This challenge was off topic from another discussion so I have started this new thread to track it separately. @BigDogxxx challenged me to test the differences between low and high stakes ring games on this site by dropping down to the low stakes tables and taking on the regular players there. To paraphrase, his hypothesis is that lower stakes tables are tougher because there are fewer people who have bought chips. My hypothesis is that the higher stakes tables are tougher because they contain mostly people who have beaten the lower levels.
Parameters for this challenge:
- I will play games at low stakes level, specifically 10/20, 25/50 and 50/100. I might play at other levels during the challenge period but I will not include them here.
- I will track all of my sessions played at these levels and post results here.
- We will assume I have a starting bankroll of 100k - this is 10x100BB buy ins at the highest low stakes table.
- The challenge will start today and finish on Sunday October 21. This will give a week of play and so hopefully a reasonable sample of hands to even out some of the variance. Conveniently there is a leaderboard running for this period for these stakes. If I do not finish in the top 100 I will post a screenshot of my actual position at the end of the challenge. The leaderboard tracks the number of big blinds won at low stakes tables so it is only counting the results at this level.
I will post comments in this thread with my results and observations of the play as compared to higher stakes on this site. I’m not sure that I have a definitive way to say that one hypothesis or another is correct, but hopefully the experiment and discussion will be interesting.