Hand 1

I'm at a table with two weak tight players, four loose passives, one maniac, and a regfish. Effective stacks are about $190.

Live at Winstar $1/$2 No Limit Hold'em - 9 players

Seat 1 (MP1): $190.00
Seat 2 (MP2): $190.00
Seat 3 (CO): $190.00
Villain (BTN): $190.00
Seat 5 (SB): $190.00
Seat 6 (BB): $190.00
Hero (UTG): $190.00
Seat 8 (UTG+1): $190.00
Seat 9 (UTG+2): $190.00

Pre Flop: ($3.00) Hero is UTG with A A
Hero raises to $8, 1 fold, Seat 9 calls $8, Seat 1 calls $8, Seat 2 calls $8, Seat 3 calls $8, BTN raises to $40, 2 folds, Hero ?

Villain is a weak tight OMC. I figure his range is super strong here, something like JJ+, AK, possibly as strong as KK+, AK. This is within the first two hours I sat down, and I've made a few procedural mistakes, so I look like a fish. Shove or flat?

Hand 2

Table is pretty solid for 1/2 with a couple decent players, several LAGs, and a couple regfish. Effective stacks are $140.

Live at Winstar $1/$2 No Limit Hold'em - 9 players

UTG: $140.00
UTG+1: $140.00
UTG+2: $140.00
MP1: $140.00
MP2: $140.00
CO: $140.00
BTN: $140.00
SB: $140.00
Hero (BB): $140.00

Pre Flop: ($3.00) Hero is BB with A Q
1 fold, UTG+1 raises to $10, UTG+2 calls $10, 1 fold, MP2 calls $10, CO raises to $40, 2 folds, Hero ?

UTG+1 is a bad LAG who has been raising about 1 in 3 hands so he is super wide here. The callers are bad LAGs so I suspect their holdings are marginal or one would have 3-bet. CO is a solid LAG who I can't put on a precise range, but I suspect it is something like {77+, A9s+, KTs+, QTs+, AJo+, KQo}. I could be way off though. What do you think about his range, and what should I do here?

Thanks!

Hand 2. Against most weak tight OMCs this is QQ+ that they won't be able to fold. Just 4-bet to $80-90 and out the rest in on the flop. If it's the type of guy that is looking for a reason to fold, flat and check/shove the flop

Hand one: I'd open bigger. 4BB opens are seen as very small at 1/2 live, and you will often get way more callers than you want. AP, thank god for the 3-bet. Very few OMC's have a 3-bet/fold range, so I just go ahead and shove it in.

Hand two: I fold AQs to a three bet OOP and only 70BBs deep, even with all of the V's described as LAGs. UTG+1 is uncapped, as is CO. Putting in almost 1/3 of our stack when we only like Q-high flops (and may not be good then) and HHH, is pretty bad, and I don't think we have much FE this many ways if we shove. We're obv in bad shape if called, with a flip being the best we can hope for.

Sorry I was referring to hand 1. Hand 2 is a fold

Hand 1 : Jam it in. OMC isn't going to find a fold with much, if any of the hands he's 3betting, since this is often just QQ+.

Hand 2 : I'd rethink your analysis of the LAG guy's 3betting range unless you've seen him 3bet those hands. I play pretty LAG in opening & isolation raising scenarios, but my 3bet range is still pretty restrictive in a lot of spots, especially with short effective stacks. Would this player really want to 3bet those medium pairs & suited broadways that do so well multiway? Unless you've seen it, it's best to assume that a live 3bet range is quite strong, like JJ+ AK, which crushes AQs.

If you really believe this squeeze is that wide (Villain would be 3betting over 10% of the time in this spot with the range you assigned, by the way), then you should shove for value since you're ahead of his range. But it will probably end up being a -EV play in the long term.

h1 - bigger pre, as played arr in

h2 - if V can be 3betting even half that light then shove. Generally, calling 1/3rd of your stack pre is bad, because folding your equity on the flop getting 2:1 is bad (two overs+bdfd is 28% equity, you need around 33, actually less with the dead money, besides there are maybe some bluffs if you call and V jams flop), so if you're not folding the flop you may as well jam and not allow the limpers to make a correct preflop call, and you can possibly allow the 3bettor to make a mistake by folding.

In Hand 1, I shoved. Regarding bet size, I've been doing 3(BB) + pot size roughly, so my bet is 8 when opening. Isn't betting large with our best hands highly exploitable? Or should we not worry about being exploited at this level? Most opponents I don't think are paying enough attention, but I did come across some pretty sharp opponents who would catch on to this quickly.

In Hand 2, I do think Villain is 3-betting that wide here because of how insanely wide the initial raiser was betting, and Villain has position on him. Also, when I said effective stacks were $140 this is misleading. Villain and the initial PFR had at least $250. I had $140. I should have thought to include this, sorry.

I agree flat calling seems bad with 70BB, so it's push/fold in my opinion. Let's see how wide villain must call to make a shove profitable. I think the pre-flop raiser and callers are almost always folding, and if not, we are doing well against the callers because they are LAGs who would raise QQ+, AK. The initial raiser could have QQ+, AK, but there are only 3 combinations of AA, 6 combinations of KK, 3 combinations of QQ, and 12 combinations of AK due to our blockers. So P(QQ+, AK) <= 24/1326 or about 1.8% and even against this range we have 29% equity. Plus, most players at this level seem to bet larger with QQ+, AK, so it is probably even less likely. It also simplifies the math to assume they'll fold, so let's assume this.

EV(shove) = P(V_fold)*($72) + (1-P(V_fold))*(P(win)*($172)-(1-P(win))*($140)

If villain is 3-betting {77+, A9s+, KTs+, QTs+, AJo+, KQo}, I think he is calling pretty wide in this spot because he is getting pot odds of (140+72)/100 = 2.12:1. Keep in mind this villain is intelligent so he knows pot odds. A reasonable range to put me on is something like {88+, ATs+, KQs, AQo+}, and villain is only crushed with 77, A9s, and AJo. We can guess his calling range might be something like {99+, AQs+, AKo}. Against my range he has massive equity with any one of these hands. His 3-bet range has 148 combinations, and his calling range has 56 combinations. So P(V_fold) = (148-56)/148 = .62, and using Equilab P(win) = .37, so

EV(shove) = .62*72 + .38*(.37*172-.63*140) = 35.3

So shoving is massively profitable if our read is close. Of course, I made lots of assumptions that could be off.

Let's see what happens if villain is not 3-betting this wide, maybe something more like {88+, ATs+, KQs, AQo+} (86 combinations) and calling with {TT+, AKs, AKo} (46 combinations). I am 99% certain he is 3-betting at least this wide and calling at least this wide. Then P(V_fold) = (86-46)/86 = .465 and using Equilab P(win) = .34, so

EV(shove) = .465*72 + .535*(.34*172-.66*140) = 15.3

Still very profitable. I'm curious how the math changes when we account for the initial raiser and the two callers, but I expect it's still a shove. I may try to figure this out later. Please let me know if I've made a mistake somewhere, which is very possible.

Why do people think this is a fold? I would not 4-bet shove this light generally at 1/2 but I was 70BB deep, the table was very loose, and Villain is an intelligent LAG in the CO. No way he is on {JJ+, AK} here. I have not seen him 3-bet specifically the range I mentioned, as we have nowhere near the hand history required, but I did see him 3-bet several times when in position vs. a bad LAG's PFR. 10% would not surprise me, but it could be a little less or a little more.

I agree that we shouldn't vary our open size by hand strength. Even 1/2 players will catch on to that. I just wouldn't size that small, basically ever. I haven't played 1/2 in a while, but when I did, the only places I saw $8 opens get any respect at all was in Vegas. I've heard that they tend to open smaller at Foxwoods as well. Everywhere else I've played 1/2, $8 opens get an average of 4-6 calls. While it's nice to have $40 in the pot pre, playing OOP mega-multi way sucks. If we open to $14, we likely get about 2 calls, and have a slightly bigger pot (though more of it came from us) and the hand plays way easier.

If we are playing an ABC value-oriented style, we generally want to find an open size that gets us 1 or 2 callers. This depends largely on table conditions, but I found the magic number for me was often $12, +$2 per limper, +$2 if I was in EP or the blinds.

This kind of ridiculous open sizing is common in 1/2, but gets smaller as we go up in stakes, as so many of our Vs think in terms of dollar value of bets, not the amount relative to stacks, the pot, etc. At 1/3, I open about the same size (but much lower in BBs) that I did at 1/2, and at 2/5 I'm down to your sizing.

If he is, he has lockdown reads on the other Vs. That is a ludicrously wide 3-betting range for 1/2 live, even for a LAG. This game just plays so much more passively than online, in general. You'll need to widen your ranges for everyone who calls, and tighten the hell out of them for 3-betting. Obv I didn't get to observe V, but for someone I'd consider "good LAG who adjusts to 1/2 live game conditions," I'd say his range is more like {half the 77-99 combos, TT+ AJs+, half the AJo/AQo combos, AKs/o, about 6 combos of random hands with blockers that didn't want to nut-mine like AXs, KQs, etc.}

No it's not. Not unless you told him you're a former online grinder. Vs an unknown, 4-bets in 1/2 live are almost never any unpaired hand except AK, which they love to put you on.

If you haven't read it already, I recommend Flat Tire Suited's post Black Friday thread on transitioning from online to live. While it's exaggerated for effect, it will really help you get a feel for the differences.

Hand 1 is a shove. People very rarely 3-bet fold in a 1/2 game, especially an OMC.

Hand 2 is a snap fold. How often have you seen CO 3-bet and how long have you played with him? Your range for him is way too wide IMO. Of the 40 or so regs I play with maybe one has a 3-bet range that wide when he's in the right mood, and you'll know because he 3-bets at least once an orbit. In a live game, a light 3-betting range is something like 99/TT+, AJ+, KQ and a few random nice looking connected hands. PFR is uncapped too.

This makes sense. I did notice that most players would fold to a $15 bet but not an $8 bet. I'll experiment with bet sizes but 12 + 2 per limper sounds reasonable. I got 3(BB) + pot size from Jonathan Little's book "Strategies For Beating Small Stakes Poker Cash Games." He was playing in AC at the Borgata, though, and from reading the book it sounds like these games were quite a bit tighter than at Winstar.

Very logical. I hope I'm able to play 2/5 pretty soon. The 1/2 games are easy but so much of it is sitting around waiting for premium hands that it can get pretty boring. If I run okay I should be able to move up within a year or so. Something that worries me is learning bad habits for beating 1/2 that will get me killed at 2/5.

This guy was pretty sharp. I talked to him quite a bit between hands. Works in finance at DFW but plays at Winstar most weekends. He knew a lot of the players but whether he had lockdown reads I don't know. I'm just working with Bayesian inference as best I can.

Anyway, he doesn't need to be that wide. I showed even a tight 3-betting range like {88+, ATs+, KQs, AQo+} calling with {TT+, AKS, AKo} is still a profitable shove. I'm interested how I would do against your range though.

You have 3 combos of 77, 88, and 99, 6 combos of TT, JJ, KK, 3 combos of QQ, AA, 3 combos of AJs, AQs, AKs, 4.5 combos of AJo, 3 combos of AQo, 9 combos of AKo, and for random hands let's say 2 combos of KQs, 1 combo of KJs, 1 combo JTs, 1 combos ATs, 1 combo A9s. I don't know if that's what you had in mind but I doubt it makes any difference as he's folding most of these random combos to a shove.

So that's 64.5 combos in his 3-betting range. Let's say he's calling {TT+, AKs, AKo}. There are 6 combos TT, JJ, KK, 3 combos QQ, AA, 3 combos AKs, and 9 combos AKo, for a total of 36 combos. So P(V_fold) = (64.5-36)/64.5 = .442 and P(win) = .344, so

EV(shove) = P(V_fold)*($72) + (1-P(V_fold))*(P(win)*($172)-(1-P(win))*($140)

EV(shove) = .442(72) + (1-.442)(.344(172)-(1-.344)(140)) = 13.59

So, still a profitable shove. Let's try to add in the PFR now. He is raising extremely wide here. I would guess any pocket pair, any ace, any broadway hand, some high suited connectors, plus random junky big card hands like K8o. Something like {22+, A2s+, K6s+, Q8s+, J9s+, T8s+, 98s, 87s, 76s, A2o+, K6o+, Q9o+, JTo, T9o, 98o}, which is 424 combos after removing the Ace and Queen of Hearts. It's hard to tell how wide he's shoving as some LAGs will get it in very light and others at this level will raise very wide but tighten up considerably for stacks (keep in mind his stack is more like $250 though). So against my 70BB shove let's guess he's shoving something like {99+,AKs, AKo), which is 42 hands after card removal. Again, he could be much wider or slightly tighter. Hard to tell, but this is probably close enough to estimate whether shoving is +EV or not.

Assuming this is a good estimate, P(PFR_Fold) = (424-42)/424 = .9, and P(Win_v_PFR) = .362 if 3-better folds. When PFR shoves, CO has pot odds (140+250+20+40+2)/(250-40) = 2.15 : 1, meaning he needs 31.7% equity. Of course, he doesn't know I have AQs. If he puts me on a similar range, {99+, AQs+, AK}, then his calling range should be very tight, {JJ+} or even {QQ+}. I think with this guy in this spot it's {JJ+}, so there are 6 combinations JJ, KK, and 3 combinations QQ, AA, for 18 calling combinations. Again using the 64.5 combos you came up with in his 3-betting range, we have P(V_fold | PFR_shove) = (64.5 - 18)/64.5 = .721. And P(Win_v_both) = .235. So we are in bad shape when both call.

WARNING: MATH

Let's calculate the EV

This will be messy since I don't have access to all the nice math symbols, and there's a decent chance I make a mistake, but let's try to find the total Expected Value of shoving, accounting for four independent scenarios: PFR folds and villain folds, PFR shoves and villain calls, PFR shoves and villain folds, and PFR folds and villain calls. The total EV is the sum of each scenario, i.e.,

EV(Shove) = EV(Shove | PFR&CO fold) + EV(Shove | PFR&CO call) + EV(Shove | PFR only calls) + EV(Shove | CO only calls)

For clarity we have relabeled some of the earlier derivations, and found a few more terms we will need for the calculation. Note | means "given" so P(A | B) means "the probability of event A given event B happens." Also note => means "implies," so the identities following this sign follow directly from the identity to the left

P(PFR_fold) = .9 => P(PFR_shove) = .1
P(CO_fold | PFR_fold) = .442 => P(CO_call | PFR_fold) = .558
P(CO_fold | PFR_shove) = .721 => P(CO_call | PFR_shove) = .279
P(WinAI | CO only call) = .344
P(WinAI | PFR&CO call) = .235
P(WinAI | PFR only call) = .362
P(PFR&CO fold) = P(CO_fold | PFR_fold) * P(PFR_fold) = .442*.9 = .398
P(PFR&CO call) = P(CO_call | PFR_shove) * P(PFR_shove) = .279 *.1 = .028
P(PFR only call) = P(PFR_shove)*P(CO_fold | PFR shove) = .1*.721 = .072

EV(Shove) = [P(PFR&CO fold)*72] +
[P(PFR&CO call)*(P(WinAI | PFR&CO call)*302-(1-P(WinAI | PFR&CO call))*140)] +
[P(PFR only call)*(P(WinAI | PFR only call)*202-(1-P(WinAI | PFR only call))*140)] +
[(P(CO_call | PFR_fold)*(P(WinAI | CO only call)*($172)-(1-P(WinAI | CO only call))*($140)]

EV(Shove) = [.398*72] + [.028*(.235*302 - (1-.235)*140)] + [.072*(.362*202 - (1-.362)*140)] + [.558*(.344*172 - (1-.344)*140)]

EV(Shove) = 28.656 - 1.011 - 1.166 - 18.231

EV(Shove) = 8.25

Even with these conservative assumptions and accounting for the rake, it is still profitable to shove here. And I am certain villain is 3-betting wider than our assumptions here. Am I missing something?

LOL. I think I actually did tell him I'm a former online grinder. I haven't run into a lot of smart people at 1/2 so when I spot somebody I may talk to him/her when we're not in a hand. Probably -EV to do so but it gets pretty boring otherwise.

Thanks, I will definitely read this. My biggest difficulty at this point is playing in pots that are five to seven way as this rarely happened online. Obviously speculative hands go up in value and made hands go down in these situations, but to what extent I have no idea. Like how often is TPTK good in a six way pot? Beats me... I'll assume I'm good as long as nobody raises me, but this is super exploitable.

I like your approach! My only concern is that even though the other Vs are capped, if V1 calls, it could cause a cascade of "OMGPOTODDS" calls, which would likely be the PP portions of their ranges. While you are near flipping with those, every pair in the pot lowers your probability to win a bit more than it increases the pot size (and it also eliminates some of the dead money your math depends upon).

I can't prove it with math with the amount of time I have available to me, but my experience in these games tells me that when called we are almost always up against a PP and/or AK. AK is a disaster for us, of course, while most PPs are fine given the likely dead money. Now how wide the Vs are now dictates how often they show up with PPs/AK to be able to call, of course. My original response assumed much more frequently than your analysis, as even "LAGs" tend to call PF too wide (if they didn't open) and 3-bet too narrow in LLSNL. If you're sure of your ranges, it's a fine shove, but I see smaller PPs call "short stack" shoves all the time, looking to flip against your "obvious AK."

On the Little book, I haven't played 1/2 at the Borgota, just 2/5, but I recall that the 2/5 open sizing was much smaller than I see in the Midwest. Plus it probably has a lot of the same player pool as Foxwoods, which is often mentioned in this forum as tighter and smaller sizing preflop, so it makes sense.

True, but few players will even notice the pattern, much less figure out how to exploit it. If you see yourself getting exploited, adjust then, imo.

Hand 1 click it back to $90 and hopefully he shoves his KK. Also clears the deck. I don't like a shove here because we may fold out QQ. Not difficult to get the rest in after that howver you think is best.

OMC didnt come to the casino to fold his KK but he may fold QQ to a shove.

Hand 2, just fold. A A or Q high flop may not be good and for the 60% of the time we whiff, now what. Too shallow to play AQ against this much aggression OOP. Hand 2 fold >> shove > call.

Thanks! Are these players likely to be aware of pot odds? The raiser and two callers are quite bad. However, if they do decide to call with pocket pairs that is tremendous for us. They never have QQ+ here (I don't mean in general, I mean these particular players). Their pocket pair range is probably 22 - 77 at most. Doing a precise EV calculation with 4 players is horrendously complicated, but look at these results from Equilab (using the ranges from my previous post):

Here is the scenario with just the PFR calling.

*******Equity*****Win*****Tie
UTG+1**63.79%**62.96%***0.83%*{ 99+, AKs, AKo }
BB*****36.21%**35.38%***0.83%*{ AhQh }

Add two guys with pocket pairs.

*******Equity*****Win*****Tie
UTG+1**35.93%**35.44%***0.50%*{ 99+, AKs, AKo }
UTG+2**19.32%**19.06%***0.26%*{ TT-22 }
MP2****19.34%**19.08%***0.26%*{ TT-22 }
BB*****25.41%**25.07%***0.34%*{ AhQh }

Here is the scenario with just the CO calling.

*******Equity*****Win*****Tie
CO*****65.64%**64.70%***0.94%*{ TT+, AKs, AKo }
BB*****34.36%**33.42%***0.94%*{ AhQh }

Add two guys with pocket pairs.

*******Equity*****Win*****Tie
UTG+2**19.55%**19.32%***0.23%*{ TT-22 }
MP2****19.55%**19.32%***0.23%*{ TT-22 }
CO*****36.70%**36.22%***0.48%*{ TT+, AKs, AKo }
BB*****24.20%**23.82%***0.38%*{ AhQh }

Here is the scenario with both calling.

*******Equity*****Win*****Tie
UTG+1**29.16%**28.36%***0.80%*{ 99+, AKs, AKo }
CO*****47.39%**46.64%***0.74%*{ JJ+ }
BB*****23.45%**23.05%***0.40%*{ AhQh }

Add two guys with pocket pairs.

UTG+1**22.08%**21.58%***0.50%*{ 99+, AKs, AKo }
UTG+2**14.83%**14.75%***0.08%*{ TT-22 }
MP2****14.83%**14.75%***0.08%*{ TT-22 }
CO*****31.45%**31.01%***0.44%*{ JJ+ }
BB*****16.81%**16.51%***0.30%*{ AhQh }

In all cases, our relative equity increases dramatically if we get the LAGs to come along with pocket pairs, and probably their crummy Aces, and ridiculous high card hands like K7o. I'm assuming they rarely do this, but if so, fantastic! Just makes the shove even better.

In fact, if the whole table called with pocket pairs Jacks or lower, I'd be very happy here, as we have more than our fair share of equity, even ignoring pot odds. We have a 15.25% chance to octuple up! This scenario gets us EV = .1525*1120 - .8475*140 = $52, so that would be fantastic.

*******Equity*****Win*****Tie
UTG+1**10.58%**10.38%***0.20%*{ JJ-22 }
UTG+2**10.63%**10.43%***0.20%*{ JJ-22 }
MP1****10.60%**10.39%***0.21%*{ JJ-22 }
MP2****10.61%**10.41%***0.20%*{ JJ-22 }
MP3****10.55%**10.35%***0.20%*{ JJ-22 }
CO*****10.60%**10.39%***0.21%*{ JJ-22 }
BU*****10.56%**10.36%***0.21%*{ JJ-22 }
SB*****10.60%**10.39%***0.20%*{ JJ-22 }
BB*****15.26%**15.24%***0.02%*{ AhQh }

You are probably right as far as people usually having big pairs and AK here, but I am pretty confident of my read in this situation. I've seen CO 3-bet in position over these bad LAGs several times, and he snap-called my AQ shove with TT so it's reasonable to infer he's 3-betting quite a bit wider.

But as explained above, if any short stacks want to come along with their pocket pairs that's a great result here, because they're crushed by CO way worse than we are.

It looks like shoving here is very bad against some players, pretty marginal against some players, but solidly +EV here if my read is even close. Of course I adjust my ranges based on opponents. Not going to shove over an OMC here, don't worry

That would explain it. It's a good book (well, technically more like a novella at 114 pages) but some of the stuff he says just doesn't mesh with my experience. Like he spends a ton of time talking about how to play when it's folded to you. What? Nobody ever folds to you unless you're at an OMC table, and even then it's pretty rare. And he spends a lot of time talking about facing 1 raiser and 1 caller or facing 1 or 2 limpers. "Multiway" in this book seems to mean 3, maybe 4 players. How do I play when the entire table limps? 7+ limpers is more common than 2 or 3, but Little doesn't really address this. It's unfortunate because I can't find any other decent books on 1/2. I have Selbrede's Donkey Poker and it has some nice charts and stats, but I don't really trust the guy as he advocates buying in at 50BB, playing a really tight "small ball" strategy, and other concepts that don't seem like they'd work too well. And his graph shows him winning at 8BB/hour, which is respectable, but Little wins at 17.5BB/hour at 1/2.

I read that post you linked and most of the first page. Good summary of 1/2, though he makes it sound insanely easy (at 2/5 also). I mean, 1/2 is pretty easy, but there are quite a few break even and modestly winning players out there. Maybe the post was hyperbolic for effect, or the games have just gotten tougher.

I've also seen a lot of contradictory advice on how to play hands like KJ. Some people say don't play that, play more speculative hands, and others say play the hell out of it because even though it has RIO, people will call you with hands with much worse RIO like K9. I saw a lot of people at Winstar playing K2o like it was a decent hand. LOL. I guess it depends where you are, but I'm inclined to play it for value unless the table is unusually tough or I'm UTG.

Makes sense, but I'm worried about developing bad habits and then getting killed at higher levels where the players will definitely notice that kind of thing. I suppose if I'm always conscientious about when I get out of line then it won't become habitual.

"higher levels where people notice things" is 5/t+ and if you ever get the roll to play that high frankly you've done alright at the pokers

Hmm...I've heard 2/5 games are pretty tough now, in many locales. But I guess it's relative. In my mind, if most or even a third of 2/5 players aren't paying attention then the games must be pretty beatable.

FWIW, I'm already rolled for 2/5 by most players' standards, 5/10 by some of the crazier ones, but I'm a bit of a nit when it comes to bankroll management. I figure I'll take shots at 2/5 when I reach 30BI and move up at 40BI and stay as long as I don't downswing back below 30BI. Then I'll do the same for 5/10, if I can make it that far. Maybe when I'm 70 I'll have enough money to play the nosebleed stakes you see on TV...but I highly doubt it.

Yeah, I shouldn't have generalized like that. Like everything it depends on your area.

1

4bb open is fine. Whole table calling is fine.

Once a tight player 3bets you it's time to take a really face up / exploitable line and min click back, so like exactly $80. You can do this bc he has no bluffs. So that means you also have no bluffs. Vs some aggrotard that 3bets you alot (rare at 1/2) you can stuff your AK combos and therefore your QQ+ combos too.

2

If I was winning and in a good mood I'd just yawn fold and go back to my delicious chicken quesadilla. If I was bored / losing I would fist pump shove. Honestly it's probably a shove.

State of poker

2/5 isn't tough, at all. However, people are less bad. (Notice "less bad" and "not tough" are two different concepts) It is however probably the least profitable level in terms of bb/hour. This is because at 1/2 you have pure recreational and 5/10+ has the real whales.

Games do vary by market, but not by much so far in my southeast / midwest experience. For example, games in South Florida probably have the most educated player pool (in a regular 2/5 game there are 1-3 people who are "not bad") compared to a place like Daytona where I'm pretty sure there wasn't a single winning player in the room.

Still though, your wr is going to about the same. It would take some dream-level type conditions that lasted a long time for you to show any major difference in win rate from one location to another imo (excluding rake differences)

Completely disagree with your assertion that attainable winrates (bb/hr) at 2/5 are the lowest. There are way more players with money at 2/5, way more gambol, and way less nursing of short stacks at 2/5 than the lower levels.

I also don't understand why you think attainable winrates would be similar in games with different caliber of players. That makes no logical sense.

I spoke in absolutes to mostly make a point.

Sure if I played 5000 hours in Daytona and 5000 hours in Sfla I bet my wr would have a noticeable difference (probably 10bb/hr compared to 8bb/hr respectively)

It's just gonna be hard to get those hours / see that real (non noise) difference. Obviously if you can game select from one room to another then yes go for it.

The win rate by stake thing is just a neat thing I've realized and I don't want to tangent the thread further and I'm self banned from the wr thread.

Well I assure you that the attainable winrates where I've put in a lot of hours ie 5/T Vegas and 5/T Winstar (where OP was playing) are not as high per bb/hr and in some cases aren't even as high per $/hr as their 2/5 counterparts. Maybe the uncapped Wynn 5/T when it's super deep but that's not really a normal 5/T.

The 2/5 games you referenced where only 1 to 3 players know what they are doing are super soft and the attainable winrates in those games are very very high. In most markets, 5/T will be filled with a lot more professionals/grinders.