Originally Posted by RythmAndBlues
Is it possible to beat higher stakes even though you might lose in lower ?
I mean i lose in 0,10/0,25$ on pokerstars but i reckon that i won a bunch of money in 1/2$ awhile ago...
Tom dwan for instant possible would win easier in higher limits right ?
Feels like its just nits playing in lower limits that only wait for the nuts, or what do you guys think ?
Im sick of the swings in 0,10/0,25 so i think ill work myself up to a bankroll so i can play 1/2 or maybe 0,50/1 is enough ?
IF you guys think higher might be better for me, what stakes do you think is HIGH enough ?? i mean the lowest stakes that is enough to not be taken of the nits..
0,5/1 or 1/2 maybe ??
Thanks guys !
Not sure if you are serious, but I'll try to give you a serious response.
You reckon you won a bunch o money at 1/2 but can't beat 0.1/0.25. I would put that down to you having a good run during your time at 1/2. No competent reg at 1/2 would have too much of a problem beating 0.1/0.25 over a decent sample (obv).
Tom Dwan is a good poker player, and as such would adjust his game accordingly. To suggest that instead of playing PA/Selbst et al, he would have a harder time playing against drunks/donks is just crazy. Of course he would do just fine at lower stakes, almost certainly experiencing lower variance because his edge would be that much greater.
If you are having problems playing against nits, then you are not adjusting. When a nit starts making the pot big, you need to take a long hard look at your cards and how they fit in with the board (and then fold if you haven't got the nuts - overpairs are not the nuts btw). Vs loose passives; value bet and fold if they raise. Easy game.
Play 10NL for a good few thousand hands. If you can't beat it, then you need to go to 5NL. If you can't beat that, try 2NL. DO NOT go UP to where there are BETTER players making fewer mistakes.
To summarize: more or less what Big_Rudy said