Party 5-10; why so few posts?

[noir]

Hey twoers,
The subject just about says it all. We see so many histories and such from 2-4 and 3-6. 5-10 falls into the guidelines, but we see so little discussion about it. Are folks just multi-tabling their way up from 3-6 to 15-30 or something?
Personally I prefer to focus on one table (I like working the fine lines and find it helps in b&m).
Thanks in advance.

[ErrantNight]

the vast majority of readers/posters, even some of the more respected posters, don't have the bankrolls for 5-10. the games also start getting noticeably harder.

as for focusing on one table... that's cool and all... but most of the multi-tablers are doing it to supplement (or, in fact, as their primary source of) their income. one tabling, when one could be four+ tabling, is lost money.

[Victor]

everyone plays 5-10 shorthanded so all the 5-10ers post in heads-up shorhand forum.

[Harv72b]

I've never played 5/10 or higher, but the general consensus seems to be that 5/10 full is one of the toughest games on Party, so a lot of 2+2'ers either play 5/10 SH (as already mentioned) or skip directly up to 10/20 or 15/30.

BR also has something to do with it, but I suspect that a lot of the regulars playing 3/6 or even 2/4 have sufficient funds to play 5/10, if they wanted.

[That guy]

I play full-ring 5/10 and I find it to be only slightly tougher than 3/6. (table selection becomes more important and then after that it is the same as 3/6)

[SinCityGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
I play full-ring 5/10 and I find it to be only slightly tougher than 3/6. (table selection becomes more important and then after that it is the same as 3/6)

[/ QUOTE ]

This guy doesn't know what he's talking about. I play the Party 5/10 regularly, and it's the toughest game I've ever encountered. I would strongly recommend that all 2+2'ers avoid this game. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Shillx]

I've played lots of hands at 5/10 ring on party (like 100k+ hands) and it is rough. Who would want to play that crap? There is much more money to be had at 2/4 or 3/6. I might be able to win .5 BB/100 at 5/10 but if I can do 2 BB/100 at 2/4 then why bother?

Brad

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I play full-ring 5/10 and I find it to be only slightly tougher than 3/6. (table selection becomes more important and then after that it is the same as 3/6)

[/ QUOTE ]

This guy doesn't know what he's talking about. I play the Party 5/10 regularly, and it's the toughest game I've ever encountered. I would strongly recommend that all 2+2'ers avoid this game. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you think the reason is that 5/10 ring is tougher than 10/20 or 15/30? Also, why is the shorthanded 5/10 easier than the ring?

[Shillx]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I play full-ring 5/10 and I find it to be only slightly tougher than 3/6. (table selection becomes more important and then after that it is the same as 3/6)

[/ QUOTE ]

This guy doesn't know what he's talking about. I play the Party 5/10 regularly, and it's the toughest game I've ever encountered. I would strongly recommend that all 2+2'ers avoid this game. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you think the reason is that 5/10 ring is tougher than 10/20 or 15/30? Also, why is the shorthanded 5/10 easier than the ring?

[/ QUOTE ]

CinnamonWind made a point about 5/10 games having a loose-tight feel to them. It pretty much means that people don't chase after the flop (without odds of course) eventhough they are willing to take slightly the worst of it preflop. So while it is beatable, it is hard to beat at a good clip. There just aren't enough LAGs or tourists to make it really profitable.

Brad

[SinCityGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
What do you think the reason is that 5/10 ring is tougher than 10/20 or 15/30?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not really sure, but we've had about 2 years worth of posts about how tough the 5/10 games are and how soft the other limits are. As for me, I'm just a glutton for punishment, so I choose to play the 5/10.

[Michael Davis]

I think he was joking, but 5-10 is tougher because it's not a place where fish who have lots of money and like to gamble are likely to end up. It's also not a place where newbies who don't know what they're doing are going to end up, unless you're talking about my first day ever on Paradise, where I blew threw $600 in a couple of hours and then created an illegal second account to blow another $600.

-Michael

[Michael Davis]

Meh, threw=through. What a dumbass.

-Michael

[Bob T.]

I think that there are several reasons for fewer posts at the 5-10 level.

First, there are fewer players playing that level, so there are just fewer posts that could be made.

Second, a lot of players that play that level, and visit this site, probably have enough experience, to know what to do in most situations. If I play a top pair/ good kicker hand. I probably won't make any decision until I get checkraised, and then I will pay off and either win or lose. Not a lot of thought, and not a lot of material to post with.

Thirdly, the hands that do pose a problem are frequently so context dependent, that you really can't do the problem justice by posting it. I played a hand last week, where I had an opponent who slowplayed good flops headsup so often, that I had three notes emphasizing that point. When he played fast on the flop, and I called him down with the smallest piece of trash, I really couldn't post it, because 90% of the forum would call me a chip-speweing idiot for playing the hand, and the other 10% would probably call me a liar for posting it. Well, maybe 70/30, instead of 90/10. Against 99.8 percent of the opponents, both comments would probably be justified.

The hand, even though it was interesting, was so context dependent, that I didn't think it belonged in the forum.

Finally, I think that by the time that you have reached the 5-10 level, you have probably started to develop your own style, and plays that might work for one player and his set of indiosyncrasies, might not work for another, even though all of the opponents situations are the same. For instance, I suspect that I don't limp enough preflop to balance my preflop strategies. Because of that, there are probably certain flops, that don't play well for me if I limped. Specifically, I probably can't steal on the flop if the flop is Ace high, because it is unlikely that I would play a hand with and ace that I couldn't raise or threebet preflop. At the same time, there probably other players that could steal on the flop, because there play might be consistant with a hand that has an ace in it.

[Moyer]

I remember someone making a good argument about all of the 6max tables hurting the full games. Basically, maniacs & other fish like short handed tables more because they like to play a lot of hands and win more pots.

Party 5/10 and 1/2 are mostly 6max tables, which is part of the reason that 5/10 full is tougher than 15/30 and 1/2 full is tougher than 2/4.

[bobbyi]

Bob, I don't think your explanations that most people playing 5/10 know what they're doing too well to need to post hand and that hands are more context-dependent and so forth make any sense given that at least half the limit hands posted on twoplustwo (mainly in that mid-stakes forum) are from the Party 15/30. If what you're saying is true, why is this site constantly buried in 15/30 hands? People in that game haven't "developed their own style", but people in 5/10 have?

[sthief09]

I spent a while at 5/10 full. the game is just not good. it's a nice challenge but completely unprofitable. most people play 6-max for that reason. same with 10/20

a thread on the topic (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=1350680&page=&view=&sb=5& o=&vc=1)

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
I think he was joking,

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm pretty sure he wasn't. I think 15/30 is tougher because there's so much aggression coming from every angle, but 5/10 is definitely tough in its own way. but I wouldn't be surprised if my "longrun winrate" (and by that I mean my winrate if I played 1,000,000 hands tomorrow at each) at 5/10 was lower than 15/30

[That guy]

Is it correct to say that any time a table has 30% VP$IP, it is beatable?

I posted before that 5/10 isn't much tougher than 3/6 but that table selection was more important. Table selection becomes a chore at 5/10 and so that is a significant difference... I made the jump to 5/10 a few months ago and have been beating it but not for 2 BB's... but its still early... ever since I started more aggressively monitoring the table conditions and jumping ship more readily, my win rate has improved.

It was the same at 3/6 for me, I was beating 3/6 but not crushing it and just figured that I might as well play at higher stakes and I have found the result to be the same... beating it but not crushing it. You could say I should have stayed at 3/6 longer to learn to crush it before moving on but I have my sights set on 10/20 and 15/30 & I view learning to beat 5/10 as a necessary step on that road -- crushing 3/6 might not help at all in learning to beat 15/30. I am definitely more comfortable now at 5/10 than I was a month ago as I realized I was playing too tight after the flop and now letting it rip a little more. I was playing in fear of the size of the swings but have now become used to it --- which is an important psychological milestone.

There is just no way that 5/10 can't be beaten for much and 15/30 can... There are some donkeys at 5/10 -- just gotta stay in tune with your table...

Admittedly, in the middle of a weekday, 5/10 sucks.

[Bob T.]

It isn't necessarily that they know what they are doing, they just think they know what they are doing.

[sfer]

I, for one, think 15/30 is tougher than 5/10 and 10/20.

[Bob T.]

I haven't played 15/30. But I think that 10/20 is tougher than 5/10, and I have no reason to believe that 15/30 is easier than either of those two.

Playing 15/30 is on my to do list.

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that 10/20 is tougher than 5/10


[/ QUOTE ]

6-max or full ring? Or both?