This forum has 3 months to live without a split

[Body Man D]

[ QUOTE ]
i should fold kk preflop like one every two weeks

[/ QUOTE ]

[Mr_Donktastic]

[ QUOTE ]
i fold kk preflop like one every two weeks

[/ QUOTE ]

Cool cuz I go all in w/ AK like once a day.

[CalledDownLight]

Its time for a split. This forum was a lot more valuable a month after it started even though there were very few regular posters. It just didn't have all the noise that it does now. I remember when it was just guys like bottomset, nation, berge, sabr, mr. donk, dlm, and a few others, many of whom have stopped posting here. A high percentage of the advice was good and now you have a 30 post thread with like 3 good replies. Its awful.

[nation]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i fold kk preflop like one every two weeks

[/ QUOTE ]

Cool cuz I go all in w/ AK like once a day.

[/ QUOTE ]

me too!

[Grinding2Ecstasy]

Im in favor of 100+ 50- for a few reasons. Firstly I play 100 mostly, sometimes 200 when the games are good. I don't find the strategy to be all that different. 400nl though there is def a jump up, and 50 is def WAY donkier and loose. Also 100nl is where I'd imagine the real grinders begin, it's possible to make a living on 100nl, seems like 50nl and below would mostly be hobbyists.

[diebitter]

100+ 50- FTW.

[effang]

Personally, I would like a 100+ 50- split. This is for personal as well as logical reasons.

Firstly, the biggest jump in games is from NL 100, to NL 200. That difference is difficulty in games, opponents, money, etc.

However, the difference between NL 100 and NL 50 is incredibly different for different reasons. NL 100 is the first level where you are playing the same regulars. NL 100 is the first level where 3/betting is a "common" occurence. NL 100 is the first level where people POSSIBLY limp/fold versus the standard limp/call.

Splitting at NL 200 is fine, but it really hurts the NL 100 players looking to move up. I think splitting at NL 50 is much better. The NL 50 guys understand the VB mindset enough to help those in smaller games, and NL 100 people get some more answers regarding how to deal with regs.

[ship_it_trebek]

[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I would like a 100+ 50- split. This is for personal as well as logical reasons.

Firstly, the biggest jump in games is from NL 100, to NL 200. That difference is difficulty in games, opponents, money, etc.

However, the difference between NL 100 and NL 50 is incredibly different for different reasons. NL 100 is the first level where you are playing the same regulars. NL 100 is the first level where 3/betting is a "common" occurence. NL 100 is the first level where people POSSIBLY limp/fold versus the standard limp/call.

Splitting at NL 200 is fine, but it really hurts the NL 100 players looking to move up. I think splitting at NL 50 is much better. The NL 50 guys understand the VB mindset enough to help those in smaller games, and NL 100 people get some more answers regarding how to deal with regs.

[/ QUOTE ]

+1

[Das Budrick]

Is there any reason why we can't try it out and if it doesn't seem to go well, regroup back into one forum? A split isn't a permanent thing. If what people like CMAR say will happen concerning a loss of vibrancy does in fact happen, we can put it back to the way it is now. I agree with what most people are saying concerning participation, we just aren't going to see growth the way things are but growth will likely occur if we split.

If this is wrong, we can go back.

The level changes themselves aren't set in stone either. It can start out 100+ at first for traffic reasons and when traffic increases it can change to 200+.

[bottomset]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i fold kk preflop like one every two weeks

[/ QUOTE ]

Cool cuz I go all in w/ AK like once a day.

[/ QUOTE ]

only once?

I'm for the split, I think 200+, 100- is the starting point, and maybe down the road something like 50-, 100-200, 400+