1/2nl and a $6 per dealer down time charge

[mattw]

is this game worth playing? thats $12 an hour for ~25 hands an hour. thats 6 BB per hour on 25 hands just to break even. a TAG doesnt have a chance. thoughts?

[spino1i]

You'd have to be beating the game for 24BB/100 just to break even. Not easily done.

[KenProspero]

I think your analysis is a bit off with respect to a 1/2 game.

Alhough the blinds are small, the betting patterns in these games (at least those I've played) don't follow 'normal' NL standards.

For example, a standard raise is in the 3xbb range, which would be $6 in a 1/2 game. In fact, in the the games I've played, the standard range from late position is more in the $12-15 range.

As a result the contested pots tend to get large compared to the size of the blinds.

The general question is a good one, is the time charge beatable, of course this is the same question for a 2/4 or 4/8 limit game, where the rake is 10% up to $4 per pot.

The answer, of course depends on the level of play. If you have two or three fish in a 1/2 game, it can be very profitable even with these rakes. Less than this, I'd look for another table.

[Perk76]

I play in a similiar game, and basically if you can win 1 - 2 hands per hour, you can beat the game. 30 hands per hour, table size 10, you should be able to pick spots to pick up your hands, even if your not getting the best of cards.

Typical raising is 10.00 to 15.00 range. So you can win hands to stay up/even, then when your really strong hands happen, you get paid off since most people tend to pay off with TP.

[The Big Easy]

What about a 1/2 NL game with a $6 per dealer down time charge AND a $1 BBJ drop per hand?

[Brian707]

I played at Trump last year in Indiana. It was $7 per half hour. I counted 20 hands per half hour on average. That was their 2/5 game

[Perk76]

[ QUOTE ]
What about a 1/2 NL game with a $6 per dealer down time charge AND a $1 BBJ drop per hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming the 1.00 per hand comes out of winning pots, and adding a 1.00 dealer toke, OP mentioned is it beatable for a TAG, then the extra bit doesnt affect that much (hence winning pots).

I would still play the game unless it was extremely tight, but generally 1/2 NL games are loose, somewhat passive, and the lowest level spread at most places which equals more beginners.

For me the biggest factor of deciding on a 1/2NL game is dependent on the table min/max buyin and whether the tables been going on for a long time.

[NickMPK]

I don't see $12/hour as being that much more than the standard $4 per pot. Playing 30 hands per hour at $4/pot is $120/table/hour. Which is $12/player/hour at a full table, and much more at a short-handed table.

Of course, every hand doesn't hit the $4 rake threshold, so the hourly rake might be slightly lower, but at your standard 1/2 game, where people cold-call $20 preflop raises all the time, most of the hands will be raked at near maximum.

[ShipThatHolla]

[ QUOTE ]
You'd have to be beating the game for 24BB/100 just to break even. Not easily done.

[/ QUOTE ]

You'd think so but when you open for $20 UTG and get 4 callers you might change your mind a little.

[e_phemeral]

It is definitely worth playing. I have found the $1/2 tables at Foxwoods to be very easy to beat, once you adjust to the low max buy-in of $50 big blinds. Play solid short stack poker until you double or triple up, and then switch to deep stack poker and be wary of the short stacks who actually know how to play short stack poker. Most people at these tables, if they know anything, know only how to play short stack. Once they get deep, they have no idea what they're doing and it is not that hard to stack them.

I have found that the high rake as compared to the table stakes is more than compensated by the inordinate amount of donks and just plain inexperienced players that you will find at these tables.

E