Posted Thu Sep 21, 2006 10:18 am GMT by rlb2252
What’s the highest stakes you’ve played and how well did you do?
Was it B&M or online?
Are you still at that limit or did circumstances cause you to retreat back down to safer waters?
Do you have ambitions—I suspect we all do—to make the leap to higher limits in the future?
I’m currently playing 1.00/2.00 Limit Hold Em. I have no complaints. I’m holding my own. I win sometimes. When I lose the amounts tend to be very small.
Still, I lurk on the 2/4 tables, 3/6 and 5/10, observing, fantasizing some, researching, hopefully absorbing. I suppose I’m like a kid looking through a hole in a fence, watching the rich people and wondering what life would be like in that rarified world.
Without my actual dollars being at stake—and that, I suspect, makes all the difference--I don’t see a vast difference between the opponent skill level at these higher stakes and the opponents at my level.
What strikes me most is that far fewer players see the flop and seldom do more than two players go to showdown. Many more hands are decided by the time we reach the turn and most certainly by the river. Thus, I am sometimes frustrated by not seeing what the loser started with.
I don’t doubt that there might be many game play subtleties that I am simply too naïve to notice. I am the first to admit that what I don’t know about poker would fill a book as big as a Cadillac.
Yet, still I see players in these games who even I—with my limited experience—can spot as totally incompetent, players in nearly every hand, players making the same cookie cutter plays hand after hand..
What are they doing, floundering in a 5/10 game? I could take them, I think. Maybe even easily take them.
It plants seeds. Maybe dangerous seeds. Could I do it too, play at, say, 2/4 without being completely bamboozled, bushwhacked and bulldozed over by the competition.
Bankroll wise I could afford to do it today. Common sense wise I fear that I would still be intimidated by the amounts being routinely bandied about. And I know that playing scared, playing with severe financial reservations is no way to guarantee a win.
So, for the time being, I content myself with peering through the higher limit fence…and drooling.
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:13 pm GMT by BeerWench13
I don't play limit on purpose, but I have been roped into a $5/10 game with full kill by the guys in my regular poker group. Ugh! I left with a headache and thanking my lucky stars that I did well enough in Omaha 8 to cover the losses at that game.
I usually play $1/2 NL in B&M and online varies a great deal depending on my bankroll, my mental state and which site I am playing. The highest I've played online has been $1/2 NL also. Lately I've been playing with free $$ pp sent me so I've been at the $25NL level trying to build it. The swings at that level are incredible!
My local game is $1/2 NL hold'em and $1/2 PL Omaha 8.
Posted Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:16 pm GMT by Dave B
Dont under estimate the players who you think are idiots, they might be working on an entirely different level. They could also be 100/200 players on tilt who are stepping down to 5/10 to blow off some steam. There are also a lot of idiots who play at those games, no question about that either.
I have played up to 10/20 online and 15/30 live. Players at these levels have a way of making you feel uncomfortable. Since plays work at these levels when they wouldnt at 1/2, you see more plays happening and much harder decision.
For example, lets say you raise w/ J  J  preflop and only the blinds call.
Flop 9 7 2 you bet, 2 calls
Turn 2 you bet, 2 calls
River K
Now, the small blind bets out and the big blind raises, you need to call $60 (15/30) and you lay down, the small blind also folds. Were you ahead? Was he calling just to steal? Are they friends pushing you around? This is the kind of stuff that you wouldnt sweat in a 1/2 game, but when the stakes go up, play changes.
Posted Thu Sep 21, 2006 2:11 pm GMT by Skribbles
I dabbled in 10/20FL for a month or so a while back. Some tables I'd run over with sheer aggresion. Others, I'd get my ass kicked. At lower FL limits I never noticed so much difference in the players or tables. At 10/20 it was shocking how different the play would be from table to table.
Posted Thu Sep 21, 2006 4:05 pm GMT by xDiamond_CutteRx
Online, the biggest I've ever played is $10/$20 on the Stud and Stud-8 tables, $5/$10 on the Limit Hold'em tables, and actually I've only dabbled as high as $400 NL once.
Live, I've gone crazy a couple times and played $10/$20, and once I went real crazy and played in the $5/$10 NL game at the El Dorado in Reno where I bought in for $600 while some people had around $2000-$3000. I made $400 and got the hell out of there.
Usually though, with my new ultra-safe bankroll management techniques, I usually only play $2/$4 or $3/$6 limit or $100 NL. Tournament buy-ins so far haven't gone above $39.
Posted Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:20 am GMT by lwestatbus
What a very interesting and thoughtful post. RLB, I'm doing exactly what you are, playing low fixed limit and working my way up the stakes as my bankroll and experience improves. I am also at $1/$2 having just made that jump this month. (Do you play at PokerRoom? I think I remember your screen name.) I'm letting my wins at each level build the BR for the jump to the next. So, yes, I have ambitions to move to higher levels.
One thing I've noticed so far is that the level of play and distribution of player skills seems pretty consistent from $.50/$1 to $1/$2. I was actually much more profitable in terms of BB/Hr at 0.25/0.50 which was the lowest stakes on the site and probably had a higher percentage of beginners.
I have noticed, though, that the swings are much deeper as the stakes increase (so far). I've been down $80 and up $80 just within the current month. I would expect this to continue. I'm currently down $20 but also believe that I've been running about 1/4 below 'average' in number of premium starting cards I've had and in making my premium draws over the past ten days. I think that if these two conditions reach what my experience has lead me to expect so far then I'll move back into the win column.
I think that Dave B's comments are very pertinent. I've been able to do OK at the three levels I've played and also (briefly) in Vegas at $2/$4 with the same style of play. But I do feel that a hole in my game is going to be dealing with aggressive players when the stakes are higher, it is late in the hand, I have a very good made hand (but not the nuts), and an opponent raises or bets out. (BTW: When this happens when there are two jacks on the board my opponent ALWAYS has me beat.)
Also very interesting to read about your lurking activities. I thought I was the only one that did this, but I do it at the highest stakes with an active table on the site. If I don't have much time or know I'm too tired to play well I'll watch $100/$200 or $200/$300 and see some amazingly bad play. A particular observation is incredibly aggressive play with second or even third pair. It almost seems as if aggression is the coin of the realm at these tables. But it may, in fact, be part of a plan that I don't understand.
Again, very thoughtful post and interesting replies.
Posted Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:14 pm GMT by Phil14312
I think Dave hit it on the head. By the time you get to the higher stakes, most of these guys are complete idiots, although that isn't always true. Sheer aggression can sometimes make for a really really tough game.
Posted Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:42 pm GMT by UrAteUp
| BeerWench13 wrote: | | Lately I've been playing with free $$ pp sent me so I've been at the $25NL level trying to build it. The swings at that level are incredible!. |
Nah...not really. At that level what's a buyin or two? I been up several more times then down at this level. When I do go down it is usually only a buyin or perhaps two (my biggest was 3) and doesn't last for longer then a few days. After that all gets right in the universe and the fish start playing their fishy little ways...  ...and pushing their chips to me.... 
Posted Sun Sep 24, 2006 7:33 pm GMT by rlb2252
Hey, Larry, appreciate your long and detailed response. Again.
| Quote: | | (Do you play at PokerRoom? I think I remember your screen name.) |
I’ve never played on that particular sight. There must be an imposter gallivanting about in disguise. I demand that he be apprehended at once
quoteOne thing I've noticed so far is that the level of play and distribution of player skills seems pretty consistent from $.50/$1 to $1/$2. I was actually much more profitable in terms of BB/Hr at 0.25/0.50 which was the lowest stakes on the site and probably had a higher percentage of beginners.
I have noticed, though, that the swings are much deeper as the stakes increase (so far). quote
It makes sense that this would be the case and that opponent skills would gradually improve as one moves up the stake’s scale. But I suppose I was expecting a more drastic improvement, though, an “experts-only-beyond-this-point” kind of level. Maybe something like a locked door with uniformed poker security operatives standing guard and restricting entry to any player lacking adequate experience.
Instead I see a more subtle change from limit to limit.
I don’t disregard the notion, however, that poker is often a game of subtleties, of nuance. Small leaks in one’s game may be more difficult to plug than the more egregious and thus more blatant breaches.
I know that when we move up, especially in that first few hundred hands, there is likely an intimidation factor that colors our play. Admit it or not, we are all a little bit more on our guard at first.
The numbers seem staggering. The play a bit more sophisticated. The players a tad more wily. And the average size of the pots—and, conversely, the potential losses--has just doubled.
As we adjust, and our game improves, our play at a new level should become as routine as our play at the previous one. And once this happen, once we reach a certain comfort with where we’re playing, it is probably human nature to soon take to our tip-toes and scan the poker horizon for a new level to conquer.
quoteAlso very interesting to read about your lurking activities. I thought I was the only one that did this, but I do it at the highest stakes with an active table on the site. If I don't have much time or know I'm too tired to play well I'll watch $100/$200 or $200/$300 and see some amazingly bad play. A particular observation is incredibly aggressive play with second or even third pair. | Quote: |
If these similarities between us keep up I may begin to question my paternity. Where were you forty eight years and nine months ago? And if you are my long lost parental unit you owe me quite a bit in child support.
As far as the lurking goes, I like it much better than watching poker on TV. It’s faster, is sans commercials and “witty” commentary from the announcers.
Usually I find myself drawn to the level that I next anticipate playing. Getting prepared for the future, I hope.
I can lurk while I eat. I can lurk while I do my exercise. And as you say, I can lurk when I lack the attention and focus necessary to play myself.
|
Posted Sun Sep 24, 2006 7:37 pm GMT by rlb2252
Hey, Larry, appreciate your long and detailed response. Again.
| Quote: | | (Do you play at PokerRoom? I think I remember your screen name.) |
I’ve never played on that particular sight. There must be an imposter gallivanting about in disguise. I demand that he be apprehended at once
| Quote: | One thing I've noticed so far is that the level of play and distribution of player skills seems pretty consistent from $.50/$1 to $1/$2. I was actually much more profitable in terms of BB/Hr at 0.25/0.50 which was the lowest stakes on the site and probably had a higher percentage of beginners.
I have noticed, though, that the swings are much deeper as the stakes increase (so far). |
It makes sense that this would be the case and that opponent skills would gradually improve as one moves up the stake’s scale. But I suppose I was expecting a more drastic improvement, though, an “experts-only-beyond-this-point” kind of level. Maybe something like a locked door with uniformed poker security operatives standing guard and restricting entry to any player lacking adequate experience.
Instead I see a more subtle change from limit to limit.
I don’t disregard the notion, however, that poker is often a game of subtleties, of nuance. Small leaks in one’s game may be more difficult to plug than the more egregious and thus more blatant breaches.
I know that when we move up, especially in that first few hundred hands, there is likely an intimidation factor that colors our play. Admit it or not, we are all a little bit more on our guard at first.
The numbers seem staggering. The play a bit more sophisticated. The players a tad more wily. And the average size of the pots—and, conversely, the potential losses--has just doubled.
As we adjust, and our game improves, our play at a new level should become as routine as our play at the previous one. And once this happen, once we reach a certain comfort with where we’re playing, it is probably human nature to soon take to our tip-toes and scan the poker horizon for a new level to conquer.
| Quote: | | Also very interesting to read about your lurking activities. I thought I was the only one that did this, but I do it at the highest stakes with an active table on the site. If I don't have much time or know I'm too tired to play well I'll watch $100/$200 or $200/$300 and see some amazingly bad play. A particular observation is incredibly aggressive play with second or even third pair. |
If these similarities between us keep up I may begin to question my paternity. Where were you forty eight years and nine months ago? And if you are my long lost parental unit you owe me quite a bit in child support.
As far as the lurking goes, I like it much better than watching poker on TV. It’s faster, is sans commercials and “witty” commentary from the announcers.
Usually I find myself drawn to the level that I next anticipate playing. Getting prepared for the future, I hope.
I can lurk while I eat. I can lurk while I do my exercise. And as you say, I can lurk when I lack the attention and focus necessary to play myself.
Posted Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:42 pm GMT by 1988 TR
| Phil14312 wrote: | | I think Dave hit it on the head. By the time you get to the higher stakes, most of these guys are complete idiots, although that isn't always true. Sheer aggression can sometimes make for a really really tough game. |
I think you need to re-think that. Maybe that are not idiots. Maybe you don't understand the game as well as you think you do. It's easy to write someone's play off as bad or they are just agressive. Until you take a step back in an effort to understand the why behind different playing styles, you won't develop as a player.
I have been in high stakes games where players are ultra agressive. If you are not completely comfortable with the stakes, it is a very hard game to play.
Posted Tue Dec 05, 2006 3:49 pm GMT by l3ones4512
i might have been on crack to play such high stakes but it turned out ok...
PokerStars Tournament #36484504, No Limit Hold'em
Buy-In: $550.00/$20.00
2 players
Total Prize Pool: $1100.00
Tournament started - 2006/11/23 - 02:52:49 (ET)
Dear l3ones,
You finished the tournament in 1st place.
A $1,100.00 award has been credited to your Real Money account.
|
|
