Is there a difference btw micro and high stakes ?

Hello,

I (still *sigh*) play at micro stakes. I spent over an hour watching a table of high stakes 50/100 ante 20. That's NL10000.
I replayed the hands which went to showdown, and what I see is not very much different from the moves I see at micro stakes. the same donk moves from our russian friends.
like this hand where the preflop aggressor with pocket aces bets on each street, and the other player (the russian here) who keeps calling with JTs with a Q and a K on the board and no draw. The guy with AA goes allin on the river and JTs calls he just has a pair of jacks on the turn, and there are so many hands that can beat him.
Some smart minds will tell : "that's because he had a read on him" lol. yes sure.
Or there was that hand with one player opening with AJs, and the other calling with K8s, they both get a flush on the turn and the one with K8 calls the allin bet from AJs. He goes allin, you could bet he has a flush, potentially better.
I have been involved in such hands several times (strong hand VS strong hand) and you just need to loose once or twice such a hand to crush your past hour grinding session. From some of my readings, I learnt not to involve more than say 15% of your stack unless you have the nuts, to avoid wasting all your past grinding efforts.
That is not what players at high stakes seem to be doing.
I am just quoting 2 hands here, but I've seen even worse plays (open raise with A4s, and call 3bet and call bet on the flop with no made hand).
They are not even recreational wealthy players gambling online. Some are described as regs on highstakesdb.

I could describe what I've seen at lower stakes too (mid), with similar plays from donks who call big bets on each street till river with a marginal hand and a 15% preflop, a percentage which gets lower and lower when the site reveal the following streets.

I am wondering what can qualify the plays I've seen at this high stakes session as : so much better play than what you see at micro stakes.
I am still questioning what does that mean when they say : you have to master NL10 or NL25 before moving up to low/mid/high stakes, because it seems that you see the same plays at all these stakes.

Cokatoo56 said:

Hello,

I (still *sigh*) play at micro stakes. I spent over an hour watching a table of high stakes 50/100 ante 20. That's NL10000.
I replayed the hands which went to showdown, and what I see is not very much different from the moves I see at micro stakes. the same donk moves from our russian friends.
like this hand where the preflop aggressor with pocket aces bets on each street, and the other player (the russian here) who keeps calling with JTs with a Q and a K on the board and no draw. The guy with AA goes allin on the river and JTs calls he just has a pair of jacks on the turn, and there are so many hands that can beat him.
Some smart minds will tell : "that's because he had a read on him" lol. yes sure.
Or there was that hand with one player opening with AJs, and the other calling with K8s, they both get a flush on the turn and the one with K8 calls the allin bet from AJs. He goes allin, you could bet he has a flush, potentially better.
I have been involved in such hands several times (strong hand VS strong hand) and you just need to loose once or twice such a hand to crush your past hour grinding session. From some of my readings, I learnt not to involve more than say 15% of your stack unless you have the nuts, to avoid wasting all your past grinding efforts.
That is not what players at high stakes seem to be doing.
I am just quoting 2 hands here, but I've seen even worse plays (open raise with A4s, and call 3bet and call bet on the flop with no made hand).
They are not even recreational wealthy players gambling online. Some are described as regs on highstakesdb.

I could describe what I've seen at lower stakes too (mid), with similar plays from donks who call big bets on each street till river with a marginal hand and a 15% preflop, a percentage which gets lower and lower when the site reveal the following streets.

I am wondering what can qualify the plays I've seen at this high stakes session as : so much better play than what you see at micro stakes.
I am still questioning what does that mean when they say : you have to master NL10 or NL25 before moving up to low/mid/high stakes, because it seems that you see the same plays at all these stakes.

Click to expand...

I'm probably not qualified to answer this, since i'm more of a micro stakes player too. This is what I think about the hands:

On the pair of J example, you said it was a bad call. Sure, it would have been if the other player played like you (betting only the nuts or the near nuts there). However, if you knew that the other player bluffs a high frequency of the time, and you have the right pot odds, you have to make that call.

In the flush example, the other player could be bluffing, he could also have a straight or a set. Although the possibility exists, you have to be willing to take that risk in order to make the profitable play, not just like "oh i have second nut flush, can't risk more than 15% of my stack".

Raising with suited aces pf is a fine play, and floating post-flop is also the right play in certain situations. Perhaps you are giving your opponents too much credit, and think they have the nuts all the time.

I learnt not to involve more than say 15% of your stack unless you have the nuts, to avoid wasting all your past grinding efforts.

Click to expand...

The game you are playing is no-limit hold'em. That means that your entire stack is at risk any time you play. If you aren't willing to get all the chips in the middle with less than the stone-cold nuts you aren't going to be very profitable at this game.

As far as your question, viewing a couple of hands at that go to showdown in a vacuum doesn't tell you THAT much about two players. But you can rest assured that the worst regulars at high stakes games are going to crush your microstakes game, and the best players at your games will get destroyed by anyone at high stakes games.

The difference between two hands that may superficially play out the same at vastly different stakes is something like this:

A. At micros, the player is just playing the cards in front of his face, or randomly choosing a bad time to bluff or bluffcatch, whereas
B. At the high stakes game, you are seeing two players with a vast array of knowledge and understanding about their opponent, players who are playing their ranges against their opponent's ranges, instead of just their own cards. And you, with little understanding of the history and metagame involved, witness one player with the bottom end of his bluffcatching range making a game-theory optimal call vs. someone who just happened to show up with the upper end of his range.

You mention "some hands that go to showdown" but I'm willing to bet the number of hands that went to showdown is significantly lower than the amount at the micro stakes. You also need to recognize players are far more aggressive at higher stakes and when you get knowledgeable vs knowledgeable player in the pot it sets up a whole new world of leveling and met a game considerations. ABC poker just isn't going to fly.

Also although certain hands (lol sample size) might play out the same, it doesn't mean the thinking and reasons were the same. With high stakes games its going to be so hard to find an edge that any profitable spot needs to be made use off which makes games more aggressive and as such higher variance creating more marginal spots.

There are fish & then there are whales the difference between the 2 is that the whales play in the high stakes games. There are going to be weak players at all stakes but obviously the caliber of play and the playing field is going to be a lot tougher the higher the stakes. The best of the best will play high stakes waiting for that whale to net.

yes and no but mistakes tend to be smaller the higher you go up

watch some noosebleed videos on deuces cracked or Cardrunners and you will be surprised that asides from some bluffs to have a better bluffing frequency it isn't like you are going from an apple to an orange

it is still poker

think more difference between rec league football and the NFL

the pros margin of error is a lot smaller

twohaha said:

I'm probably not qualified to answer this, since i'm more of a micro stakes player too. This is what I think about the hands:

On the pair of J example, you said it was a bad call. Sure, it would have been if the other player played like you (betting only the nuts or the near nuts there). However, if you knew that the other player bluffs a high frequency of the time, and you have the right pot odds, you have to make that call.

In the flush example, the other player could be bluffing, he could also have a straight or a set. Although the possibility exists, you have to be willing to take that risk in order to make the profitable play, not just like "oh i have second nut flush, can't risk more than 15% of my stack".

Raising with suited aces pf is a fine play, and floating post-flop is also the right play in certain situations. Perhaps you are giving your opponents too much credit, and think they have the nuts all the time.

Click to expand...

you can say whatever you want about betting the nuts or near nuts, the fundamentals are still the same at high stakes : good players don't play looser than with the 18 or so (depends) best % of hands. just like what i see for most players at NL5 or NL10.
I doubt the guy would go allin with $20k over on a complete bluff in CG.
Just like you don't in micro. If you have played enough hands, you must have observed that it is not a profitable play. Or I have another side of poker to discover yet.

you have to be willing to take that risk in order to make the profitable play, not just like "oh i have second nut flush, can't risk more than 15% of my stack"
Read again what I was saying. From my personal experience, when it bets strongly on a board, your 2 pairs/ trips or higher combination depending on what cards come, are not often worth calling or over betting.
I have experienced countless times calling with what I thought was the best hand (often a 85 or 90% winning postflop), to end up loosing my stack, and at the same time the equivalent of $ I accumulated the past few hundred hands.
That is not exactly a profitable play either.
You have to come with a strategy to avoid that kind of situations. Considering folding your TPTK or two pairs on some specific boards can often be more profitable. with a strong play you can always bet good hands coming soon after.

Raising with suited aces pf is a fine play
If you are dealt such a hand, I'd advise you contact immediately your poker site support, as well as your country fair trading?consumer protection service.

you can say whatever you want about betting the nuts or near nuts, the fundamentals are still the same at high stakes : good players don't play looser than with the 18 or so (depends) best % of hands. just like what i see for most players at NL5 or NL10.
I doubt the guy would go allin with $20k over on a complete bluff in CG.
Just like you don't in micro. If you have played enough hands, you must have observed that it is not a profitable play. Or I have another side of poker to discover yet.

Click to expand...

You have not even begun to understand what you don't yet understand. There are certain "types" of players at all stakes generally but you don't even understand the level of aggression and calculation that goes on in the highest games. The most aggressive players at NL10 are going to be passive compared to NL25 games. Good players go all in on a complete bluff all the time, at various stakes, and the higher you go, the more likely you are to find someone willing to bluff shove. Isildur1 plays nosebleeds and is famous for overbet shoving on bluffs.

baudib1 said:

You have not even begun to understand what you don't yet understand. There are certain "types" of players at all stakes generally but you don't even understand the level of aggression and calculation that goes on in the highest games. The most aggressive players at NL10 are going to be passive compared to NL25 games. Good players go all in on a complete bluff all the time, at various stakes, and the higher you go, the more likely you are to find someone willing to bluff shove. Isildur1 plays nosebleeds and is famous for overbet shoving on bluffs.

Click to expand...

I don't know if Isildur1 can be an example (at least not for me). He is known for playing very LAG and putting big bluffs, just like gus hansen. look at his highstakesdb profile. he plays high variance game.
he can be +2M and go down -2M in 4 months time. I wonder how positive is his bank account, looking at his poker results only.
Some call it poker, I would call it gamble. You might have the same chart playing roulette.
I am more interested by phil galfond's chart for instance. just have a look at it.
I haven't really watched any videos featuring phil galfond, but I would bet he is not as LAG as isildur or hansen, even in high stakes. (btw I have to watch how he plays )

I don't understand what you mean by : "The most aggressive players at NL10 are going to be passive compared to NL25 games"
Can you pls detail ?

The main difference could be something like throwing a mouse against a wall vs. blowing your brains out with a sawed off 12 gauge rifle, if you hit tilt.

Is there a difference in taste between poop and skittles?

S3mper said:

Is there a difference in taste between poop and skittles?

Click to expand...

LOL! I don't know and more importantly, I don't want to know!

Well to answer the gist of the question, the biggest difference is the nose bleeds have mo mula. And if your not 'equipped' well enough, your out baby, in one hand. Game over, gonna take a long, long time of picking up pop cans for another foray in the jungle. Seriously, you have to have lot's of cash and great big cahoneys, because scared money is very easily taken advantage of by the mega sharks. Like some above said, big money, big cahoneys, and no fear. You ain't gonna find those qualities in the micro-stakes. To easy to get a few hundred bucks, not easy for many to put up a 100k.

^ it has nothing to do with guts and ego and everything to do about frequencies i really don't get why people think victor bloom "has more cahoneys" or not it is about good play and balancing ranges (or giving the illusion of balance) to make you harder to play against

I'll give another example:

Your driving a car on the highway-- the people your playing are the cops with a radar gun


at the micros, you can speed 30 mph over the speed limit easily and their radar guns can't tell the difference

at mid stakes, you need to only be 10 mph over and you run the risk of getting caught

high stakes, don't speed. You can't take shortcuts as much

dont forget unless you run into Guy Laliberté the people you would be playing have beaten the lower stakes players, and as you go up you find players that beat those players (and so on and so on)

and for the record i think Guy Laliberté would beat most people 400NL and under he isnt a bad player

Cokatoo56 said:

I don't understand what you mean by : "The most aggressive players at NL10 are going to be passive compared to NL25 games"
Can you pls detail ?

Click to expand...

Baudib means that you can be aggressive compared to 10NL players, and yet when you move up to the next limit your aggression will seem to dwindle. It's not because you are being any less aggressive, but rather because the games themselves involve more aggressive gameplay and on a highly consistent basis.


And that very reason above is why you see players make such calls. What you saw certainly does appear to be a very standard hand against a probable fish at any limit. However what you didn't see is more important, and what you didn't see is that the guy who had the aces made the exact same play 100 times over the last week and had complete air more often than not.

Cokatoo56 said:

I don't know if Isildur1 can be an example (at least not for me). He is known for playing very LAG and putting big bluffs, just like gus hansen. look at his highstakesdb profile. he plays high variance game.
he can be +2M and go down -2M in 4 months time. I wonder how positive is his bank account, looking at his poker results only.
Some call it poker, I would call it gamble. You might have the same chart playing roulette.
I am more interested by phil galfond's chart for instance. just have a look at it.
I haven't really watched any videos featuring phil galfond, but I would bet he is not as LAG as isildur or hansen, even in high stakes. (btw I have to watch how he plays )

I don't understand what you mean by : "The most aggressive players at NL10 are going to be passive compared to NL25 games"
Can you pls detail ?

Click to expand...

You will loose your bet. The difference between the nosebleed players is somewhere around 5% . Those 5% makes them unique. 95% of the time they play the same and you could say that it is standard for them. It is variance game because 2 mil means only 20 buy-ins to them. Because the difference in skill is so small 2mil may be a bad run and not a very bad one. They do not even calculate their winrate in BBs but in dollars per hand because their winrate is way under 1BB/100. There are so few of this kind of players though. They are like Messi, Ronaldo, Tiger Woods, Coby Briant . They are the best of the best. They use concepts that most of us will probabely never have to use because we will not reach that lvl. Anyway I prefer Leatherass as a roll model instead of Phil Ivey any day. Why? Because I understand the first and I will never be able to understand the last one.

For the last part of your post. From 25NL and up you will not see as many flops as you had seen at smaller lvls and you will need to adapt to this. Finding the fish at the tables it is not enough anymore. The other regs will be looking for them too and it is a race to who will take the fish money first. They will squeeze and squeeze and squeeze to isolate the bad player for themselves.A lot more players understand the postflop play that is crucial to success in poker. While at 10 NL most regs understand only the preflop stats and probabley some of them the CB and FCB stat, you will see 2 barrel and 3 barrel a lot because they understand ranges better than you.

i have never played on high stakes but i have seen some tables and the type of play is very different. first the 3 bets are very respected in high stakes, making lots of folds preflop which it doesnt happens on lower stakes where is more difficult to win a hand preflop ( especially in full ring tables).
then the level of aggresion is usually stronger in lower stakes, and the range of hands preflop are much wider than higher stakes
the pressure is so much different and the time they take to act is very much slower in high stakes. considering how important is to make good decision there. Also there are lots of regulars in higher stakes which is why there is very difficult to beat those games.

S3mper said:

Is there a difference in taste between poop and skittles?

Click to expand...

Dont know, I've never tried skittles

S3mper said:

Is there a difference in taste between poop and skittles?

Click to expand...

w0oferr said:

Dont know, I've never tried skittles

Click to expand...

lol can't believe I said that.... Sounds like something I'd say tho

At first glance it may seem that there is, but in fact there is a difference. I watched a lot and tried to play at different limits. I advise you to choose the limit on your bankroll but not vice versa.

I will tell you something, don't jump from micro stakes to high stakes tables, you just need to go step by step.

e.g. If you play $0.10 / $0.25 blinds, maybe next step for you is $0.50 / $1 ...

And about russian players, i can't tell you nothing...they have their own rules

heh always russian players its same ppl like me and u but in russia alot of ppl play poker thats all

As far as not considering putting up more than 15% of my stack without the nuts, I'd have to agree that in order to win, a lot of the time, you need to bluff. If you only play top tier cards, you're going to sit out a lot and rarely hit when you do limp in or push with a decent hand. Getting called sucks, but there are solid, conservative methodologies to help cut losses. I've had a couple days where I explored higher stakes tables and took down tons of money, unfortunately, gotta spend it to make it. 14% pre flop 810 off. Yolo.

The difference is def there , as very big bluff is there more frequently in hghstakes , therefore u ll see many ll call very light...n also no matter wht stakes , every stakes have donks who like to gamble.. there is one Thing commen in both low micro stakes n high stakes , n that is many maniacs there liek to gamble at Little hint..

lol lol.... is this thread some kind of level?