Party 1/2 versus 5/10

[topspinner]

First of all, want to thank everyone who posts on this forum, as it has been a great help to me. I was wondering how the 5/10 games compare to the 1/2 games unfortunately this looks like the next level if you are going to move up. Are the games that much tougher, what is the average # of people seeing the flop? At the 1-2 tables it has been about 52%.
I have only been playing 6 max tables for about 12,000 hands and have won about 7.5bb/100, before that I had played about 12 months of 1/2 (10 handed), with a win rate of 3bb/100. I usually only single table, as I like to surf the net while I play. I think most of my win rate is attributed to how bad the other players play, rather than how well I play. I know when I get on a table that the vpip is in the low 20's and aggr is over 1.5, I am a break even player at best. However, I am thinking to improve my game and take it to the next level, I need to move uplevels. Any opinions or advice would be most appreciated. I have a bankroll of about 9k, so money isn't an issue, but I don't want to lose what has taken me so long to earn.

[srw5n]

Besides the old joke they use the red chips, the main difference is aggression. All the loose passive passive players from the 1/2 game are replaced by semi-loose to loose aggressive aggressive players. The 5/10 Full game is a field of rocks which I never play so I can't comment extensively there, but 5/10 (6 max) is a very aggressive game. You're not going to see the absolutely awful plays you see at 1/2 with great frequency either, but you do run into mediocre players regularly.

If you adjust accordingly you'll be fine.

7.5 BB/100 is unrealistic at 5/10, but I'm around 4BB/100 and looking at PT I was at 7.42BB/100 back at 1/2. When I first started at 5/10 I lost .2 BB/100 for the first 1000 hands while I adjusted to the change in aggression.

You could also just play 3/6 short handed which is also do able. I think the rake at 2/4 is excessive and would never play at that level.

[bobman0330]

I started 6-max at pokerstars (2/4 and 3/6), and I found it to be pretty good training. (I haven't fully transitioned to Party 5/10 yet, so I could be wrong.) It's a bit saner, from what I've seen, but also more passive, so maybe you'd be better served just jumping into the 5/10.

So basically, my answer is I don't know. On the other hand, I can't describe the feeling when I sat down at my first PP 5/10 after the sane PS 3/6 and realized that the player on my right was VPIP 80+ and PFR 45%, and the guy on my left was VPIP 70+, PFR <10, and had no problems cold-calling my 3-bets. Ahhhh.

[ggbman]

[ QUOTE ]

7.5 BB/100 is unrealistic at 5/10, but I'm around 4BB/100 and looking at PT I was at 7.42BB/100 back at 1/2. When I first started at 5/10 I lost .2 BB/100 for the first 1000 hands while I adjusted to the change in aggression.

[/quote

you averaged 7.42bb/100 after how many hands at 1/2? Unless your simply the best 1/2 6 max player in the world this can't be over the course of more then 30,000 hands. Also, how many 5-10 hands have you played. 4 BB/100 is doable, but it puts you in the top fraction of a precent of these players, and when making a comment like this which someone is going to use to evaluate competition, you should include how many hands your talking about.

[wahooriver]

Before moving up to 5/10 on Party, I frequented 3/6 on Paradise (5 handed). I think this is the next logical step.

I too have a 7 BB/100 rate at Party 1/2 - mostly due to loose passive opponents. At 5/10 I am fluctuating between 2.5 and 3 BB/100 (close to 20k hands now).

The big difference - more aggression!

Just like 1/2, you need to search out good tables. When you find a good table, it is a beautiful thing. 5/10 has some great maniacs and fish (maniacs raise almost anything, fish call everything preflop and then play passively). Find those, play smart, and enjoy the fruits.

5/10 has many excellent players. If you get to a table full of excellent players, find another table. Leaving a "bad" table is commendable.

If you are not willing to play at Paradise 3/6 first, I would accumulate around 30-40 k at 1-2 prior to moving up. It is a different game, and the shock of dropping $100-200 in minutes takes a bit of time to get used to.

Be sure your bankroll is prepared for the swings, unless you want to just "take a shot".

<font color="red">Taking a shot </font>

When I started 5/10, I set aside 65 BB for my experiment. The first week, I would play 5/10 for a session, then go back to 1/2 for a couple of easy sessions. I lost around 40BB quickly, before going on a nice run.

When you have a losing session - take the time to critique your own play. I find that I go on mini-tilts when losing - playing good (not great) hands in the face of strong betting from strong players. When I am up, I am much less likely to make that mistake. When I am losing, I sometimes forget to concentrate on the board's texture as part of my decision making.

At 1/2 these mistakes are cheap compared to 5/10. Develop a discipline for handling the downswings - because they will occur.

Good luck!!!

[Jonny]

[ QUOTE ]
If you are not willing to play at Paradise 3/6 first, I would accumulate around 30-40 k at 1-2 prior to moving up.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't be serious. You must mean 3-4K, which in fact is what I started with at 5/10.

[Jonny]

I forgot to add, I never played 1/2 6 max. I played about 2000 hands of 3/6 SH on paradise to train. Its easy really with the use of pokertracker and some decent reads.

[wahooriver]

Jonny,

I meant 30-40k hands - not dollars. Laugh - bad use of shorthand by me.

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
7.5 BB/100 is unrealistic at 5/10, but I'm around 4BB/100 and looking at PT I was at 7.42BB/100 back at 1/2.

[/ QUOTE ]

How many hands do you guys have at 7.42/100??

I never played the 1/2 game, but I have a hard time believing you could ever play against people bad enough to win at that high of a rate.

Also, 4 BB/100 is pretty impressive at 5/10, how many hands do you have at that?

[topspinner]

Thanks for the replies guys. I have never played at Pokerstars. How easy is it to use pokertracker there? I don't think there is a way to automatically download hands there is there?

Also, can anyone give me an idea of what the vpip is at the higher limit games. I am sure you don't run into a whole lot of 70%vpip, 0pfr , .5 Agr at the higher limits.

[pfkaok]

avg. VPIP at at 5/10 is right around 40, saw flop % is about 46, PFR is 11

At 10/20 I have VPIP just over 41, SF% 46.5, and PFR is 13.

I'm not sure how this compares to 1/2 though, but you still do run into a decent amount of 70+ VPIP's if you try hard enough... however, the 0PFR aand low AGRfacts are pretty rare at 5/10. I've seen some, but usually those are the 40-50VPIP players who are extremely passive.

[wahooriver]

Checking my Pokertracker data

ASF (avg see flop)

1/2 55%
5/10 44%

Those are general numbers. Look for looser tables and you bankroll will increase.

[TeeJayORTj]

My question is more on Rake at the 5/10 game. If I expect like 40 table hours a week how much rake would I generate. I would obviously look at my PT data but it has all been corrupted. I was just wondering because I was going to get a New computer to make 4 tabling way easier so I wanted to sign up at another Skin and get a rakeback deal.

[srw5n]

I had approx 25K hands at 1/2. If you think 7+ BB at 1/2 is unrealistic I don't think you've played there that much. Particularly max 6 and short handed. It is very, very bad. I mean very bad. If it wasn't for the rake the game would be very profitable, but the rake quickly takes a toll in these short handed games.

5/10 I'm just under 20K. I would expect a downward movement in my BB/100, because I'm certainly not as good as some. But currently I'm at 4.08 BB/100 after last night (even after a couple donkey heads up moves where I dropped 10BBs). I don't play everyday, so if 30K hands is the tell tale moment it will be a bit before I get there.

If you want to talk about insufficient data at 10/20 I'm 161BB/100 /images/graemlins/smile.gif But that's only after 50 hands /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[k_squared]

[ QUOTE ]
I had approx 25K hands at 1/2. If you think 7+ BB at 1/2 is unrealistic I don't think you've played there that much. Particularly max 6 and short handed. It is very, very bad. I mean very bad. If it wasn't for the rake the game would be very profitable, but the rake quickly takes a toll in these short handed games.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not sure how this follows? If you are winning 7 big bets per hundred hands then that should take into account the rake being taken out. If it does take that into account then you are a winning player at 7 big bets per hundred hands regardless of the rake. The rake takes a lot of money off the table, there is no question about that, but it does so more at a detriment to poor players who play more crap hands. Every time you put money in the pot a percentage goes to the rake (and so the more hands you play the more rake you play... hence when the rake is big you need a larger edge over your opponenets for your cards to be playable so that you can also 'beat the rake').

-k_squared

[kenberman]

[ QUOTE ]
I was wondering how the 5/10 games compare to the 1/2 games unfortunately this looks like the next level if you are going to move up.

[/ QUOTE ]

at Crypto, you can play various other limits &lt; 5/10. they have 1/2 and 2/4 games in euros and pounds.

[pfkaok]

yeah, as k_squared said, the reason I thought that 7+ bb/100 seemed really high was b/c of the very, very high rake % at that level. I only played there to clear a few bonus' a long time ago, and it was before I had PT so I don't know my WR. I would imagine though that the rake takes a lotta BB/100 off the table at 1/2. It just seems to me that with a high rake % like that the other players would almost have to be trying to lose for you to make that much over the long run. However, like you said, I haven't really played the game, so maybe the players at that level are playing so bad that its as if they're actually "trying" to lose.

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
My question is more on Rake at the 5/10 game. If I expect like 40 table hours a week how much rake would I generate. I would obviously look at my PT data but it has all been corrupted. I was just wondering because I was going to get a New computer to make 4 tabling way easier so I wanted to sign up at another Skin and get a rakeback deal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I initially started playin 5/10 6max just to build up some BR, and get experience with added aggression before moving to the 15/30 full, but the added rakeback I get has made me want to stay longer than I needed to. (that and the fact that I recently had unexpected expenses that ate up over half my roll)

But anyways, if you're 4-tabling 40hrs a week you can make pretty good rakeback. For my data its about $1.4/hand. If you say you're playin 350 hands/hr ( i think reasonable for 4tablin, I play 8 and get 650-700, but I'm slower on switching b/c of the extra tables), then you're gettin 160 hours/month, that'd be $78400 at the month, and probably avg. of 5.25 people is reasonable. So you'd generate about 15k per month, which is pretty damn good. If you get a 27% rakeback you could be gettin 4k