big buy-in, limited rebuy, 1 or no add-ons....perfect for serious game, players are tight but always feel that we have chance to win.

Not the same in small buy-in, unlimited rebuy, add ons with big stack, player with crazy style, so many time reborn

The bigger the buy-in the easier the game. Seems legit. Let's be millionaires!

For larger buy-ins, you mean $ 55 $ 109 $ 215 tournaments? There is clearly a higher level game going on ... Little crazy tournaments in the long run are always good for anyone who knows what they’re doing. Be happy to play crazy players and take advantage.

I think lower buy- in's will put a lot of donk calling cowboys in the tournament as in The bigger buy-in's you will have stronger well balances players. so for me I would say that it is easer to play higher buy-in's

In low buy-ins people easily put a lot of chips where they are not supposed to, so there are big swings there
In high byu-ins players will just eat your chips little by little and be happy with it

You can try check it. If you ask it seriously, you should not play for real money.

Originally Posted by Fair

big buy-in, limited rebuy, 1 or no add-ons....perfect for serious game, players are tight but always feel that we have chance to win.

Not the same in small buy-in, unlimited rebuy, add ons with big stack, player with crazy style, so many time reborn

Big buy ins start at $1000+ a buy in perfect for serious games yes but are you ok and not affected if end up losing 100 buy ins at this level?
Forget individual tournaments players style all that crazy play stuff think of the big picture long haul for just a minute,
Example below of a 100 buy in swing if change euro graph shown to dollars from a good player at that level I will not name them just an example from a +50k to -$50k at one stage put pushed through and up again currently.
Can you keep it together financially,mentally positive can do attitude and also handle these type of swings not knowing which way the next 50k or 100k swing is going?

If answer is I do not care I am going to win on my 101st or 199th buy in you are ready for that level go for it break out from the easy $1000 buy in games and get to the nose bleed stakes good luck.

For me, it depends. If I have a bankroll of $0, I can play a 10 cent tournament seriously at times. Somehow, I turned nothing into $600 early this year. But when I had a $600 bankroll, I had trouble taking a $10 tournament seriously, when just a few days earlier, I was taking a 10 cent tournament pretty seriously! Makes no sense, right? I turned $0 to $600 in a week. Haven't been able to do anything like that in the past couple of months.

To answer your question, for me, it depends what my bankroll looks like. If it is extremely low, I can sometimes take a small buy-in seriously, but I find that they are usually crapshoots. More players in the tournament, a lot more all ins early in the tournament. Tough to bluff people off hands. I find that the larger buy ins, I always play my best game, as I am almost always more focused. Which is easier to win? The small buy-ins. Which is easier to play my best game? It is usually the bigger buy-ins.

Its delusional to think, its easier to beat games, where more money are at stake. Its just the other way around, since the more money is at stake, the more serious people will tend to take it on average. And if you cant beat the worst players in the game, like drunk people playing on a friday night, then you have massive flaws in your own game.

Besides that you are kind of mixing up different subjects. R+A tournaments are a special format, because effectively people will be buying in for more than the at face price and there are special tactical considerations due to the add-on, which is almost like a second bubble. But just like normal tournaments, R+As exist at different price points, and you are going to find a significantly higher level of play in a 5,5$ R+A than a 1,1$ R+A. Just like you will find a higher level of play in a normal 16,5$ MTT than in a normal 3,3$ MTT.

That being said stacks often tend to get rather short towards the end of late registration in a R+A. Thats just the way these tournaments are constructed, since the whole point is to make people rebuy. So if you dont like turbo tournaments and push-fold poker, then avoid this format and pick some tournaments, where the average stack size remain deeper.

i mean small buyin are $ 0.1 $0.5 and sometime $1. Big buy in from $5 up
Take the thousand dollar buy in tournament is obviously never easy to win
Maybe i do not know how to play in small buy in tour, playing as tight as in the final table so rarely i can get prize from small tour

In my opinion, a bigger buy-in is more focused on the quality of the game than, ofcourse will have flips but a lot less than with low buy-ins where there are many players and a lot of luck is needed to get to the olives. Once the bubbling of low-stakes games is over, the difficulty of the game is comparable to that of a high-stakes game.

Originally Posted by Fair

big buy-in, limited rebuy, 1 or no add-ons....perfect for serious game, players are tight but always feel that we have chance to win.

Not the same in small buy-in, unlimited rebuy, add ons with big stack, player with crazy style, so many time reborn

For me, it depends just as much on the bank roll as it does on being able to play at the higher stakes.

There no point playing a $215 if you can't buy in and get ITM enough times to make it profitable, you'll just risk the short term variance.

Naturally you'll see well rounded players at the high stakes and less people throwing money at the pot compared to the low/micro stakes tournaments.

I feel like tournaments above $100 are more difficult. That makes sense since there are more professionals among them.

I think the OP has an expensive misconception.

The more it costs to buy in , the higher the level of play. Because you can't see villain hole cards you mistakenly feel people are playing stronger hands than they are.

You are assuming this based on showdown.

At the beginning of course there are fewer big pots because there is no reason to waste chips when there just isn't much to win.

As the blinds grow and antes go up you will see the skill start to peek out.

You will see constant raises, cbets, 3 bets and wonder why they get so many hands but you are card dead.

The higher the buy in the looser and more aggressive the game.

Originally Posted by Fair

i mean small buyin are $ 0.1 $0.5 and sometime $1. Big buy in from $5 up
Take the thousand dollar buy in tournament is obviously never easy to win
Maybe i do not know how to play in small buy in tour, playing as tight as in the final table so rarely i can get prize from small tour

The real issue here is not the buyin but the player types, you are most likely to encounter. At 1$ and below there are going to be a lot of very loose players, who are typically not schooled in any way. Recreationals, fish, funplayers, whatever you want to call it. In a 5$ MTT you will still find some of these, but there will now be more TAGs (tight aggressives).

And it is easier to play on a table with many TAGs than a table with many fish. The TAG is more likely to either fold or 3-bet preflop, so there are less hands, where you need to see a flop, and when you do see a flop, its more likely to be heads up rather than multiway. If the hand proceed past the flop, the TAG will also have a somewhat more defined range, which you kind of know, what is, because you are probably a TAG yourself.

On a table full of fish you often can not effectively bluff, because for starters a lot of pots are multiway. This force you to make hands, and variance goes up, because the pots tend to be large. Maybe 3 people have limped into the pot, so rather than raising to 2,5BB you now have to make it 7BB with AQ, and you still end up with 4 callers. You miss the flop, and with so many people in the hand the only option left is to check-fold.

Or you actually get it heads up, but then the fish fire a big donk bet into your face, and since you missed, you cant really do anything other than fold. Or you actually hit top pair, and the fish call your C-bet. But then on an apparently safe turn card he suddenly jam it in your face. You make a curiosity call and gets shown J6 offsuit, that turned two pair. River is a brick, and on your way out of the tournament you just have time to see him post something like "LOL goodbuy fish" in the chat.

For all these reasons it can be frustrating to play against fish, especially when you are card dead. You just sit there and watch them splash chips around in the most ridiculous way, and some of them end up with huge stacks, while you make a disciplined laydown preflop for the 19. out of 20 times. However easy is not the same as profitable. And the simple fact is, if a whole table full of TAGs sit and battle it out against each other, then they all end up losing to the rake, because they all make the same decisions in any situation give or take. So if your goal is to win in poker, you have to learn to beat games with a lot of fish in them.

And as Carl Oakley say, once you get to mid stakes MTTs (22$ and higher), you are going to find an increasing amount of players, who are also rather loose, but there are loose in a good and profitable way. These are called LAGs, and they are the most difficult of any player type to be up against. They will sometimes put you to the test for all your chips, so you cant just fold all your bluff catchers on the river, as sometimes you can against a bad TAG. LAGs will also 3-bet you more, 4-bet you more, float you more, bluffraise you more. So on a table with many LAGs, there will also be few easy pots for you to pick up.

I believe that only you can understand what brings you the greatest joy from the game.

Originally Posted by fundiver199

---And it is easier to play on a table with many TAGs than a table with many fish. ---

Thanks for sharing your opinion. I found it interesting and somewhat unusual as for me. Have to think more on this, but should to say that for me it is easier to Win on a table with many Fishes than a table with many TAGs.

whatever buy in you choose, there will be always some crazy moves from players who don't care
so play your game and enjoy the tourney

Definitely the bigger the buyin the harder the game. it's common sense haha

I think if the buy in are higher the play is more predictable. In a 5k tournament no one will gamble with 23 not suited.

Originally Posted by DIANTA

Have to think more on this, but should to say that for me it is easier to Win on a table with many Fishes than a table with many TAGs.

This is also the exact point, I was trying to make. Its somewhat more simple to play against TAGs, but its potentially way more profitable to play against fish. The issues, many people have with playing against fish, include:

* they hate getting drawn out
* they hate losing to bad hands / bad players
* they want to use advanced strategies and bluff
* they hate variance and "gambling"
* they cant fold, even when it should be obvious, the fish got lucky on them

I think in any disciplines and at any limits with repeated entries or not-there are players of different levels.The most important thing is how you feel about the game.Your style your practice will show you who you are at the table.This is a game and it consists of bursts and emotions and players who can make you rich even for a second).Good luck friend!

as much money as music

Originally Posted by Fair

big buy-in, limited rebuy, 1 or no add-ons....perfect for serious game, players are tight but always feel that we have chance to win.

Not the same in small buy-in, unlimited rebuy, add ons with big stack, player with crazy style, so many time reborn

Here you need to turn on logic and reason : In tournaments with low bynom, you can show your skills only in the late stage of the tournament, since there are a lot of chips in the beginning and they don't care what to stab and olynit..In such a game, you obviously do not learn much, but still if you are a beginner, you should play first on the micro-limits... Where the bain is higher, there is certainly a strong field of players, but this is not terrible -this will just teach you how to play that poker where thoughtless olins and stakes will have little space and you will be able to apply your skills and see your mistakes .Do not stay long at low limits where the loss price is too small so it resembles more roulette .

I believe it,s easier to play a small buy-in or even a freeroll, just because usually in expensive tournaments with big prize money you can see lots of good players. I know also some people sometimes can,t controll bankroll management and plays this expensive tournaments, and i think this is the bad decision, it,s better to try to play lower buy-ins with weaker players. You will just have more chances to earn some money.

It isn’t that easy and also not good. Otherwise everyone could get rich with poker. But poker is a skill game with luck. It is important to take care of your bank roll management. So just play buy ins which you can afford and aren’t to high.

It all depends on the type of game, the most difficult thing is to play games where there are prizes for knocking out a player, they do not probable things at almost all levels of bains. If, for example, I have a choice to play one tournament for $ 100 or 4 for $ 25, I will choose the second option 4 games can bring you more profit from tournaments

I think so. The reason is that there are many good players who do not have the possibility to play high-entry tournaments and play only low-entry tournaments.

Big bye-in is easier.

with a buy-in of $ 10, players are much more difficult and play more interesting

the bigger buy in will give you better odds to place... however more chances for you to get knocked out... your play style should determine that.

Originally Posted by Fair

big buy-in, limited rebuy, 1 or no add-ons....perfect for serious game, players are tight but always feel that we have chance to win.

Not the same in small buy-in, unlimited rebuy, add ons with big stack, player with crazy style, so many time reborn

Common misconception from tons of players...oh if I just play higher buy ins players are tighter than micro donks! While it's true, the caliber and skill level of players significantly rises once you start playing $55 and up. Even alot of $16.50 ‐ $33 games have some crushers in them and very good regs at those levels. To beat those guys, you have to be on their skill level, and all of the best players st those levels are using the best tools and solvers available.

Anyhow, before I ramble anymore - hands down, smaller buy ins are much easier to beat. Yes super micro buy ins are definitely high variance -but your win rate - or bb/100 - should be much higher than it would be in the $55+ games.

Point blank if you cannot beat games $3 and under...you will get smashed playing anything above $11s and be broke before you know it. Poker is poker, and anyone can win a tournament they took a shot at outside of their bankroll that day - but that doesn't mean their skill level will sustain them at that buy in level.

If you frequent $2 games, are barely breaking even and then you satty into a $109 and you run deep and manage to cash for $900 - that doesn't mean you should all of a sudden jump stakes up to $11 games...you will probably punt off a ton of your roll because you don't have the skill set to make that jump. Then some folks after catching a big score take another big shot at a high buy in tournament, only to bust and fall short.

In summary - the smaller games are easier to beat no doubt, hands down - and if you are not disciplined enough to move up the ladder in smart fashion, tournament poker will eat you alive.