Is it better playing higher stake MTT???

Be interested to know your thoughts guys.

I`ve been playing less MTT recently, concentrating more on ring games.

However, I have been playing a few low buyin MTT, $6 rebuy on Party, $3 rebuy on stars, etc.

I am trying to get my head around the following:

1. Is it better to play higher stakes MTT ($25> buy ins) Down side - Better players, up side less chance of chasers.
2. Lower stakes ($10<) Down side - more ppl in every pot, therefore you chance to win the pot reduces with strong hands (AA v 4 callers instead of i) Up side, loose lottery players = bigger pots

I`ve searched the forum for a similar post but can`t find it.

My bankroll would stand $100 MTT if I wanted to chance 5% of my bankroll.

Thanks chaps

I'd say check a few of the higher ones out, see if you like the play in those and if you fit in well, if not go back to the lower ones and stay there and keep playing the lower ones

There are bad players at all levels. I've played on 100 and more MTTs as well as $5 MTTs and I see some of the came really bad play at both. So moving up won't let you "escape" from them. However at the higher levels there will be more good and very very good players. Is this really what you want, to play against more players that know what they are doing and have a better idea of how to take your chips?

You should not make a decision to move up in stakes based on trying to get away from donks. You wont ever get a way from them anyway. Base it on you skill level and bankroll.

I agree with everything you say, and I`m not trying to get away from the donks, not especially, anyway.

I think it is a question of how do you know you are good enough to move up?

When playing lower levels I will get into the cash about 30% of the time and most of the time I seem to get my money in with the best hand.

I think, however, your chances of winning are diminished when playing poor players. For example, and I don`t want this to turn into a bad beat post, pushing all in with similar stacks as others with JJ after 4 limpers. Had about 10 times bb. Get 2 callers. expecting to see AK/AQ QQ/KK type hands but POW, one turns Q9o other A4 (Q9 hits set 9`s on river) I could possible understand one caller but 2???

So, in that example, I doubt if u will get a caller in a $50 buy in game near bubble.

So this is what I`m trying to get right in my mind, if you understand.

I am finding it that it is better playing at stakes greater than $5 for MTT's. It just seems to me that you won't see as much chasing draws as you do on lower stakes. Just my 2 cents.

storm shakes head.

/me agrees

Ive played numerious $55 MTTs on Stars, $26MTTs/$79MTTs on FT, and the odd $150+ buy in, and all i can say, if you cant beat the $5 donks then dont bother. The ephifany of it being on the bubble of a $150 bubble and watching an idiot calling my AKs shove with KJ for 19BB.

You get it at most limits. Dont reason that because you cant beat the $5 whores that you can beat the$150 ones, the logic does not make sesnse

Added question, same theme.

Will the starting field get smaller?

At what buy-in for a MTT is there on average the fewest players?

the higher you get the less people for obvious reasons, every level up should have less. Kind of silly question dont you think?

Might be a totally silly question, but I didn't know the good answer. I'm the cheapskate, remember?

At what???

I know what I`m trying to say but I can`t put it across

I accept the fact that the players at higher levels are `probably` going to be better.

I accept that you want to get your money in with the best hand.

Now I`m not saying Im a great player, far from it, but I would say I`m a decent player who plays pretty much `by the book`

So when I get a hand like JJ, as in the example, in middle position, I don`t want lots of callers.

If I put in a strong raise I would guess people playing higher stakes sitting with say A8 on a similar stack will go through the same though process as me, which will be along the lines of "I`m behind any pair 99+ and I`m dominated by A9+. With such a strong raise I`m probably behind so I don`t want to fire my final 18 big blinds into this pot. Fold"

However, smaller stakes seem to be thinking "I`ve got an Ace - fire!!!" then the next guy "my K4 is sooooooooted - fire" next guy "I`ve got a pair!! 22 - fire"

I`m having fun, but the point is, without going too heavily into the %, the A8 guy calls my push, the other guys know they are probably beaten and fold. I`m now about a 70/30 fav.

In the smaller stakes example, I`m about what, 35% fav??? I don`t know exactly.

So the fact you are a good player making the correct moves is reduced in smaller stakes.
This is against the fact in bigger stakes you are up against better players.

I know I`m rambling on a bit, but do you get my drift???

I don't know....Every now and then I play in the Sunday 400k on FTP. 200 buy in. Yes, there are still donks, but a fraction of what you will see in other games. This is the only tournement I have really relaxed in and found it to be a breath of fresh air. I do agree with sngo's though, even the 100 and 200 games have absolutely horrible play. Check the Sunday game out sometime though, it's nice playing poker instead of the equivilant of scratch off tickets...and first prize is 80k. Think I played in it 4 times, cashed twice.

If it were up to me, i would play in the higher stakes. There is at least a little bit more people that play better, but not all. Some people in higher stakes play like there playing for play chips. But if it doesnt fit you, you can always move down stakes.

tenbob explained why, he read me so well.