Contemplating 100NL

I made another dash at 50NL the other night and got snapped off yet again with a cooler. I flopped top two in the big blind against a LAG. He got feisty on the turn/river so fortunately I kept the pot small and lost only half my stack against his flopped bottom set on a dry board.

This actually reminds me of when I ran horrible at 10NL and simply skipped this level then ran like God at 25NL. This level has been like a comfortable old boot and quite a good money earner, but I feel stale and need a new challenge. And as you’ve witnessed, my Omaha game needs a little work…

The temptation I have now is skip 50NL and make a run at 100NL then see what goes down. The advantages I can see are:
- I’ve been coolered so many times at 50NL I’m now feeling a bit snake bit when I fire up these tables, which is also negatively affecting my play
- 100NL actually isn’t that high compared to the lowest game available at the casino. I'm also bankrolled sufficiently, esp. if I buy in at around $75.
- It's possible that 100NL has more players and better table selection, as I also found with NL10 vs NL25.
- I’m an unknown quantity at this level so the regulars should take a little while to get a line on my style
- 100NL is covered in the table ratings site which includes a wealth of information on the players. At the moment I need a few rounds to get a good feel for the table and players, but with this site I can instantly determine the winning and losing players. I’ve also noticed the tight players have a very slow/steady bankroll graph typically growing slower than the rake while the LAG’s have a wild bankroll fluctuating into positive and negative territory. It’s also shows big losing hands, so I can see for example if they’re the type to ride TPTK to the river no matter what.



FG