when to move up to 2/5NL?

[frankx99x]

AKQJ10,

thanx for the head's up on cross posting.
I might be at a disadvantage with a small stack since I never played that style. I actually buy-in at max or 2/3 max and rebuy to max if I start losing.

Where can I get some strategic thoughts about playing a short stack. It sounds like an interesting idea.

[AKQJ10]

The canonical source is Ed Miller's Getting Started in Hold 'em. Since the rest of the book may be beneath you, or limit content you're not interested in, you might do better to search SSNL for +Miller +short. I've tried to archive some of the thread links here.

Long story short: only play 99, AQ, or better except in late position and first to raise, then you can add 77, AT, KQ. Only reraise (generally all-in) with TT or better, and in calling a reraise behind your raise consider both the strength of your hand and the pot odds. (Call anything if your stack is only twice your original bet, but for example, lay down JJ if your stack is 4 times your original bet.) When your normal pot-sized flop bet would be about enough to push, just push. Your experience playing deeper stacks will help you; in general you'll often be pushing unimproved AK heads-up or three-handed on the flop as a CB, but use your best judgment.

It's not an entirely satisfying way to play, because you're playing very tight and only making preflop and flop decisions, essentially nullifying your advantage on later rounds. But it's a good way to ease you into a higher-stakes game and let you observe the quality of the opposition. Then when you do double up, don't cash out and go back down! -- instead, play with your bigger stack and gain experience against the tougher opposition. In essence you're using their money (based on their inferior preflop decisions) as your training bankroll.

[Rottersod]

[ QUOTE ]
2/3 is a California thing. 1/2 then 2/5 is far more common on the East Coast.

Min and max buyins are at the Borgata wiki page; I updated them recently so I'm pretty sure they're correct. I think other AC games tend to be the same as the Borg's, not 100% about that though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you post a link to that? I did some searches and found the Borgata wiki page but there wasn't anything on buy-ins.

[frankx99x]

Thank you for your help. I will study the links.

I can see a few advantages to using this approach for moving up.

1. Less risk to my bankroll
2. Chance to analyze the way the game differs from 1/2 while
being somewhat safe.
3. If I'm able to double up a couple of times I can switch
gears and hopefully cath the table off guard.

[surfinillini]

at the 2/5NL level...5K would be a good start...at most you'll have swings of no more than 2 buy ins if you're a good player

[frankx99x]

It seems like the concensus is 10X the buy-in for a given NL game.

I've never had more than a 2 buy-in downswing at 1/2NL but it would be more likely ay 2/5 considering the better players

[bav]

[ QUOTE ]
I suspected that some people played 1/2 for a living and now it seems that it is true.

[/ QUOTE ]

I had a chat with a guy at the MGM NL1/2 game a few months back. He claimed to be a pro. I asked if he was just slumming at the 1/2 table and he explained that no, NL1/2 is all he plays. But...

He lives with his uncle, doesn't have a GF, and doesn't own a car. So he can do just fine on $900/mo.

[bav]

[ QUOTE ]
at the 2/5NL level...5K would be a good start...at most you'll have swings of no more than 2 buy ins if you're a good player

[/ QUOTE ]

That's DANGEROUS advice. Holy cow. You've never lost 3 or 4 buyins in quick succession? All-in pre-flop with KK cracked by AJ, followed by all-in pre-flop with AA cracked by 77, followed by all-in post-flop with the nut set cracked by a straightflush draw? You be runnin' lucky, then. In the span of 30 minutes I've lost my stack as a 5:1 favorite followed by a 45:1 favorite, followed by a 1.5:1 favorite.

[AKQJ10]

Sorry, I had linked it above but here it is again:

Borgata buy-ins

You might have had the Wikipedia article on the Borgata which, though interesting, isn't tailored to poker players.

[e_phemeral]

At the moment, I play $1/2 NL live. I have day job and play for fun. I do not need to win in order to pay the rent. I have been winning consistently over last 30 sessions or so and have decided to devote $5k to taking a shot at moving up to $2/5 NL. I have played $2/5 NL before, before I was any good at poker - and probably when I was not very good. Had some big wins, then a series of big losses, which prompted me to move down to $1/2 to improve my game, which I think I have done. NOw I play a fairly conservative (although it doesn't seem conservative because I play a lot of hands) small pot strategy that usually sees me win a lot of small pots, lose a lot of small pots and occasionally win some big pots but rarely lose a big pot. The big pots I win usually account for my profit for the session and I either break even on the small pots or turn a little profit there too.

At the casino where I play, buy in at $1/2 is capped at $100 and buy-in at $2/5 is capped at $500. I feel like my game is good enough to move up to the higher game. I feel that it probably will not be as easy to stack people at the $2/5 as it is at the $1/2, however, I also think the variance will not be as great at the $2/5. In my recent run of good results at the $1/2, I have never been down more than 4 buy ins ($400) in one session and usually I am able to recover for a win or at least minimize the loss to under $100 (losses have been rare). However, the thought of being down 4 buyins at the $2/5 in one session is not a good one (-$2,000). On the flip side, for some reason I am not that worried about it and don't think that it will happen. Am I wrong to think that?

My thinking is that at the $1/2, my initial buy in is only 50x the BB, not much room for error there. Whereas initial buyin at $2/5 is 100x BB. So my thinking is that being down 4 buyins at the $1/2 ($400 or 200xBB) is more equivalent to being down 2 buyins at the $2/5 ($1,000 or 200xBB). Is my thinking correct? Is it incorrect to make the comparison based on the amount of the big blind? Or should I think in terms of buy-ins, in which case, $5k probably is not enough to move up?