Fishiest micro-low stakes cash games?

rob2 · #1 10-22-2006, 11:20 PM

Since as long as I can remember, party's NL25-NL100 cash games were as easy to beat as I could imagine. There were sooooo many loose passive fish and calling stations it was almost too easy. Now that party is gone, which site do you guys recommend the average nitty NL25 or NL50 full ring player move his bankroll to?

I tried full tilt but even with the 100% slow releasing bonus and a little rakeback, it's not easy to crush those games. There are a huge number of tight aggressive regulars with stats like 14/6/3 for full ring and I'm not confident in my ability to turn a profit against these characters.

Are there any sites with a fair number of loose passive players who wouldn't even think of check/raising? Stars seems ok but it's not as soft as I'd like, there are no bonuses or rakeback, and there's no datamining. This ended up being kind of long, but does anyone have some suggestions?

steel108 · #2 10-22-2006, 11:25 PM

Any site. Its 25NL and 50NL. Just jump in any game on any site. The nits (14/6) should be extremely easy to crush.

TKWest · #3 10-22-2006, 11:30 PM

If there is an answer no one would really want to post it on a public forum so that 20,000 people see it and all rush to play on the site.

However, there are less sites to play on now for U.S. players so the best thing might be to play on a few of the bigger ones and then some of the smaller sites and see what you think for yourself (as you did for FullTilt).

Photoc · #4 10-22-2006, 11:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If there is an answer no one would really want to post it on a public forum so that 20,000 people see it and all rush to play on the site.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh really now? They tried that with WPEX. 20k players did NOT rush out to the site, but a few hundred did. And that site is "rakefree", really 100% rakeback (Not a rakeback discussion, just a point)

rob2 · #5 10-22-2006, 11:33 PM

Are there any sites which have plenty of 36/4/.60 type players? I agree I should be able to beat the nits but it feels like I'm just trading money with them and making a little profit from the one or two weaker players. I'd really like to find out which site the loose-passive party players went to.

Pokerho · #6 10-22-2006, 11:46 PM

I'm having the same problem, but looking at the pokersite scout website, it looks to me that Poker Stars and to a lesser extent, Full Tilt have had the biggest increases in population, and therefore should have the largest concentration of fish. It may be some time before it's like it was (if ever), but you can only do what you can do, right?

Photoc · #7 10-22-2006, 11:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
but looking at the pokersite scout website, it looks to me that Poker Stars and to a lesser extent, Full Tilt have had the biggest increases in population,

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, its the other way around. Full Tilt has the largest increase in traffic on a % and # basis. They're running 2k more cash players at peak than a month ago. Stars is actually only running about 1k ahead of a month ago at this point. Which this will probably increase throughout the end of the year.

Synergistic Explosions · #8 10-23-2006, 12:15 AM

PokerFantasy, Poker4Ever and JunglePoker.

Micro sized sites seem to have the best micro NL games. Or maybe it's because they dont support PT and don't have multiple tables going, which keep the serious players away.