Are micro-limits profitable?

Hello, this post is regarding the profitablity (or lack of) the on-line micro limit holdem games. I have read a lot of opinions lately from both good and bad players alike, that the small limits on-line, such as 0.50$- 1$ and 1-2$, cannot be beaten for much profit. I am looking just for a little more info here. Now I know nobody is going to get rich at these limits, and I know anyone decent should move up in stakes, but assuming a small rake, (planet, paradise) aren't these small tables still beatable for 1, 1.5 or 2 big bets an hour by a good player? Please let me know why they can't be beaten at this rate, or any rate, if that is your opinion. /images/smile.gif


At first I was thinking if you can't beat these tables of river players and loose callers, who can you beat? I was even thinking in the long that you would get more big bets per hour out of these players then any other game going. Now however, I'm not so sure.

One thing I was considering is that the combined bad play of a whole table of fishes, although contributing to your profits, might actually lower your net big bets per hour because a good player can't use skill and ability to their advantage at such a table? I'm not sure if that logic holds true or not...


Thanks in advance, SS.

In a casino you are dealt around 20-25 hands a hour. A good player strives to win 1 big bet an hour. At paradise on a fast table you are dealt 100-120 hands per hour. In my opinion a good player should be able to beat these games for 4-5 big bets an hour. Is my thinking wrong? If so, why?

I think your hands per hour are inflated.


Typically the micro-limits have more people seeing the flop and more people going to a showdown. This significantly reduces the hands per hour. While they are still well above a brick and morter casino, very rarely will a full table approach 100-120.


I'd estimate about 60 hands per hour to be more accurate.

$5 an hour is definately doable...

These games are definately beatable in terms of BB/hr. If you have trouble beating the loose games, either adjust your style or play in the tighter games. Micro limits are great places to learn how to play different styles because they obviously won't break your bank.


Not all micro limit games are full of super fish with 5-6 callers at the river. Many of them consist of decent poker players who can beat bad players but get destroyed by better players at higher limits. Usually because they are too passive. The best advice I can give you for beating these games is to be AGGRESSIVE.


And I suggest you move up to higher limits as soon as you're consistently beating the game and have a proper bankroll. After you move up, don't go back.

I fail to win until I hit $2/4. I played with $50 and $75 buy-ins at $1/2 and lower games. I could never win. My money would slowly disappear over the course of a couple months. Or, I would take a shot at a bigger game and get blown out in an afternoon.


I thought that $75 should be plenty to back a .5/1 game. It probably should, but I could not. After reading a post about bankrolls, I decided to buy in for $500 and take a shot at the $3/6. Good decision. I don't play much different. I use the same starting hand standards (maybe a little tighter).


I could not beat these stakes and I know I'm not that good. I do beat (barely) $3/6, but right now I'm just studying to get to the next level. I'm sure many are beating these micro-stakes, I just know I didn't. Good practice and not very expensive.


Gary W.

You're right you wont get rich in these micro games,but you can make your beer money rather easily if you stick to quality openers.I have very limited time to play so I have to hit and run.I rarely play more than an hour per session.After an initial loss playing loose and aggressive I tightened up and now average 5 bb's per hour.Keep in mind I play short sessions and have lost my buy in to "Bingo Players" drawing out a couple of times and I don't usually rebuy.You would do well to profile players and pick the tables where you know the weak ones are playing.I don't know how well I would do if I played longer sessions but I belive if you play tight and aggressive you could do rather well.

Sure they are profitable. There are several 2+2ers who regularly double or triple their stacks at UB .10/.25 NL in fairly short periods of time.


I've only recently started played 1/2 PL at UB, with mixed success, but I've spent a lot of time watching the games. They are definitely profitable for a good player. From what I've seen the same players consistantly take home the money.

I very seldom play over 2/4 (I occasionally will step into the 3/6, 5/10 if I see some weak players who I know I can ride for a big win). My reasoning is that the play at the lower limits is often terrible (and if it's not I'll switch tables and find one that is).


I've been playing for 4 months an average of 3 hours per day (a total of 350 hours) and have netted over 3,000 profit. Most of my action comes on 1/2 which means I am averaging a little over 5BB/Hr (lately since I've been reading here and adapting my strategy it's actually gone up significantly). So the answer to your question, at least in my opinion, is that micro limits are profitable if you find the right action (loose, weak players) and are a smart player.

I beat 1-2 for between 2.5 and 3 big bets per hour (over two tables).


Probably better to move up if you can stand the bankroll requirements.


Chris

Micro-limits are profitable but they are not going to replace any day jobs. I was averaging $5 per hour at 1-2 and $6 per hour at 2-4. Now I was never succesful at playing multiple tables so most of that was 1 table. So $10 per hour seems reasonable if you can do 2 at once.


I think the UB small NL limit is also profitable for a similar hourly rate.


Ken Poklitar

ohKanada@hotmail.com

Don't believe people telling you that you can't beat a table because the rake is too high or too many people are calling. Both of these things should change the style of your play(see every poker book ever written for more information on this) but it's still a skill game, you're opponents just don't have any.

If the rake is too high, and the table is tight-aggressive, or maybe even just tight (if the rake is high enough), the game is probably unbeatable.


I think rake makes shorthanded games in general harder to beat, but this is just me, I'm not aggressive enough!


If the table's loose, the game is definitely beatable! People who say the game is unbeatable because everyone calls, need to adjust their style to the loose game. Less bluffing, etc.


Taken to the extreme, if there was a game where EVERY street was capped, and everyone stayed in till the river, I'd imagine that would be very profitable. /images/smile.gif


- Tony