Help! Input needed on $2-$5 NL cash game buy-in

[Mario8654]

Please folks, help me with my dilemma. I currently live and work in Iraq and about 20 or so of us run a steady, nightly 2/5 NL hold em cash game. The game always fills and sometimes we have 2 tables going. The game is full of newbies that are fish, newbies that have potential, but primarily fish that think they are players. It is prime pickings for me and a select few others. Anyway, I am coming here to "twoplustwo" because I need some favorable backing on my persistent plea to change the buy-in currently in place. As it stands right now, it is a 2/5 NL cash game with a ...are you ready for this...$100 min/max fixed buy in. You can reload back up to 100 but only after your stack drops below $40? wtf! Does this make any sense at all to anybody? Keeping in mind that on average, most players are rebuying 4 and 5 times per night. My suggestion is rather ingenius...let's make the buy-in a spread like every other 2/5 NL game on the planet...duh! How about 100 min 300 max, is that too much to ask? Their response..."you will scare away players with the larger buy-in". Hmmm, so you want to rebuy back into a 2/5 NL game with $100 when you are facing stacks of 400, 300, 500 and sometimes even 1000? . I try to explain it in the slowest most comprehendable way..."This way each player has the option to play however they want, with a short stack or a generous stack". It boggles the conscience that these guys can't grasp the concept. Believe me when I tell you, I am working with poker retards here folks. In other words idiot savants w/o the savant part being established. I am banging my head off the wall trying to get these "players" to see the light. Please help me convince these "players", and I use that term lightly, that a $100 fixed buy-in is completely ridiculous when the blinds are 2/5. $100 is even too low for 1/2 NL in my opinion. Please help with any feedback. Thanks in advance.

[Lottery Larry]

Seems as if the answers you got in Medium and Small Stakes NL were pretty good.

But i fyou're doing so well, why change it? Oh, I see, you just want to win MORE than you already are.

[Zetack]

Have you thought about giving examples?

You raise to 4 BB's PF and get two callers. Pot is 12 BB's. On the flop you don't even make a pot sized bet, just 9 BB's. Now you only have 7 BB's for both the turn and the river play -- Assuming you have the full amount of your original buy-in in front of you. How does that make sense? If both players called you now have 7 BB's to bet at a 39 BB pot.

You're playing a glorified limit game.

Maybe they would be receptive to the argument that poker is most fun when you may have to make interesting decisions on all five streets (if you're playing a 5 street game, of course -- also I wouldn't muddy the argument by pointing out that there are actually only four betting rounds for the five steets) rather than just two.

--Zetack

I suppose it wouldn't make any sense to these guys to point out that it skews the math of the game by vastly increasing the number of times its proper to call with draws.

[bdotgates100]

2/5? buy-in should be 200-500max

[Colima420]

[ QUOTE ]
2/5? buy-in should be 200-500max

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly.

And that rule about reloading when you have $40 left is ridiculous. Anyone can reload at any time (obviously just not while in the hand) up the the Max buy-in.

Colima420

[jjflash]

Here is some insight that you may find interesting. I recently read an article in a major poker magazine. Normally, I would reference the exact mag page number and an exact quote. I am having trouble locating the article so I am asking you to take my word for it. Anyway, it talks about the underground cardrooms in NY city. In the article it describes people playing $5-10 NL Holdem and buying in for $10,000! The author explains that the poker pros bread in this environment (Lederer, Ungar, Seidel, Harrington, etc.) learned to play deep stack poker. This is the way that the game was meant to be played. The ONLY reason that the casinos have caps on buy-ins at NL games is so that the bad players won't lose all of their money in one session and will come back.
In light of the casinos thoughts on this, a cap may be in order, but I agree that $100 is far too low. The rebuy is also rediculous.
I play a regular low limit game where I buy-in for more than anyone else. I used to catch some flack for this until I pointed out that the players had more to gain from me being there than I did from them being there (though this is not 100% true).
I think that in a $2-5 game $100 should be a minimum buy-in (if you have a minimum) and the cap (again, if you have one) should be between $500 and $1000. Most people that would play a $2-5 game should have no problem with these numbers.
On the other hand if the game is as lucrative for you as you say it is, maybe you shouldn't "tap the aquarium".
I am not sure if this helped at all. If it did then I am glad. If it did not then good luck finding what you are looking for.

[PantsOnFire]

First of all, the min buy-in might be a figure that a lot of players look at so perhaps you should leave that one alone (since it likely won't affect you much. Well it actually will so just change your strategy from implied odds to putting a short stack all in as a value bet). You really want a bigger max buy-in and so would I.

Can you explain to them a simple aspect of deep stack poker? That is, you can play a little looser with hands like suited connectors and small PP since implied odds are higher. They just might like the "play a little looser" part of that, even if they don't know how to exploit it.

Have you tried suggesting going to a 1/2 blind structure? I don't see how anyone can counter that arguement other than they like "big starting pots". So, just raise preflop if you want to start with a bigger pot...

The only other thing I can see is to make it a Limit game.

[NickMPK]

If people are uncomfortable playing for more than a $100 buy-in, I would strongly recommend switching to $1-$2 blinds.

[nowags]

Bellagio's buy for 2-5 is 200 min, 1000 max.

100 is way too small a buy in for 2-5. even too small for 1-2.

rule of thumb is to allow a 100 BB buy in.

[David]

20 or so player pool from what you said.....

$100-$300 buyin. Higher buyins mean players bust too hard and too fast. With your limited player pool you don't want them to bust too hard or too fast. Think long term, don't listen to these guys who are saying 500-1000 or even more. In a casino that is fine. In the limited poker economy of most home games these higher buyins will break the games. Who ya gonna play with then? My 2/5 game has a $300 max buy in. I play in some others that have no max and they are more sparcely attended than mine and those that do attend them regularly are hardly "fish". Just my 2cents.