http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Petersburg_paradox

It’s a variation of the high-stakes coin toss dilemma that i first read about in an undergraduate math textbook, and it goes sort of like this:

I toss a coin until it comes up tails. If n is the number of times I tossed the coin, I pay you 2^n dollars. We repeat as often as you would like. How much are you willing to pay to play?

The expectation value of this game is infinite! In other words, you should be happily willing to pay $100 billion per tossing session. But the variance of a $100 billion St. Petersburg game would be so ludicrously large that the world would almost certainly run out of cash before anybody won.

Mathematically, poker games against stupid-aggressive opponents are a lot like a real-life St. Petersburg paradox: extremely profitable, but with terrifying bankroll swings. (and if you really want practice at wild poker, try the NL play-money tables!)

I think there’s also mileage, from the improvement perspective, in sampling games at equivalent stakes in various environments. FOr me that means bouncing around Party, Stars, Full Tilt (of course) and Paradise with occasional visits to Bodog for spice. The list changes from time to time as the mood takes me. I’m also convinced that learning to cope with other games and betting structures helps to develop overall poker “sense” to more general situational play.

Interesting take, especially #2 which I would agree with. On #1 though, I see it a little differently. If you’re playing a typical Party game of $5/$10 full with at least one raise pre-flop and 5 or 6 to the flop on every hand, that’s a very, very different game than even $5/$10 6 max where it’s likely to be heads-up or three handed to the flop. So, in essence, it sounds like playing an aggressive 6 max game would do more to prepare you for higher limits than would playing in loose, aggressive full table at the same limit.

And, if I’m reading you correctly, what we’re really talking about here is the change in hand strengths. K9o is a good hand heads-up. It’s a crap hand in a loose, aggressive game with a raise in front of you. 76s is a great hand in a loose aggressive game where you can get the odds to draw to your straight or flush. Heads up, it loses a lot of value.

1. As you move up in limits, the games get much looser and more aggressive on the individual level. Meaning, there is much raising with hands like K9o, but usually the pot ends up heads up on the flop. I think that learning how to play against loose aggressive players is one of the most important skills to learn in low limit poker.

2. “Now, part of my hypothesis is that Player B might plateau at $30/$60.” The most successful player will move up in limits as fast as he possibly can (with some constraints thrown in here)– I believe that the most successful players are driven by their competitive instincts, and don’t concern themselves with win rates– only the question if the bankroll to play in the bigger game.

Also, I believe the jump from 30-60 to the bigger games is a tough one, but a players chance of successfully making the leap has little to do with their previous experience. The game is so different that non technical skills become far more important.

Well, I know that Full Tilt had that reputation for some time. Though, the site has been growing so quickly that the games have softened a bit. I think each site has their own reputation for their games. For instance, the low limit games on Site A might be tougher than on Site B but site B’s middle-limit games might be tougher than Site A’s.

Bill

It was a good lesson, and I will probably profit more from the lesson far more then the chips I bled off last night.

Also, is it possible for a site to somehow attract only “better” players so their site isn’t riddled with fish? It would be nice to have people respect a re-raise once in a while, but is it realistic to avoid the schools of fish just to play with “better” players to improve your game?

HH Mark has often maintained that he prefers the tougher games (plays at paradise) because his goal is to improve and learn, not just make the most BB/100 hands.

I agree and like what you said about playing in both the fishy and tough games. Part of being a good player is recognizing the type of game you are in and adapting. While it is still hard to find a tougher game at .5/1 through to 2/4 it occasionally does happen. I was playing last night on party at a full table and 8 out of ten of us had a VPIP of 20% or lower and the Pre/post flop AF was high. Very unusual for party but still fun to play. even at the same stakes you need to be able to recognize a tougher table and play accordingly.

Amateurs whose tourney entry fee represents 50% of their year’s winnings will hesitate to take those edges because this will be the only tourney they play.

It’s all about sample size and the ability to withstand swings such that the law of large numbers begins to hold true.