this forum is for 5/10 and higher (no text)

[collegeplayer1]

.

[Sponger15SB]

I don't think this is true. Thanks for your expert opinion though, "mr 8 posts".

I post in the small stakes NL, and I don't think I could give you any advice in a $400+ max buy in game, unless it was really obvious and stupid.

[AJo Go All In]

[ QUOTE ]
I post in the small stakes NL, and I don't think I could give you any advice in a $400+ max buy in game, unless it was really obvious and stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]

is this actually supposed to be a good argument, or what?

[GimmeDaWatch]

So much snobbery. What is 2/4 and 3/6 NL if not the Mid portion of "Mid-, High-Stakes"?

[cornell2005]

no its not. its typically for 3/6 and above. if some 2/4 with deep stacks want to post occasionally, theres no harm in that

[turkkito]

Posted by El Diablo:
[ QUOTE ]
I think as a general rule if everyone just posts hands w/

a) blinds smaller than 2/4
or
b) stacks < 100BB

in the small-stakes PL/NL forum, we'll be off to a good start.


[/ QUOTE ]
Posted by Mason Malmuth:
[ QUOTE ]
This sounds about right to me.


[/ QUOTE ]

[theBruiser500]

I agree with BK.

[theBruiser500]

Especially these partypoker 2/4 hands have no business here.

[Wayfare]

Can you guys really say that 2-4 is not at least "mid" stakes, as a reasonably deep player will have $500 on the table at any given time?

I agree 50x BB 2-4 should not be mid stakes as it's only $200, but $500 / stack sure doesn't seem "low" stakes to me.

This forum was made to segregate the "bad" posters to the low stakes forum, not really to seperate the games because of any intrinsic differences, yes?

[tpir90036]

Depends on how you define "bad." It would seem that the objective is to seperate the beginner questions (since beginners are more likely to play in smaller games) from the advacned questions. That is just my logic though...and lord knows logic doesn't always fly around here.