... this is why I'm stuck playing 2/4 all these years. If there was a 3/6 or 4/8 game running at TS, don't you think I would have been playing in it regularly? There's not a game 100 miles of where I live that spreads anything in between 2/4 and 20/40 in a long time.

St. Louis is pretty poor in terms of LHE selection too. It's mostly 3/6 LHE scattered among 4 poker rooms with a few exceptions (20-40 1/2 kill on Wed/Fri at Harrah's and 4/8 1/2 kill on Fri. at River City).

As for 2/4 being "beatable", that's really stretching it depending on your definition. If one chooses a quite liberal definition, it's possible I would guess, but very very difficult. From a statistical standpoint, I would probably say a player whose WR (after rake/tokes) is positive 97.5% of the time (results above negative 2 standard deviations) after 1000 hours would be a good sign of it being "beatable". Given an SD of about 10BB/hr (18.3BB/100 hands) and a hand rate of 30 hands/hr, one needs to win about 0.62 BB/hr in the "infinite run" after rake/tokes to do this.

I'm not sure many people could sustain a long term win rate of 0.62BB/hr in many 2/4 games. I would guess that players pay about 3BB/hr in rake/tokes per hour? This means that we need to beat the game itself for 3.62BB/hr to be a likely "winner". This becomes equal to 12BB/100 hands. If rake/tokes are 2.5BB/hr then the WR needs to be 3.12BB/hr = 10.4BB/100 hands Any winner will have to be dependent on the rest of the table being horrible; however, this is often the case for 2/4.

One thing is for certain, however, no one should try to intentionally win money at this game.

lol, not even remotely close to wrong

Maybe occasionally you get one to two players at some of the 15/30 or 20/40 Limit tables who is a completely recreational player who knows little about the game, but I'd imagine it's rare.

I've played 20/40 limit O8 with a minimum of 4 really terrible players. I've see 50/100 mixed games with a minimum of 3 very terrible players. Like we're talking worse than microstakes online.

fyp

Not sure what to tell you then, we'll agree to disagree. I know plenty of people who put in a good number of hours in AC playing these games and people aren't exactly handing out chips.

Then again, I'm obviously not taking into account that everyone here is awesome and can just show up on this site and declare that everyone else they've been at a live table with is a mouth breathing drooler who just dumps money at will.

It depends on your definition, I guess. I've been in Bellagio 30/60 games where there wasn't a single decent player by modern standards. You can have "doesn't lose that much" regs who aren't good but don't spew off racks a night. You can certainly play in mid-stakes games with people who barely know the rules. The 30/60 here is full of bad players, and if the 50/100 gets going it is even more amazing because many OK regs can't/won't afford to move up. Especially playing nights and weekends, you should be able to find soft players. I think you're giving people too much credit b/c they can come up with $1000 to play poker. LHE isn't solved. Not everyone playing regularly is good.

Not really sure what your question is in your post. It seems to be in the thread title. It depends on the rake structure and how bad the opponents are. 4/8 or 6/12 these days. Check out the FAQ in Small Stakes Limit. If you run into a $5+1 or $5+2 or a drop in tight games, it could be 10/20.

--

MNOWAX you'd be better off playing online. It would save wear and tear on your car. If the company turns out to be shady and takes your whole small BR (you wouldn't deposit much to start), you wouldn't care. Netting < 1/4BB/HR should make for huge swings. It would be way easier to make more online. Also, you'd learn the skills to move up to midstakes if you could find the games. None of that will happen live making < $1/hour. Just assume that the minute you deposit that the money has been stolen by foreign thieves. Then, any check you get is found money.

You have totally missed my point here. IF I wanted to be a big winning player, I would move to AC or Vegas and move my way up the stakes until i had the bankroll for 20/40 or 30/60. The ONLY point I was making is that in the confines of my definition of beatable, 2/4 LHE IS. I don't play at TS to make huge amounts of money. If I wanted to, I could sit at their 200 max and make a reasonable amount of money. I DON"T WANT TO. I want to play at a Live Limit game. Online games I will not touch, not until it is regulated (put me in the tin foil hat group if you want, I just don't like risking my money at this point).

Since the only game in my area is 2/4, I have been playing that for years instead. If there was a regular Stud or HORSE game at TS, I'd be playing that instead. For a short time a home game 3/6 was running, and while I didn't have the chance to play in it much, ( I sadly think only one or two times) it was a nice comfortable game that I made a good set of money in.

NL has too many swings. I have too many leaks for NL, and even if I plug them, it's still a helluva time to make a reasonable profit off of a game 150 miles round trip away. I am not fooling myself, I have a career and a business to take care of, Poker is my love, my passion, but not my means of making money at this point in my life. If it was, I wouldn't be living in the middle of New York State!

there's definitely a few. (remember west coasters 10 and 15 games here are time)

I think there are "pro" guys but they also have a 3-4k month pension or SSI. Or he/she has a bunch of money here or there. Where it's nice to be making 25-40k a year but it's not the same as a meat and potato's guy who's sole source is that 25-40k, imo of course.

Not to say there aren't plenty of those same type, play 5x week but are losers in those games,in fact there are a ton.

Source: I follow everyone I play with home

beaten to the punch. but to re-affirm. There isn't a ton of middle limit in the country. There are some hot spots, but not a ton. Where there is mid-limit. The new player pool is shallow at best. That's not to say plenty of people that play regularly aren't losers/good for the game. But it's 90%+ regs.

Heck, i'd go so far as to say that you'd have a better chance finding a total poker "noob" playing bigger stakes. The whole " I want to play the biggest game" kind of thing.

How did those calls go? I know you never said you were going to post a report on them, but I'm sure most people reading this thread would be interested.

I doubt he called since several people in this thread gave evidence he was wrong, including myself.

Outside of Vegas/LA/AC/Foxwoods games ranging from 6-12 to 10-20 are very difficult to find. It's almost always 2-4, 3-6, or 4-8, and then a gigantic jump to 20/40+

I can only really report on where I've been but Winstar in OK has 4/8 5/10 (this always tilts me that they have both because 4/8 is a freakin $1 chip game) 10/20 and possibly another level above that. The Oaks in Oakland has 1/2 2/4 3/6 6/12 15/30 and I think there are a few regular games higher than that every week. It does seem a bit regional - limit games in mid stakes are way more common if there is not a lot of NL games.

...who spends time posting on poker discussion boards......they should agree with what is popular within the peculiar subculture that exists on poker discussion boards. People have been turning a modest profit in small stakes limit games, including 2/4L & 3/6, a lot longer than people have been posting on 2+2.

Please provide anything remotely resembling a modicum of evidence that some big number of people have been beating 2/4 Limit over a large sample. In all the discussions that have been had on this topic on this site, we've got a grand total of one person to claim they did, for the slimmest of winrates, over a decent-but-not-huge sample of 1600 hours.

I didn't agree with any "peculiar subculture" just to fit in with the crowd, I provided a detailed math breakdown of the issue at hand.