The Peter Principle

http://www.pokertableratings.com/blog/2010/01/the-peter-principle/

Very good read about playing ur A game at ur level, then gettin that feeling the need to move up one level and not going so well. Been there, done that, lost and went bk down to my level which I felt comfortable at.
Just one bit tho I found intresting tho is that ive been on NL5 a while and taken a few stabs at NL10 (some good, some bad. Moved back down to NL5).
But after reading this caption:

"You can avoid falling victim to the Peter Principle by not promoting yourself until you’ve shown “the skills and work habits needed to succeed at a higher level”. In other words, you can refuse to move up in stakes until you’ve achieved at least a 3BB/100 winrate at your current level over a significant sample"

I know PTR isnt 100% accurate but looking on my stats i have 3.20BB/100 over 22K hands. Looking at my NL5 stats im 4.99BB/100 $90 profit over 18K hands, which i think is pretty bitchin, but is this enough to take a stab at NL10?

Thanks for reading.

I think you have enough info to assume that you could be a winning player. I also don't think that $10 is any harder to beat than $5. Depending on the site, I think tight ABC poker is more than enough to get the money up through $25NLHE, at least at FR.

So, I think it really just depends on bankroll. If you've got 20-25 buy ins for $10 then move up and see how it goes. If you lose 5-10 BI's then move back down.

I don't like taking shots. If you're really beating a certain level then it won't take long for you to build a roll big enough to move up.

If you're rolled for 10NL, do it. If you're not, try adding more tables of 5NL.

ukaliks said:

http://www.pokertableratings.com/blog/2010/01/the-peter-principle/ In other words, you can refuse to move up in stakes until you’ve achieved at least a 3BB/100 winrate at your current level over a significant sample"

Click to expand...

Meh I aint too keen on this. It takes a longtime for our winrate to converge. For the micros I'd just move up when your rolled for it.

Ive only got $142.50 in my BR atm. I think when I reach $200 i'll take the shot when im properly rolled for NL10 so lee fear of money loss.
I'll continue to keep on crushing NL5 atm lol.

ukaliks said:

Ive only got $142.50 in my BR atm. I think when I reach $200 i'll take the shot when im properly rolled for NL10 so lee fear of money loss.
I'll continue to keep on crushing NL5 atm lol.

Click to expand...

Wait until 250 IMO. While you may not actually be at risk of going broke with 200, its also psychologically helpful to be over-rolled.

I think you are over thinking this choice. If you have the bankroll. Go play you can always retrench.

c9h13no3 said:

Wait until 250 IMO. While you may not actually be at risk of going broke with 200, its also psychologically helpful to be over-rolled.

Click to expand...

I've waited till I have 30Buyins before taking on 100NL (which I'm doing so as of today ).

But meh its 10NL. 25buyins is way over cautious when we just wanna accend through the micros as fast as we can. If you bust your roll on 20 buyins at 10NL you likely need to start over at 2NL for practise sake anyway. (Or god hates you)