I think the 3/6 ring games on Party are harder than the 5/10 games. I don’t know why, but for some reason when I have tried to move from 2/4 to 3/6, my bank roll has always taken a big hit and I’ve had to move back down. Because of recent tourney winnings, my bankroll has swelled, and I’ve been dabbling at the 5/10 tables. I find them to be softer and more easily beaten than the 3/6 games. Anyone else noticed this? Or am I crazy?
In any case, I have delayed any move up in level because 3/6 seemed too tough and 5/10 is still too expensive for a lowly boarding school teacher (until I make a big score in the Stars 11R that is!). I’m consistently beating the 2/4 game, but the rake is so high that I’m never going to be a big winner at this level and I really want to move up. Frustrating!
Today I played two sessions of 3/6 on Party and booked two big winning sessions. This is good for my bankroll, but also good for my mind. 3/6 can be beat! Maybe I can finally make that move.
Categories
4 replies on “Any validity to this?”
The one think I can think of is that 5/10 is very much a “middle limit” and people who have money who have never played online before may decide they want to start there instead if starting lower. Of course we also know that a lot of these clowns start in the 15-30 games because that’s how I pay rent and buy all those train tickets to come see you.
I love those clowns. I truly do.
my winrate was way higher at 3/6 than 5/10, but WAY higher at 5/10 6max than anything else
if only you had some sort of backer flush with cash…
There was a crazy and irresponsible period this summer when I was on quite a rush for about two weeks and played exclusively 5/10 6 max games. Of course since I was just starting out, this had little to do with my skill and everything to do with getting smacked over the head with the deck. It took about two losing sessions to bring me back to reality.
A backer, you say? Flush with cash? I don’t know anyone like that…do you?