCD for poker sessions for the increased resolution) on .50/1 and work with that for the next 2-3 weeks.

Thanks for the insight all.

[MasterShakes]

I started playing at .50/1 with $300, as is usually recommended (though I'm sure somewhat less is very doable). The rule I decided to use was that when I have the 300BB to move up with a win-rate that looked good, I would move up.

1/2 is not as tough as it might look with its considerably smaller pots compared to .50/1. These games are incredibly passive and a very aggressive player who knows how to bet their solid hands into calling stations will always get the money here. I have my doubts about whether even 5% of the players at this level know how to play their draws properly. If you're crushing .50/1, and you've been studying and playing well, just move up.

Oh, and do the same thing if you crush 1/2 for awhile. Just go ahead and move up to 2/4. It's what I hope to do by the end of the week.