Potential NL forum split: Speak up

[mikechops]

for any newbies, that was a joke. Please don't do this because people will get pissed off and more importantly, you won't receive the most appropiate advice for your level.

[Sh@i'tan]

Personally i think this might hurt micro limit players, but i don't find too many intresting hands at 25NL(where i'm at), since the play is just so straightforward IMO. But i think there needs to be a split.

[kurto]

Perhaps a more meaningful split would be 6max SSNL vs Full ring SSNL?

The play in 6max vs full ring is certainly much different then $50full ring vs $100full ring, no?

[tufat23]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think it's a bad idea.

SSNL is all about learning the basics of NL and hand reading, rather than the absolute levels of the blinds. Maybe the range we put villains on changes somewhat as we move up the levels, but also it does depending on whether villain is solid, wild, a fish etc., so whilst the analysis might change a bit, the nature of the questions and thought processes within the SSNL forum are similar across the majority of the questions- what does he have, how do i best play against that?

Contrast that with MSNL where this is more of a given, and the analysis seems to be more about when and where to make moves, good times for bluffing etc. I don't see that a split in SSNL would really give rise to 2 forums with different content, so I don't see the need.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bro, NL25 and lower is NOT about hand reading, at least not compared to NL50 and up. How are you supposed to read hands when half the players are 40/5/.5?

[/ QUOTE ]

I played 3 tables of 200NL yesterday. My first (moving up).

No less than 8 players across 3 tables had stats like 55/8/2.

Many posters kid themselves about the level of play at NL100-200, I think. The good players are way better, sure. But the bad players aren't any better (nor do their hand ranges narrow much), they are just more aggressive (but mindlessly so).

Maybe it's a PokerRoom network thing, though.

[/ QUOTE ]


wtf I think i'm off to pokerroom NOW. either that or your table selection totally pwns me

[yad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

OK said another way, I don't think 100 and 200NL has vastly different play from MSNL

[/ QUOTE ]

They're really quite different. OK so 50/4/0.5 donks are the same at every level but the average/breakeven players at 600/1000NL are far better and the good players are in a totally different league. This shows in the quality of the 200NL posts and posters in MSNL.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is really the key point. The total idiots are the total idiots, from 0.10/.25 to 10/20. But there is an enormous jump in the skill level of the "good" players between 1/2 and 2/4.

[ajmargarine]

I was kind of on the fence before, but am leaning towards supporting a split now. SSNL in the past was 50/50 on whether there should be a split. Now it looks like theres many more who favor, than those who oppose.

Thoughts:

--6m and full ring split = not gonna happen.
--hate to see SSNL break up because it's a good community here. I'm sure the new SSNL would have a decent community as well. And micro (MCNL?) would start out decently as well. Whether they grow into something cool like we have now would depend on the posters I suppose.
--There is a definite difference between NL100 and NL25. NL25 and NL50 play pretty similarly. NL100 and NL200 play alike sorta. Big jump between NL200 and NL400. Not as big probably, but there is a sizable hurdle between NL50 and NL100, so the way the split is proposed, IMO, is along the right lines.
--Micro mods would have their work cut out for them, but the three of us (isura, 42, and I) have volunteered to get the ball rolling.

[epdaws]

[ QUOTE ]
I was kind of on the fence before, but am leaning towards supporting a split now. SSNL in the past was 50/50 on whether there should be a split. Now it looks like theres many more who favor, than those who oppose.

Thoughts:

--6m and full ring split = not gonna happen.
--hate to see SSNL break up because it's a good community here. I'm sure the new SSNL would have a decent community as well. And micro (MCNL?) would start out decently as well. Whether they grow into something cool like we have now would depend on the posters I suppose.
--There is a definite difference between NL100 and NL25. NL25 and NL50 play pretty similarly. NL100 and NL200 play alike sorta. Big jump between NL200 and NL400. Not as big probably, but there is a sizable hurdle between NL50 and NL100, so the way the split is proposed, IMO, is along the right lines.
--Micro mods would have their work cut out for them, but the three of us (isura, 42, and I) have volunteered to get the ball rolling.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think all forums will be the better for this. Thanks to the mods for agreeing to work on this issue.

[PaulMTC]

Makes a lot of sense to me having a single forum for $100NL/$200NL

[linuxrocks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think that the most convinving argument for splitting between 50NL and 100NL is that so many people seem to struggle for so long with that transition. I don't see any difference between 100NL and lower but clearly a lot of people who are there do.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am in this transition and I agree. The play doesnt seem too different, but the money starts to mount up. Maybe its the 3 figure thing but a few buyins down and your apporaching 1k which seems alot.

I think the barrier is more physcological then actually a harder game

Plus - I dart between SSNL and MSNL so I dont see why others cant do the same

[/ QUOTE ]

I also hop between 50 and 100 NL and the biggest difference (for me) is that there are more regulars otherwise they are so similar. I have to spend a lot more hands with a player before I start putting serious monies against a player. The variance and the high money numbers also psychologically affect me.

That said, I still think it's a good idea to split them up.

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
--6m and full ring split = not gonna happen.



[/ QUOTE ]

That's cool. Just curious why since the limit tables thought the game different enough to separate it.