Party 5/10 vs 15/30

[Victor]

no matter what limit u play at, this game is easy, unless, of course, u are losing.

[Victor]

[ QUOTE ]
In party 5-10 there are a lot of situations that go like this. You raise pf w/ AK, you get 2-3 callers. You whiff completely but bet the flop and get 1-2 callers. Then you check through on the turn

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont play 5-10 full. but, checking the turn is rather large mistake.

[jfresh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The biggest difference is that a lot of the 15/30 LAG's are fairly good hand readers, which makes them more difficult to play against.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll 2nd this... I didn't play a ton of 5/10, but it seemed that the occasionaly LAG that you'd find there would just be total morons. Also, a lot of the tighter players in 5/10 are weak, and much more straight-foward. 15/30 has tons of VERY tough multitabling TAGs.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah there is no way 5/10 is tougher than 15/30. 5/10 (SH, haven't played the full) is way way passive, and the LAGs are way too loose and the TAGs are way too tight.

[Mizzles]

I played 5/10 for a while before stepping up. 15-30 with more bluffing, better hand reading by opponents, much more aggression, stronger play. I love it.

[Barry]

I suppose the next thread like this will be a comparison of the Party 3/6 to the 30/60 game.

[ QUOTE ]
The biggest difference is that a lot of the 15/30 LAG's are fairly good hand readers

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The "fish" are always putting pressure on you, especially w/ flops that don't figure to hit a tight preflop raiser

[/ QUOTE ]

If you raise PF and it's all rags, they'll always put you on AK and raise the flop. If there's an A on the flop, they'll put you on a pair smaller than A's and raise the flop.

The good news with this is that you'll get paid off big with a monster, but it makes the so/so hands harder to play than in the more passive games at the lower limits.

But if you really want to know and have a decent bankroll, take a shot at it and see for yourself.

[Sheriff Fatman]

[ QUOTE ]
It's just not true. The 15/30 is tougher than the 10/20. The pot averages are higher because of increased aggression and the larger small blind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its much easier to find good tables and weak opponents at $15/30 than $10/20 due to the number of available tables. Quite often the selection at $10/20 is 3 or 4 tables occupied by the same group of rock-tight players.

This is especially true if, like me, you are not on US time.

When good tables are available the $10/20 level is easier, as there is less aggression to deal with. However, its a rare event for this miracle to occur.

Sheriff

Edit: I'm referring to full ring games here.

[ggbman]

15-30 is definitly beatable, but it's not the goldmine people used to say it was. I jumped from the 5-10 6 max which i was beating for 3.1 BB/100, and the transition is doable, but not as lucrative as it might have been in the past, because you have to be VERY good to beat 15-30 for anywhere near that.

[Luke]

In general, 5/10 is weak-tight and 15/30 is loose-aggressive. This may be a function of the differing blind structures and/or the type of players that just seem to populate the games (higher stakes, thus more gamblers).

Both games are very beatable by a good player. I'd say that you can beat the 5/10 for more BB/100 but the 15/30 for more in absolute $ terms.

And FWIW, I find the 5/10 game easier to multi-table, meaning that I can play 6-7 tables of 5/10 comfortably while I usually like to stay with 5 games at a time for the 15/30.

Luke

[sthief09]

5/10 is tighter, 15/30 is tougher. however I think better players can have a higher winrate at 15/30 than 5/10 because of the rake

[scott8]

This thread is hilarious.