$5 Players Vs $100 Players

[Ouch-8s 4]

I've been playing at the $5-$10 tournament level for several months now, and I do reasonably well there.I won a ticket to the $112+8 Grand VII qualifier and played in that game last night. This was my first experience against "$100 level players".It did not go well.Starting stack is 1500. There are two tables to start, both six-handed.I got QQ and AK in my first two hands. Both times I re-raised a multi-way pot significantly to thin the field, we went 3 players to the flop. On the QQ, the flop came AKx, I fold to an all-in. On the AK, the flop came 10Qx (all clubs), again I fold to an all-in. Boom, I've lost a third of my chips. From there it was mostly fold fold fold until we consolidate to one table, where I open-raised in LP w/ 1010 to 4xBB (about 25% my stack). I got raised enough to put me all-in by the button, who was re-raised all-in by the BB. I should have pushed from LP but didn't, then compounded my mistake by calling, as does the button. The cards are turned over, button has Q10 (resteal attempt?), BB has KJ(?). A king fell and I was done.Questions:- Did I commit too many chips to the first two hands? In both cases, there was a raise early, and then multiple callers. I was on button/CO for these hands. The pot is around 200 when I bump the bet to 200. Both times the first to act pushed on the flop, so I had no chance to do anything. - I think I need to fold these flops here, correct? First 2 hands so no reads and I have no notes on these players.- Is this amount of aggression the norm at this level? The all-in (first two hands) is much more than a pot size bet...- Does my fold to the first allin increase the likelihood of a second allin coming at me regardless of the 2nd flop?- What kind of adjustments do I need to expect to be able to make to succeed at this higher level? Or since you don't know me: what types of adjustments does the typical $5 player need to make?- What were the button and BB thinking on my final hand? They are the two chip-leaders, they don't need to tangle with each other, I've been tight for the last 2-3 orbits and am obviously looking to double up. I felt committed to call, although I probably wasn't really. I can understand the button's resteal attempt, but the BB? His raise was insignificant to the button (only a couple hundred more into a multi-thousand chip pot). Maybe I can win at this level if this is the kind of play I am going to witness - Is it allin, or all-in, or all in?

[Garn 0]

i have no experience with these stakes but I think that you played the 1st 2 hands fine. just didn't go your way.

[Ouch-8s 4]

i have no experience with these stakes but I think that you played the 1st 2 hands fine. just didn't go your way.

Thanks. It was kind of a shock to lose so much of my stack so fast, especially since I have been running over the $5 SnGs for the last two weeks or so and the same for the qualifier that got me into this game. I went into it really wondering if the skill level would change (as I noticed no real difference between a $5 SnG/MTT and the $14 qualifier). I had to take a deep breath and relax to last as long as I did after the first two hands...Of course I see all-ins in the first level occasionally but it is more rare than not. There were these two, and then a couple more shortly later. I suppose it may be in part due to the fact that the tables started 6-handed.

[copernicus 0]

Ive never played at the $5 level so its hard to say what kinds of adjustments would have to be made. In general the faults of lower limit players are playing too many hands preflop, overbetting or underbetting, calling stations, and overvaluing unimproved big pairs, AK. But then, those are the faults of a lot of $100 players..just not as many of them.The aggression at your table is not typical from what Ive seen, but then as you point out its shorthanded, and I assume only 1 or 2 spots are paid, so aggression is called for.The first two hands look fine. I doubt whether the first all-in influenced the second one.Yes you should have pushed with the TT but would it have made any difference? Neither player was doing much thinking apparently, unless there were stack considerations where accumulating chips immediately was essential.When in doubt about all in, allin, or all-in, just push.(Actually it probably depends on the context. As a noun ("He called his all-in") it probably should be all-in. As an adverb (at least I think its an adverb..modifying a verb? math is my thing not grammar) its probably not hyphenated. "He went all in". I doubt that allin is ever right.)

[Ouch-8s 4]

Ive never played at the $5 level so its hard to say what kinds of adjustments would have to be made. In general the faults of lower limit players are playing too many hands preflop, overbetting or underbetting, calling stations, and overvaluing unimproved big pairs, AK. But then, those are the faults of a lot of $100 players..just not as many of them.The aggression at your table is not typical from what Ive seen, but then as you point out its shorthanded, and I assume only 1 or 2 spots are paid, so aggression is called for.The first two hands look fine. I doubt whether the first all-in influenced the second one.Yes you should have pushed with the TT but would it have made any difference? Neither player was doing much thinking apparently, unless there were stack considerations where accumulating chips immediately was essential.When in doubt about all in, allin, or all-in, just push.(Actually it probably depends on the context. As a noun ("He called his all-in") it probably should be all-in. As an adverb (at least I think its an adverb..modifying a verb? math is my thing not grammar) its probably not hyphenated. "He went all in". I doubt that allin is ever right.)

Thanks Copernicus,I think I am getting a handle on the 'common faults', and I'm seeing an improvement in my results that directly reflects the discipline I apply when playing.I think that if I had pushed with the TT, the resteal attempt would have been moot. But who knows? Maybe a call was coming regardless...I think I have a new sig

[offset 0]

I cant fault you for any of your play. In terms of the different skill levels there are tons of donks at both levels. There are more good players at the $100 level, but in my experience they are still mostly mediocre or complete donks. The only noticeable difference is that the higher levels are much more agressive. You should be willing to call with a lot more when you suspect a resteal, especially when you are the button, sb, or CO, and someone to your left pushes preflop.

[therrinn 0]

As to the first two hands, you just caught horrible flops. Short of a deepstack structure, you're not going to avoid losing a good portion of your stack if your good hands can't hit a flop.In terms of general style of play, you're going to make less money on your 'good' starting hands than you would at lower buyins. If you have AK and the flop comes Axx, you're not going to get paid off very much. You have to be much more worried that if someone is playing with you on an A-high flop, they probably have tptk beat or are on a semi-bluff with a pretty big draw.

[Ouch-8s 4]

I cant fault you for any of your play. In terms of the different skill levels there are tons of donks at both levels. There are more good players at the $100 level, but in my experience they are still mostly mediocre or complete donks. The only noticeable difference is that the higher levels are much more agressive. You should be willing to call with a lot more when you suspect a resteal, especially when you are the button, sb, or CO, and someone to your left pushes preflop.

If the push had been preflop, I might have called. I was certainly watching for aggressive moves, and saw some real early

If you have AK and the flop comes Axx, you're not going to get paid off very much. You have to be much more worried that if someone is playing with you on an A-high flop, they probably have tptk beat or are on a semi-bluff with a pretty big draw.

Thanks

[GrinderMJ 0]

Hey, I'm not going to go into specifics about any of the hands, but I would like to address the difference between 5 and 100 dollar players. Obviously there is a difference, but I think that lower buy in players (10-30 dollar MTTs), overestimate the talent of their opponents. I see nonstop horrible play at every stage of 100 and 200 dollar MTTs. So if you get your chance through satellites to enter 100 and 200 dollar MTT's, just play your game and dont look for monsters in the closet. THe hands are the same, the players are slightly better but sitll overwhelmingly bad. So play with no fear and give yourself the best possible chance to win a big cash.P.S. I'm not sure what my post has to do with the topic at hand, but I liked it.

[Ouch-8s 4]

Hey, I'm not going to go into specifics about any of the hands, but I would like to address the difference between 5 and 100 dollar players. Obviously there is a difference, but I think that lower buy in players (10-30 dollar MTTs), overestimate the talent of their opponents. I see nonstop horrible play at every stage of 100 and 200 dollar MTTs. So if you get your chance through satellites to enter 100 and 200 dollar MTT's, just play your game and dont look for monsters in the closet. THe hands are the same, the players are slightly better but sitll overwhelmingly bad. So play with no fear and give yourself the best possible chance to win a big cash.P.S. I'm not sure what my post has to do with the topic at hand, but I liked it.

I think your post is pertinent to the topic...When you say $10 players overestimate their opponents, do you mean at the $10 level or also at the $100 level? I don't think I overestimate my opponents at $10, but I was nervous going into the $100 tournament and suppose I was looking for 'monsters in the closet'.I remember going from PartyPoker to FullTilt for the first time and being COMPLETELY outclassed. I lasted about 2 days before I withdrew and went back to the games I could beat . I didn't feel outclassed like that after this tournament; I'm looking forward to my next $100 experience, which I will have to satellite into as I cannot afford the buy-in (or rather cannot afford to LOSE the buy-in).FWIW, the single biggest improvement to my tournament game was realized by improving my cash game. That allowed me to go deep. I've read HOH, etc, and knew all about 'playing to win' not 'playing to cash'. But still, it wasn't until the amount of the 'bubble cash' was insignificant to me, because I knew I could win it in 20min on a cash table, that I was truly able to 'play without fear' and go deep.