I'm a new poster, but long time lurker. I will be traveling to Winstar this weekend and am trying to determine whether to play 1/2 or 2/5. I typically play at 1/2 and 1/3 home games. These games play bigger with my typical buy in being 400 and somewhere between $3500-$4500 on the table when it starts 10 handed. I've logged 113 hours (small sample size, I know) and my current win rate is $35.52 an hour. My current poker exclusive bank roll is just over 4k.

I'm looking for advice on what to play at Winstar. The 1/2 game has $100 min and $200 max buy in. Most tables have most of the player stacks in this range with usually one or two stacks upwards of $400. The 2/5 game has a $300 min and $500 max but you often see people sitting with stacks upwards of 2k.

Pros and Cons of 1/2: The buy in is more in line with my bankroll. The players are overall worse than 2/5. I've had good results at this 1/2 game. I came back up over $900 for my last 2 day trip. Biggest drawback is the stack sizes don't allow for as much post flop play. My game is based on three betting pre-flop in position and applying pressure post flop. Small stack sizes make for more all ins and less poker playing.

Pros and Cons of 2/5: Stack sizes should be more of what I am used to seeing at my home game and should allow for more post flop play. Drawbacks are my bankroll and potential to sit down short stacked ($500) when most people at the table have over 1k.

I currently leaning towards playing 1/2 with maybe giving 2/5 a shot if I can get on a new table. Would love to hear others' thoughts and reasonings.

You might try checking in the brick and mortar forum to see if there is a thread for this particular casino.

They can typically tell you specifics about the casino and anything that you might want to know.
If you are not comfortable firing 2+ buys in with your bank roll size at 2/5 (as with 100BB stacks, you will end up getting AI pretty quickly I'd think) then I would recommend that you play 1/2. You can also always play 1/2 then move up.

Also, you should think about it in terms of BB's not in terms of $'s. So when you say that you are more used to the stack sizes, don't think about $200 as half the size of your game. Think about it as X BB's. You play should be about the same either way.

Play which stake you'll feel most comfortable in. If you feel uneasy at 2/5 don't play 2/5.

Wow, this is the most thought out, concise 1/2 vs. 2/5 thread I've seen posted. You should post more.

A $4K roll is obviously suited to 1/2 from a variance / ROR perspective. So most would say to simply play 1/2.

Personally I would recommend starting with 1/2 and if you build it up / get comfortable get on a 2/5. HAVE A DEFINED SHOT TAKE LIMIT. The idea that you can play more post flop poker in 2/5 is a bit off though (if what you are inferring by this is deeper stacks = more street to street play = more fe). If anything people are worse at the 2/5 level.

I would think the better way to say it is "2/5 tables are likely to be deeper in terms of bb's because 2/5 has more action, and I as an intelligent player have a significant advantage with deeper stacks"

Build your $4k roll at 1/2 until you reach $10k..then you can start playing 2/5. Always stick to having 20 buy ins or you will risk going broke.

Thanks for the responses (and the encouragement!). I have looked at the brick and mortar thread on Winstar and general consensus seems to be the players are poor across the board, but that most 2/5 tables have at least a couple of decent thinking people.

Avaritia, you hit the nail on the head with what I should have said. I do feel that as an intelligent and at least semi-poker competent player I have a significant advantage over the average joe. Deeper stacks let me play to this advantage more. Also, players that posses slightly more than zero poker knowledge are often easier to play against than someone who is just sitting down because they saw the WSOP on tv one time.

I agree with having a defined shot take limit. I am thinking if I get up 1k, I will take my shot, hopefully at a new table. The thought of 2/5 does not intimidate me but I am trying to be responsible in terms of building a bank roll and don't want to get ahead of myself.

Yea the thing about shot taking is you (in my experience) think about poker in terms of $ instead of bb's.

Like someone jamming $200 otr seems scary in terms of the $ amounts were are used to but for 2/5 it is standard in terms of bb's.

As long as you are thinking in terms of bb's (a preflop 3! from $20 to $75 is not huge/scary, it's the same as a pfr from $10 to $30 in a 1/2)*, then you should be okay.

*actually you should be concerned with the 3! itself bc people are so passive in general the 3!'s are usually strong, but you get what I mean in thinking in terms of bb's.

Also, getting stacked at a 2/5 is tough to swallow the first few times. Whereas it's just lol $200 at 1/2.

I will say you are taking a rather large risk. I would have the shot take limit be 2 buy ins including what you run up in the 1/2 session. This is still a very large risk.

Remember that discipline/patience are the cornerstones of a winning poker strategy and that isn't just in reference to cards.

Grunch:

Buy in for 300 at 2/5, nit it up for a few hours to learn the game and see if it's a good table, add on if you see awfulness w deep stacks and are comfortable

Play a tight position based non slowplaying image aware style and win $


I really can't stand 1/2, worse rake, less $, bigger scum bags

seems like you have a solid plan w/ the shot take angle based on circumstance and play. One thing that I would add though, is there is no substitute for being comfortable at the table.

If your comfort zone would be better suited for the 2/5 game maybe consider starting out there. You can always move down to the 1/2. If your generating all your results playing a certain style in a game that plays deeper/more post flop play, perhaps you should single out tables playing that way regardless of 1/2 or 2/5.

I'm not advocating taking unneeded risk w/ your roll or playing over your head, just saying make sure your comfortable and able to play YOUR game at whatever table you do decide to sit at.

$4k is enough to play 2/5

Lol, no.

I'm a winning 2/5 player approaching 1K hours and I've burned $2K in less than an hour in a $500 cap game.

The ROR (risk of ruin) is extremely high at $4K but the reason why I said she can shot take is she made it sound like the $4K is totally separate from life funds and she also sounds fine with losing a few buy ins.

So yes if you are comfortable losing 25% of you entire bankroll in 2 hands (bc that can happen), and this bankroll is not significantly important to you, then shot take. I'm not being sarcastic.

Most should not be shot taking until 8-9K imo and even then you need to be VERY disciplined.

Being the short stack with 100 big blinds is an advantage, not a disadvantage.

I have experience playing in games like this, where $500 is the minimum buy-in. When I buy in for the minimum and everyone else has me well covered, they always are inclined to play far looser against me than they should.

BUT, at the same time, with 100 big blinds there is enough postflop maneuverability that you aren't killing your skill edge on the other players either. It's a great mix of using the natural advantage of the short stack and the advantage you expect to have playing 100 big blinds deep.

That said, there's a lot of other good advice in here about managing your risk of ruin. I'd personally say, get your feet wet at 1/2, and if you want to shot take, shot take with winnings from 1/2.

This is the part of your thread that is jumping out at me.

Would you care to further your description of your game? E.g. 3b range from HJ to an UTG opener?

My first thought is that if you're good at LAG'n it up, then you're going to do better at the 2/5 game in general, even though you will be relatively less deep. You're going to need at least semi-competent opponents who will be able to figure out the story your bluffs are telling, and then be capable of acting accordingly.

But your roll doesn't really support 2/5. Unless this is just your roll for this trip, in which case then you're fine.

IMO, if you decide to sit deeper in the 1/2 game, go easy on the LAG until you find some opponents capable of letting their hands go when you turn up the heat.

As a general rule though: look for the "best" table, regardless of stakes. Table selection, FTW.

Sounds like OP is looking to 3b and isolate frequently though.

I'm hoping OP will post some more insight into this, but if the expectation is to 3b to like 20bb frequently, then stacks should be at least 300bb+ to allow for proper maneuverability.

100-200bb effective stacks definitely does not support this kind of style, unless you expect to get lots of folds preflop.

My suggestion is always to start out with 1/2. The biggest reason is that home games are usually far softer than casino games. You know the players well, know how they'll react in your home game. That won't be true in a casino. There is less "drinking with my buddies" action.

Another reason is that the 1/2 game is just as deep as the 2/5 game at the buy in. If you think 2/5 is deeper, it suggests that there are some gaps in your knowledge. While it is possible that everyone at 2/5 has $1000+ stacks at Winstar, I tend to doubt it. Losing players don't double up unless they get lucky. And the whole table doesn't get lucky playing.

I've actually almost always found this to be untrue. Not in relation to the bb, but in relation to the standard open raise sizing.

In my experience:
-- standard open in 1/2 is $11 to $16, 5.5 to 8bb
-- standard open in 2/5 is $15 to $30, 3 to 6bb

So if we just compare standard preflop opens to 100bb buyin stacks, the 2/5 games are almost always "deeper".

Our experiences differ. I haven't seen a 6-8 BB raise at 1/2 as a standard for several years.

Thanks for all the responses. I'm new to posting so I'm not sure how to isolate people's comments and reply to each one. Some things that stood out to me:

I completely agree that table selection is the most important thing. Whether 1/2 or 2/5 it should be a table I am comfortable at and feel I have a significant advantage playing at. With the number of tables at Winstar this should not be a problem, I just need to be disciplined in finding the right seat.

In regards to my comment on 2/5 playing deeper than 1/2, I understand that both have max buy ins of 100bb, but like it was mentioned, I feel that the pre flop raising at 1/2 is generally out of whack with regards to the size of the blinds. I see people opening for $12-$20 routinely at 1/2 which, imho, significantly handicaps post flop play with a 100bb stack. 2/5 the raises typically $15-$25 in my experience so it allows for most post flop play with a 100bb stack.

As far as my psyche and playing style, I want to again state that I am not afraid of a 2/5 table or of losing the a buy in. This roll is completely separate from my life roll and I will not play at stakes where I think of the chips in terms of money. I know I play my best when I think of the chips on the table as chips and when I put money into a pot its me putting 20 red chips in and not me putting in $100. I hope this makes sense, the point I'm trying to make is, the stakes are not intimidating nor is the thought of winning or losing that money.

I mentioned my game is based on three betting and agression. This means I value position a ton and in CO or on the button I might three bet a MP raiser with JTs+, any suited ace or king and 88+. The idea being to isolate one caller out of position and then apply pressure post flop. While this type of style can lead to a little more variance, I have found it allows me to pot control really effectively. Since people are likely checking the flop to the raiser, I can largely dictate how big a pot gets. This allows me to play to a lot of big pots when I have the best of it, and hopefully lose smaller pots when I don't. It also lets me get a lot of information about the villains hand strength. I have found that people want to announce their hands and over bet according to pot size at these limits. They are so afraid of getting drawn out on that they will protect their hand at the cost of making money long term. This strategy obviously gets tailored to the players at the table and also to my image, but sitting down at a table this is my basic game plan. As I get more information on each player I will shift this thinking as best I can adjust to playing style while trying to maintain my agressive posture. It really is amazing what well timed (read intelligent) agression can do at a poker table.

I'm off to Winstar in the morning. I will more than likely sit down at a 1/2 table when I get there with the potential to try a shot at 2/5 later in the trip. Additional comments on my mindset or strategy, especially as it relates to these two games are greatly appreciated.

Keep us updated on how it goes!

Sounds like you can talk the talk. So if you can walk the walk then, IMO, forget the 1/2 games and just jump in with both feet into 2/5, run good and profit.

I hope you continue posting here.

May I request you post a PAHWM thread?

Since you are off to Winstar, TTHRIC. Visit our chat thread if you want to give updates.

Locked.