World Poker Forums

Which is harder? High stakes or low stakes holdem (NO LIMIT?) I have seen tight, aggressive players at the 1/2 level. Some play perfect poker.However when I watch High stakes poker, it seems as though they play MUCH looser and bluff more often. I see players calling early raises with hands like QJ off suit. That does not seem like a good play.Is high stakes poker MORE difficult than the lower stakes (NO LIMIT)

As a broad generalization, the higher the stakes, the more likely the players involved are serious about the game, which means there's a greater chance any given player is at least competent. However, just because something is generally true does not mean it applies to any particular table, it's important to analyze the table and adjust play accordingly.You seem to imply that tight = good play and loose = bad play. That's a pretty simple approach that generally won't hold true at higher limits. Particularly in high stakes no-limit games, where post-flop play is so important. That's not to say that somebody who plays loose at 100/200 is automatically a good player, just that you have to pay attention to more than just their pre-flop percentages to make an accurate assessment of skill.

The play has to be much looser, because there's a $100 ante, in addition to the $300/$600 blinds.In a 1/2 NL with no ante, you can still afford to play tight and wait till you get a premium hand.If you toss 10 hands in a row, you're out $3. (1 1/2 big blinds)Try that on High Stakes Poker, and you're out $1900 (3 big blinds)

Its not really harder, its the players.Its all perception. If I throw a $10 bet in, your less likely to think, your going to call immediately with anything. If I throw $200 in, your thinking a little harder (its still the minimum raise, just different table)