Hero has about $340, pretty new to table.

V is unknown, has about $275. Young white guy. Said he just came down from Jersey, otherwise I don't know anything about him.

Table seems pretty limp happy/passive since I sat down. I'm already considering a table change since I want to play for stacks, not at the kiddie table.

Folds to V who makes it $5 (wtf?) in MP+2. HJ calls, folds to me in SB and I make it $25 with AJo. V calls and MP2 folds.

Flop ($57)
AT6xdx
I bet $30, V calls.

Turn $117
6d
I check, V checks behind.

River
3 completing the rainbow.

I bet $65, V goes in the tank and just stares me down hardcore. I'm just looking at the board as I usually do, pretty much staying still, minding my own business, waiting for him to call so I can keep building my stack.

After about 90 seconds or 2 minutes, V goes all-in for about $215.

What is he repping here?

AT, AK, TT, AA, 66

fold

AT, A6, TT, AA, 66 especially with the tank/jam

You're playing 1/2 they're all kiddie tables move up to 2/5 if you like playing for stacks

I play a lot of 2/5 too, but I find that my win rate is about the same with both and 1/2 is half the stress. We have some really loose and bad 1/2 players down here.

What does 2/5 have to do with playing for stacks? You can play for stacks at any stakes.

The difference is a 30bb stack vs a 100 to 300bb stack

I'm a part-time player, so I don't depend on poker for income. It's just supplemental to my career in finance. I'm at about $26.25 p/hr in 1/2 for the last 400 hours and just under $33 p/hr in 2/5.

Yeah, you play for bigger stacks on average since more 1/2 players are underrolled and buy-in for 40-50BBs more often than 2/5 players do, but I tend to shy away from the variance. I mix in a 2/5 session for every 4-5 sessions of 1/2.

The shorter the stack the easier it is to get stacks in so your statement still doesnt make sense. Good luck getting a 300BB stack in.

Everything about your post is illogical, no offense. Mike Starr pointed out some of it.

Also, You should know that 400 hours is a pretty small sample size. Even with that said, your hourly at 2/5 is $7 an hour higher at 2/5. That seems big enough of a difference to want to keep playing at that stake, regardless of the swings. But thanks for leaving money on the table for the rest of us...

As rare as it is, this feels like the last remaining two aces in the deck. It seems like the only value hand he can have here other than a weirdly played 66. People who would ever raise to $5 preflop would never do it with TT.

I don't really like the river bet. I don't think it's for value against worse aces much and could be value owning yourself against a pot-controlling AK/AQ.

I don’t like narrowing ranges down to one hand, but this feels very much like 66 most of the time. In my experience, small mom-like opens are often lower pocket pairs. If I hit quads ott, I’d check back in hopes that you hit a flush OTR or at least take a stab.

Fold

Not a single specific thing I stated in my post was illogical (and Mike wasn’t talking to me). I never said anything about playing easier for stacks in 2/5, someone else did. I acknowledged 2/5 has bigger stacks was all. 400 hours is also a fine sample size, consisting of 6000-8000 hands which leaves a relatively small, healthy margin for error statistically.

Anyway, back to the point: I agree with Notam, I felt like a stupid small raise was more likely to be a player raising a hand like 22-77 that wanted to build the pot a bit in a set mine situation. I practically never see someone raise tiny with a strong hand.

+1

When finding oneself at a passive, limp-happy table, who doesn't think "I'd rather be playing with more aggressive players who will put me to difficult decisions for all of my chips?"

Easier playing against good players because at least you can put them on a hand.

This 100%
+1

I agree and would rather play against good players, even pro's who's ranges are easier to read (especially ones who I know are tight and easy to barrel off hands) which is why deeper stacks are required to do it.

I wasn't the one complaining I can't play for stacks, the OP was.

OP never complained about not playing for stacks. Reread his post.

You cant really think playing against good players, even pros, is better than playing against below avg to bad players. Stupid statements like that is what started the whole "move up to where they respect your raises" came from.

If they are easy to read, they aren't good players.

This is one of those times I'm going to agree with you 100%. FTR I was talking from my own perceptive, so I should have said "players on my level of poker" prefer playing vs "Pros", your every day run of the mill young tight pro instead of players who gamble every hand with ATC. I do however still recommend that people should be playing in games against players who are not as good as them whenever possible.

Can’t sustain a decent win rate at 1/2 on a limp-heavy, passive table. The rake just eats you alive. If I’m at a table where people are only raising the top 2% of hands then I try to find another one. Table selection is always important and playing 1/2 is no different. Playing against bad players that you can’t range isn’t necessarily so bad. I just play my value range more aggressively and I’m very cautious about my bluffing spots. A standard bluff spot in 2/5 can be a terrible one at 1/2 against players that are just clicking buttons more on average.

Larger bluff sizing seems to do better at 1/2 than 2/5 as well. As has been discussed in a few other threads, I think 1/2 players look at money in absolute terms rather than how it relates to pot size.

Also, as I mentioned, I tend to shy away from the variance of 2/5 somewhat. I’m a working professional with 3 kids. My wife and I have a lot of bills. Playing 1/2 for enjoyment and making $25 p/hr and occasionally dipping into 2/5 is just what works for me. I can look at the long-term profitability being a bit higher in 2/5 but I don’t have a separate poker bankroll so seeing large sums of money enter and exit my bank account just adds a small, unnecessary level of stress that’s not worth it. I’ve never lost more than $600 in 1/2 in my life. I’ve lost 5x that in a runbad session of 2/5 in 3 hours. Sure, I won’t have a +$4k session in 1/2, either, but I’m quite OK with that.

This is the most inane thing ever posted. What you mean is that it's easier to play against "predictable" players. "Predictable" players are not good players.