Would You Play Well At 100x Your Normal Stakes?

[Matt Vaughan]

Apparently it all depends on the size of the bankroll. That is, I mean the ratio of bankroll to buy-in. For example, if my bankroll was $ 100,000, I could easily, without hesitation, play comfortably in $ 500 or $ 1,000 buy-in tournaments. But if my bankroll was actually $ 500, I just wouldn't be able to adequately play in a $ 100 or $ 200 buy-in tournament.

Well, sure, but most people with a $100,000 bankroll don't play $5-10 tournaments as their "normal" stakes. This is a good point though!

 

[lcid86]

Maybe if I was drunk? 100x would be real money and not something I felt I could lose. Playing not to lose would mess me up..

 

[Phoenix Wright]

Yes! I'd play equally well at 100x my stakes...of course it isn't bragging and it isn't as impressive as it sounds

I've only played freerolls through cardschat

0 x 100 is still 0

Joking aside, I think a better thought is why would anyone want to play x100 their stakes? This sounds like poor bankroll management. The only real exception I can think of are the many people entering each year for the $10,000 Main Event, but (even though I've never gone) many do this more as an experience or once in a lifetime event off their bucket list.

 

[DanielSnrL]

Sure. Where do you think the line is that most people wouldn't be "totally freaked out though"?

I think most players moving up 1-2 levels from what they're used to in quick order would claim that the money isn't affecting them. So I'm curious where you think the line is.

I agree... maybe for a millionaire sultan the buy-in jump is not a problem. To me, I believe it would interfere with my decisions at the table.
Even more so as I'm trying to build a bankroll.
Few people would not be affected by this factor. I remember Victor Blom when he started as Isildur1 at the Full Tilt tables. That guy had no fear of high stakes and no love of bankroll.

 

[Hsac]

I happened to stumble on this other thread, which essentially just asks "what was your biggest tournament buy in in 2021 and how did it go?"

https://www.cardschat.com/forum/general-poker-13/your-biggest-buy-in-in-2021-a-495667/

At first I was just chuckling at how the posts mostly went progressively higher with a sort of "one upping" mentality. But several comments saying "I satellited into tournament buy in X that I wouldn't normally play, and I didn't play that well" got me thinking.

If you were able to get into a poker game at 100x your normal stakes. Whether it's cash, tournament, doesn't matter. Would you play well? Do you think you would be playing to maximize your EV, or more so playing to not lose (or min cash, or whatever version of playing it safe looks like for you)?

What I think is so interesting about this question is that in large field tournaments, if you make it down to the very end... at some point you start to play stakes you are not even remotely rolled for financially, mentally, or emotionally.

Let me know your thoughts!!

Your post brings two tournaments I've participated into mind. One was a million dollar tournament that I'd won the entrance to through satellites. Worst tournament experience I've ever had to date. For over an hour I never got delt a single starting hand and watching what happened during each hand I wouldn't have caught any flops, or anything else, anyway. bluffing seemed useless. I finally got delt 44 and went all in with my measly stack that had been whittled down to almost nothing for an hour and a half. Flopped a 4 and doubled up. From there I lasted maybe 20 minutes. At least I'd made money off it by selling 10% shares to friends at work. Had sold them shares to some of my other tournaments with good results. The other tournament was another satellite entry with a hundred-thousand-dollar payout. From the very first hand it seemed I couldn't lose. Starting hands galore, and they darn near all hit on the flop. Lost count of the number of times I was told, "I should have known you would hit." Won that tournament and got a hell of a payoff. Both tournaments were extremely unusual in opposite ways, and I'd say my style of play wasn't altered with either one.

 

[Skot_Gy]

When i qualify to big tournaments, i try to play my A game. Yes, maybe a little tighter than usual, but otherwise i always try to play my game.

 

[slicheri93]

probably not, different play styles in them than the middle ones, and never played that high so the pressure sure would get to you at some point when you are deep in a hand or you get a strong hand, and get put in a though pos

 

[dongato2]

I think the important thing is to play at the levels that you have according to your level of learning and your bankroll

 

[mina271]

I don't know how good or bad I would play in such a high stake, but I think that when you play such expensive tournaments, you should focus on poker and not on the buy in. If you're already playing something like that, you shouldn't worry too much about how much that cost. And if you came in with a cheap ticket, then you should simply enjoy the opportunity.

 

[ChubbySin]

I happened to stumble on this other thread, which essentially just asks "what was your biggest tournament buy in in 2021 and how did it go?"

https://www.cardschat.com/forum/general-poker-13/your-biggest-buy-in-in-2021-a-495667/

At first I was just chuckling at how the posts mostly went progressively higher with a sort of "one upping" mentality. But several comments saying "I satellited into tournament buy in X that I wouldn't normally play, and I didn't play that well" got me thinking.

If you were able to get into a poker game at 100x your normal stakes. Whether it's cash, tournament, doesn't matter. Would you play well? Do you think you would be playing to maximize your EV, or more so playing to not lose (or min cash, or whatever version of playing it safe looks like for you)?

What I think is so interesting about this question is that in large field tournaments, if you make it down to the very end... at some point you start to play stakes you are not even remotely rolled for financially, mentally, or emotionally.

Let me know your thoughts!!

I believe yes, the game foundations are the same! And my game baseline is very solid.

 

[ztibor72]

Sometimes I went from qualifiers to serious live tournaments and achieved results, maybe I played a little tighter but usually I played my A game. So yeah, I think I can bring my good game.

 

[w1nn1epo0h]

I think my game won't change, as the bet doesn't affect anything

 

[xOneCoolHandx]

I happened to stumble on this other thread, which essentially just asks "what was your biggest tournament buy in in 2021 and how did it go?"

https://www.cardschat.com/forum/general-poker-13/your-biggest-buy-in-in-2021-a-495667/

At first I was just chuckling at how the posts mostly went progressively higher with a sort of "one upping" mentality. But several comments saying "I satellited into tournament buy in X that I wouldn't normally play, and I didn't play that well" got me thinking.

If you were able to get into a poker game at 100x your normal stakes. Whether it's cash, tournament, doesn't matter. Would you play well? Do you think you would be playing to maximize your EV, or more so playing to not lose (or min cash, or whatever version of playing it safe looks like for you)?

What I think is so interesting about this question is that in large field tournaments, if you make it down to the very end... at some point you start to play stakes you are not even remotely rolled for financially, mentally, or emotionally.

Let me know your thoughts!!

I think the problem most people have playing stakes that far out of their normal game is that the players at that level will be more competent that those at the lower level. Most people cannot adjust their game like that and will play very similarly to the way they played at the lower level. Others will tighten up considerably so that they can min-cash and call it a victory.

My normal cash level is $2/5 live and .25/.50 online, but I have played in $10/$20 games and been very successful (I have never played a $200/$500 game if that were to exist...lol). I also usually stick to tournaments (whether regular, PKO or SNGs) that have a max buyin of $50 online and $500 live, but I have also played in $25k tournaments and have done quite well. I attribute this success with being able to recognize that there are a higher percentage of good, solid players as you move up in stakes. I would dare say that the people who play only freerolls and microstakes tournaments and then try to jump into the wsop ME are not going to find much success.

 

[INISHTE]

My biggest income has been from satellites that I win and get paid well in those tournaments, at first I obviously play to win, I go more risky, but there comes a time when you run out of chips and you only think about getting paid the minimum, at least , it is true that if you were to win good money and start playing higher bets, you may lose money in the long run, but that depends on each one, to find a level of bets in which you can be a winning player.

 

[kunkgreen]

Good point Matt!

In my experience, which is not much (especially since I started playing online poker recently)... I can say that I feel swallowed up.
At times when I've played much higher buy-ins than usual, two things have happened:
1 - Playing too tight, succumbing to the blinds with no game action coming close to the cash.
2 - Being too aggressive in strong hands not getting paid when he hit.

Ps: One of those times I think I would have won a sundaymillion with so many cards that I hit the flop! (but unfortunately I didn't pay any) hahaha

 

[gustavofuentes2]

I happened to stumble on this other thread, which essentially just asks "what was your biggest tournament buy in in 2021 and how did it go?"

https://www.cardschat.com/forum/general-poker-13/your-biggest-buy-in-in-2021-a-495667/

At first I was just chuckling at how the posts mostly went progressively higher with a sort of "one upping" mentality. But several comments saying "I satellited into tournament buy in X that I wouldn't normally play, and I didn't play that well" got me thinking.

If you were able to get into a poker game at 100x your normal stakes. Whether it's cash, tournament, doesn't matter. Would you play well? Do you think you would be playing to maximize your EV, or more so playing to not lose (or min cash, or whatever version of playing it safe looks like for you)?

What I think is so interesting about this question is that in large field tournaments, if you make it down to the very end... at some point you start to play stakes you are not even remotely rolled for financially, mentally, or emotionally.

Let me know your thoughts!!

I think I would definetly play better, since you have alot of players not making silly bets pre flop.

 

[dallam]

I played some 109$ tournaments in my life, mostly made all of them from satties. The thing is that you could see similar faces from 11$-109$. And if its a big event, most of the micro players are taking their shots through satties while others are directly buy-in themselves.

So for me, the challange could be to play ALL of my games with 100% level, or not playing so many. That's what I'm working on currently, to have my own balance and extend my A game to the most games that I can, and not fool them in the first place, nor in the second etc.

Anyway, a dream is to play a 1000+$ MTT, not just because the possible money involved, but the game itself. I would love to experience that field's atmosphere and parties. I could do my best to make myself proud, so that's my answer, and this probably would hiding a wannabe clean & great game on my own league.

 

[Poker Orifice]

I don't even play optimally when playing at 4x higher than my regular cash game stakes.
I think what I'm reading in this thread is that most seem sure they would play just as well. Myself... I would want to but I KNOW I don't.

 

[D0nk3y Hunt3r]

From time to time I'm making an experiment where I try to build 3xBI for higher stakes and play there until I get 3xBI for next level or fall to 2xBI then I'm getting back to lower level and make a reset meaning I need to make 2xBI more there to advance this time. This way I'm ahead anyway and in theory I should play same on higher stakes, though my experiences show that the awareness of playing higher stakes is still there.
BTW I got up to five levels one time using this system.

 

[manzanillo53]

I happened to stumble on this other thread, which essentially just asks "what was your biggest tournament buy in in 2021 and how did it go?"

https://www.cardschat.com/forum/general-poker-13/your-biggest-buy-in-in-2021-a-495667/

At first I was just chuckling at how the posts mostly went progressively higher with a sort of "one upping" mentality. But several comments saying "I satellited into tournament buy in X that I wouldn't normally play, and I didn't play that well" got me thinking.

If you were able to get into a poker game at 100x your normal stakes. Whether it's cash, tournament, doesn't matter. Would you play well? Do you think you would be playing to maximize your EV, or more so playing to not lose (or min cash, or whatever version of playing it safe looks like for you)?

What I think is so interesting about this question is that in large field tournaments, if you make it down to the very end... at some point you start to play stakes you are not even remotely rolled for financially, mentally, or emotionally.

Let me know your thoughts!!

I am stuck on playing not to loose now, so no, I guess I would play the same. A lot would depend on my bank roll as well.

 

[Daen27]

In high-end tournaments, I play tight, keeping my chips to the max, folding all draws if my opponents are betting big while I call all bets in the micros. And yes, it turned out to be a plus all the same, on the eve of a lot of money and I managed to win. Playing tournaments for 1-5 dollars and getting into a tournament for 109 and winning something there is already a success

 

[NDRWTRLGC]

depends on my bankroll. if it is equally matched then I don't see why not