the rake at .50/1

[underthegun662]

i was watching a rerun of the 2003 wsop today and saw dutch boyds rakefree.com hat. so i decided to check out the site. on the site he wrote something about him propping in calfifornia. he wrote that him and the other guys propping couldnt make money playing 2/4 because of the rake. i am beating the .50/1 at pp but im not killing it like the 5/10 game at the cardroom. is the reason for this the rake? it seems like the people making steady money are the ones playing 3/6 and up. i know the games are tougher as you go up but i think the rake is harder to beat at .50/1.

[stinkypete]

the 5/10 game at your cardroom might well be softer than party .5/1

[Rah]

Yeah, sometimes Party is so full of bonuschasers and 2+2ers that no level is really soft.

[Rudbaeck]

It might well be the rake, it's pretty damn monstrous as 0.5/1

[cnfuzzd]

The rake is terrible. However, how many hands have you played in that live game. Chances are, despite the fact that it probably is softer than the party .5/1, you havent reached that special convergence of winrate and variance. That having been said, i think it is more difficult to beat most low limit live games than the party .5/1. In some of these live 2/4 and 3/6 games, a full BB is coming out of the pot. Thats bad.

peace

john nickle

[Bulbarainey]

[ QUOTE ]
The rake is terrible. However, how many hands have you played in that live game. Chances are, despite the fact that it probably is softer than the party .5/1, you havent reached that special convergence of winrate and variance. That having been said, i think it is more difficult to beat most low limit live games than the party .5/1. In some of these live 2/4 and 3/6 games, a full BB is coming out of the pot. Thats bad.

peace

john nickle

[/ QUOTE ]


on top of that there are also less players, most B&M cardrooms seem to be 8-9players, where as online is usually up to 10. also, some of the casinos also have a "jackpot blind" on the button like at hollywood park, those kill the game with 8 players

[BusterStacks]

This is a pretty lame excuse imo. I started my poker career with 300$ at .5/1 and have never deposited any of my own money, and I am not a great player by anyone's stretch of the definition. It's very beatable. Now granted, you're not going to make a any good amount of money, but that's not the point of this limit.

[cnfuzzd]

uhm. reread my post. We are agreeing. The .5/1 is very beatable. That having been said, it would be easier to beat if the rake were lower. If the rake were higher, it would be more similiar to the low limit games ive seen in casinos, where there is often a full big bet coming out of the pot, and this doesnt include the various tokes that most people, rightfully imo, feel they should give to dealers and servers.

peace

john nickle

[BusterStacks]

the reply was to the guy above you. sorry.

[Rudbaeck]

[ QUOTE ]
the reply was to the guy above you. sorry.

[/ QUOTE ]

I too beat 0.5/1 on the way up, but the rake in BB counted is possibly the highest you'll ever encounter at this limit.

It's beatable, no worries, but the rake in comparison to the blinds is the worst you'll ever have to suffer. The average player pays 4BB/100 in rake at this level. This has dropped to 2.5BB/100 at 3/6. After 3/6 it plummets pretty fast.

[underthegun662]

so .50/1 should just be a stepping stone? i put $100 and built my bankroll up to over $600 it took about 40,000 hands just to do that. i wanted to move up to 1/2 but i was making so much at .50/1 i decided just to play that some more. then i hit a big downswing and now im stuck at -250 bets over the past 8,000 hands. should i haved moved up? when you guys say you are crushing the .50/1 for 5 bets per 100. is that with or without the rakeback? because with rake back my account is well over $1000. ive given alot of money to the rake these past 3 months.

[BusterStacks]

I made < 3bb/100 at .5/1, but yes I think it should be a stepping stone. Dr. Feeney has a good article on learning to beat the higher limits in his book, "Inside the Poker Mind". In short, you should move up when you can, it will help your game and your wallet.

[cnfuzzd]

playing 4 tables, beating the .50/1 for 5/bb 100 is $10 hour. playing 4 tables, beating the 3/6 for 2/bb is 24$ hour. a good rakeback on a 3/6 account should be at least 600 month. At least. There is no way to move up to 15/30 directly from the .5/1. Yes, to many .5/1 should be just a stepping stone. To others, it can be a decent source of income. Personal preference really.

peace

john nickle

[lefty rosen]

I have a buddy who was beating .5/1 for 200 US a week on the side of his job and never moved up beyond playing tournies. You can beat the game for huge amounts if you 3 or 4 table. I told him he was wasting his time if he bothered to scout many soft party 1/2 and 2/4 games the games will play similar and you are geting payed off at a 4 to 1 rate too......

[Kenrick]

Online rake is pretty rough at .50/1, but B&M rake (plus tips) at 3/6 sucks, too. Now that Party and probably other 1/2 games have softened up, I wouldn't recommend .50/1 to anyone who is not a beginner. .50/1 eats up a lot of rake. Party 1/2 used to be a wasteland, but not lately.

This winter seems to be ridiculous at every level, though. Seems like people are just throwing money away. Hopefully that will continue as people feel "entertained" by playing holdem poker.

I thought last winter was something, but the average pots this winter are even higher. Very interesting. The local knick-knack women's stores at the mall even sell poker junk. I've never seen so much gambling crap in stores. God Bless the WPT. ...Seriously. I thought last winter was something, but this winter makes me want to jump up two playing levels with a short bankroll just because the players suck so bad.