The Biggest Secret In Poker... Revealed!

[LPY2005 0]

This is False.when you can afford to play 100/200 instead of 1/2 you are playing better by that time because A-, you can afford to lose money and arent playing scared, B- you played your way to that level.Note that If you are a 1/2 NL player who now plays a high level, You will think what you see is similar styles at both level but in reality, you've just gained experience to play the high limits which are now your comfortzone, which remind you of playing 1/2

Not everyone playing 100/200 has worked their way there from 1/2. Some rich bored people that love to gamble aren't going to waste their time at the lower limits. It just doesn't give them the thrill they are looking for. While 100/200 may be a high limit for some, it's all reletive to how much money you have. Not everyone new to the 100/200 game just carried their bankroll over from 50/100, some have money from things other than poker. I agree that there is probably a couple brutally bad players with very limited experience. The trick is to make sure you know which players those are and exploit that.

[Actuary 3]

the simple initial post implied no skill difference.Certainly Royal is correct in pointing out:1. there is a big skill difference, in aggregate2. as you move up, your perception of who is skilled will adjust (like 40yrs old is old when you're 12, kinda adjustment)no one is saying there is no overlap between any levels, where a strong 1/2 player is better than a weekend gambling 100/200 fella, sometimes

[Royal_Tour 0]

Not everyone playing 100/200 has worked their way there from 1/2. Some rich bored people that love to gamble aren't going to waste their time at the lower limits. It just doesn't give them the thrill they are looking for. While 100/200 may be a high limit for some, it's all reletive to how much money you have. Not everyone new to the 100/200 game just carried their bankroll over from 50/100, some have money from things other than poker. I agree that there is probably a couple brutally bad players with very limited experience. The trick is to make sure you know which players those are and exploit that.

yes, i understand this, although someone with money to spend @ 100/200 will be able to play a form of poker that might appear to be solid, as long as they dont look to LAG.if they have simple knowledge and a few games under their belt, they can play these high levels without worry about money cuz to them 100/200 is the same as you playing 1/2

[LPY2005 0]

yes, i understand this, although someone with money to spend @ 100/200 will be able to play a form of poker that might appear to be solid, as long as they dont look to LAG.if they have simple knowledge and a few games under their belt, they can play these high levels without worry about money cuz to them 100/200 is the same as you playing 1/2

Exactly

[avsfan 0]

The only difference between a 1/2 player and a 100/200 player is how much money it takes to get them excited.

Do these players you speak of live under the sea?

[sixhands 0]

Do these players you speak of live under the sea?

yes, and they are good friends with Ariel. :Dif I won a couple mil on the lotto do you really think I am going to waste my time with $1/$2hell no, I am going to jump into a bigger game because the money won't matter.

[pokerplayer24 0]

Iggy not to be an *** but I think you overrate your game. And overall the reason each limit seems easy as you go up is because you improve along the way in order to beat the next level.

[homnig 0]

Iggy not to be an *** but I think you overrate your game. And overall the reason each limit seems easy as you go up is because you improve along the way in order to beat the next level.

How does he overrate his game. He consistently beats the mid-high limit holdem games..

[pokerplayer24 0]

How does he overrate his game. He consistently beats the mid-high limit holdem games..

Having played more hands of 10/20 and up on stars then anyone on this forum and having played with iggy/ talked to players who have played with him i'd have a better idea then most.I dont doubt that he can beat the game and that he does beat the game i'm just saying that its pretty impossible to label the 30/60 game on stars as easy and or anything at all similar to a 1/2 game.

[antistuff 0]

Having played more hands of 10/20 and up on stars then anyone on this forum and having played with iggy/ talked to players who have played with him i'd have a better idea then most.I dont doubt that he can beat the game and that he does beat the game i'm just saying that its pretty impossible to label the 30/60 game on stars as easy and or anything at all similar to a 1/2 game.

the real question is...if youre right and there is a big difference...why woulndt you encourage the spreading of the misconception that there isnt....or is there really not a difference and you dont want us to all take shots at your soft 30/60 games?

[Abbaddabba 0]

I dont play that high, so i have no vested interest in saying that i think the typical FCP poster could only make a stars 30/60 softer. They're not easy games.Im sure that i've played in 3/6 games on absolute that are tougher than some 30/60 games on stars, but those instances are the exception and i leave those tables asap. It's a bad comparison. There is a noticable gap between the level of play at a 30/60 and even a 10/20. If someone doesnt see a very noticable difference between 1/2 and 30/60, that's reason to question their ability. I think if iggy sat down at both he'd soon see the difference.

Having played more hands of 10/20 and up on stars then anyone on this forum and having played with iggy/ talked to players who have played with him i'd have a better idea then most.I dont doubt that he can beat the game and that he does beat the game i'm just saying that its pretty impossible to label the 30/60 game on stars as easy and or anything at all similar to a 1/2 game.

I hope to challenge that title some time soon.

[Actuary 3]

not even worth it for free.

[Zach6668 513]

not even worth it for free.

I hate the newsletter.

[homnig 0]

Having played more hands of 10/20 and up on stars then anyone on this forum and having played with iggy/ talked to players who have played with him i'd have a better idea then most.I dont doubt that he can beat the game and that he does beat the game i'm just saying that its pretty impossible to label the 30/60 game on stars as easy and or anything at all similar to a 1/2 game.

Allright points understood, but he's not really over-rating his game he's just underrating the game he plays or overrating 1-2. Not sure which.

[iggymcfly 0]

I better clear up some misunderstandings here. I was never trying to say that the skill level at the two games is exactly the same. In general, there are usually better players, the higher up you go. My point was that the deciding factor in what limit most people play is not skill. It is the money in play. The idea that you get at low-limits is that each limit up, people are significantly better, when really, there's huge overlap, and the difference is a slight gradation. For instance, you can't say a 5/10 game plays like X and a 15/30 game plays like Y, because they vary widly. On Party, it was not uncommon to see some tilted schmuck at the 50/100 game who would be getting hammered at a 1/2 game in his current state.Post-ban on Stars, I've noticed a lot more regulars in the mid-limit games, but I still maintain that the difference is a lot smaller than you'd think. It seems like half the people at the tables have AF aggression ratings under 1 and PFR under 10 (something like 40/8/0.7, not nitty TAGs). To be fair, I haven't played low-limits in several months, but it seems like these passive types are the same fish you'd be taking advantage of at 2/4.Again, I wasn't saying the games don't change at all. They get more aggressive as you go on, the fish percentage goes down, and the good player percentage goes up. I was just saying that the same type of players exist in all the games, and money not skill is the deciding factor for what level people choose to gamble at.

[Abbaddabba 0]

Of course there's overlap. Just maybe not enough to justify a BIGGEST SECRET IN POKER REVEALED thread.

[iggymcfly 0]

I thought it would be funny to have a serious post under a heading that looked like spam. Sorry if that's frowned upon in Strat. And I do think it's true that most low-limit players greatly, greatly, overestimate the skill difference between different levels.

[Abbaddabba 0]

I dont think it came across as satire to most.It looked like... you didnt think there was a big difference between players at different stakes.

[Actuary 3]

I thought it looked like you didn't think we realized that bad players play at all levels.

[thehidden 0]

So I guess the end result in this post is:Who is going to stake me for the 100/200 game?

i got 10 free dollars sitting here with ur name on it Zach...i get 65% of the profit right?