Your thoughts on 10/20 actually being less profitable than 5/10?

[Nigel]

Maybe it has always been this way, but 10/20 seems like a shark fest these days. Every table I sit at, I see the same players, day after day. How some of them manage to play every day without going broke is another story, but for the most part, most seem to be decent players and I'm sure a good number are 2+2ers.

On the other hand, you have 5/10 with about 300 million tables running at all times filled with some of the worse poker players on the planet. Even most of the good players are so easy to play against because they are so damn TAGish and they let you punish them with position, especially against their blinds which they happily hand over.

It's so easy to find 4 or more great 5/10 tables that it seems you could easily be 6 tabling that game whereas 2-3 tables seems to be the norm for 10/20. In fact, I was quite surprised to see in one of the recent threads how many people aren't massively multi-tabling the 10/20 and instead opt for just a couple of tables. I thought 8 tabling was very en vogue at 2+2. I am also surprised when I see WR's mentioned that many people aren't even clearing 2BB/100 (myself included, in fact I think I should post another thread altogether about my pathetic WR in the 10/20).

Overall, it seems that when you combine rakeback with the ease of the game that multi-tabling 5/10 could be a more profitable game.

Has my running bad for the past 5 days in this game gone to my head? Is this just crazy talk?

Nigel