[pufferfish]

If you like playing $1/$2 and can afford to, why not play it?

Implicit translation: "Why not bring your winnings from 0.5/1 to 1/2, where I am known to lurk. Study my play as I take your money."

My translation: There is no translation; I meant what I said literally. How do you know I’m not the biggest fish out there?

As far as beating $.50/$1, I don’t think it proves much beyond an extreme tolerance for boredom.

Implicit translation: "Why would you want to play at a level where you can beat the game? That's boring. Come to a level where some expert players will show you some real poker fireworks? The price of admission for a player of your obvious skill is only 1 or 2 BB per hour."

My translation: OK, what I said sounds flip. $.50/$1 doesn’t just “generally” represent a skill level, I think it also “generally” represents a type of table texture. I think only playing one table texture can get boring and frustrating after while.

Also, you can always drop back down to $.50/$1 for sessions here and there.
Implicit Translation: If you happen to run low on money, go back to 0.5/1 and get some for me.

My translation: Your username suits you. [img]/forums/images/icons/wink.gif[/img] I was trying to say there is no shame in dropping back/or in playing lower limits than the one(s) you aspire to. Every limit that you can afford (monetarily and psychologically) has a place, at least for me it does.

I think your barking at the wrong cat, umm fish, umm 2+2’er, no fish was right.