Started playing 1/3 NL in 2010, where the rake was $5; couldn't tell you how long it had been at that rate (was 1/2 NL before that but I didn't play it so I don't know).

Remained that way until 2016, where it has gone up $1/year over the last 3 years, so currently sitting at $8 + $1 BBJ.

GcluelessrakenoobG

Markets with casino competition haven't had rake increases. We're at 5+2 with hourly high hands, and have been since I've been able to play in the casino.

Jeez, 8+1 is pretty hideous. I think everyplace I've seen in AC is at 4+2, and a lot of them give the 2 back in high hands that hit consistently instead of BBJs, so it feels to me more like 4+1 after hitting a couple $100 high hands.

Michigan has been 6+1 for a decade or so. Recently had some going to 5+2 or 6+2. With more HH than BBJ.

GG is Canadian, so his 8+1 is still pretty much 6+~1.

How do you define marginal? I think a reasonably smart person with a solid work ethic can clear 80-100k playing 2/5. I personally made it my goal to clear 80k this year and I have a long long way to go in terms of developing my game.

Agreed, and that's without even considering inflation. We all know how much less purchasing power a dollar has compared even to 10 years ago. It's an often overlooked fact when discussing the viability of LLS poker as a primary income, and probably due the to gradual nature of inflation (at least in the US). That said, it continues on while the game stakes continue to stay the same. You would have enjoyed a much higher standard of living 20yrs playing a fixed stake like "1-2" or "2-5" than you could today. As we look forward over the next 5-10 yrs, grinding these rigid fixed stakes of LLS poker will continue to provide you with a lowering standard of living even if you sustain a consistent or fairly improving winrate.

How are you clearing $100k playing $2/5?

10 BB/hr for 2000 hours? OK. Then you're not accounting for any time off the table for study or improving your game. You're also assuming a pretty good winrate for a lot of "off-peak" times. I think those assumptions aren't particularly great. I think you're going to have fewer hours overall and the more you put in the lower your WR will get.

Then you're peeling off $15k or so in self-employment tax, $20k in assorted income tax, and $10k (??) in health insurance. That's leaving you with $55k *IF* you scored $100k in winnings. Before you even consider retirement savings.

$55k sounds pretty good to a single guy with no obligations. With a family? Notsomuch. But again, I think it's really going to be lower.

Definitely workable, but you've got a lot of risk.



I miss being able to get a full meal for less than $9. Now the exact same order is almost $15.

But to be fair, I've seen a lot of rooms go from $1/2 to $1/3, and there seems to be more $2/5 around. As inflation creeps up I wouldn't be surprised for the casinos to scrap the lowest limit games to increase the rake. And if the purchasing power of the money is lower, there's less real risk to playing $2/5 for a rec player, so they may naturally shift that way too.

I don't think it's fair to factor in the exchange rate since I pay for my life with my Canadian money. Bottom line is that our 1/3 NL rake has gone from $5 to $8 in 3 years; that's a pretty brutal jump. To be honest, it's mind boggling that Vegas hasn't made similar jumps (especially since they've increased prices on virtually every other aspect of Vegas casino life).

The price of everything goes up over time. That's how things work. That's why we're not paying the exact same price for gas, bread and milk as we did 50 years ago. Thinking the rake will remain the same as the cost of living (and in turn the cost of running a poker room) increases is pretty optimistic. Of course it's going to go up. It's simply a matter of time in every single market, even competitive ones.

ETA: Good points above about perhaps the minimum limits being bumped up as well to perhaps help offset the increase in rake. The Limit games have been pretty much eliminated around these parts, and the lowest NL steaks has been 1/3 instead of 1/2 for quite a while (although you'll be hard pressed to find a 2/5 NL game in most rooms). And with the last rake increase in our room also came a maximum BI increase (from $300 to $400, although that doesn't necessarily make a huge difference if a lot of the players were already only BIing for $200).

GcluelessinflationnoobG

While the exchange rate jab is a bit of a joke, the rate itself has actually changed quite a bit over the last 5-10 years. Went from about 1:1 to 0.75:1. Which impacts inflation and purchasing power differences between the two countries in ways I don't fully care to understand. So that may be a factor in why your rake has changed more than ours has.

I'm not an economist so I know nothing about that sorta stuff, but I doubt it has anything to do with it. I've seen enough lol bad rake structures posted in the forum (Upsidedownland immediately comes to mind, but there are others) to the point where it kinda looks like parts of the US is pretty much the only one lagging behind.

Genjoyitwhileitlasts,imoG

That’s fair enough. I don’t plan on having kids and my SO works so the money I’ve made from poker so far has let me live comfortably and save for retirement but I wouldn’t recommend it to someone who plans on having kids. I may also just be sun running so my estimates could be skewed.

Just another update a few months into 2/5-ing, for people considering moving up to 2/5 from 1/2-1/3. If you are beating the lowest stakes, you should definitely move up. There's good money to be made.

People stack off lighter at 2/5, and if you preserve your ultranit mentality at these stakes you should do well. I've mainly short-stacked but it's all the same really.

Started 2/5 as my main game in March:



1/3 results not as impressive (when I was a noob I had my leaks, see October-November above), so overall lower winrate, but meh:



2/5 is $46/hr. at 370 hours, 1/3 8.7/hr. at 1090 hours.

Poker is not dead!

Your estimates are definitely skewed. There’s a reason most of the pros from 5 years ago aren’t pros today, and even less of the pros from 10 years ago etc.

In BC, as I understand it, the government takes 30% of gambling profits from the casino's as well as charging corporate income tax so, if you're wondering why we get basically zero comps and a sky high rake...

Hi this is Sol.

So I always post brag graphs, but I’d been digging through old stats thought this time of post with accompanying downswings.

Here are my 2014-2015 graphs.





I grinded 2/5 non stop after each of my failed shot or big game where a big whale would appear. It would seem like I’m stabilising and getting out of the hole then I would just get smashed in one or two sessions, sending me back down. I played 1000 hours or so each year excluding commute and wait times.

And this is my 2016 when I finally got out of my rut.



Hopefully this puts bad runs and downswings in perspective and gives some of you who are running bad some sense of hope.

That's a whole lotta sessions. Avg session length? I assume you are entering it as a new session after each meal break, or something?

Yeah, each table change is new session. I don’t tend to take meal breaks.

Is this 2/5 Sol? Or mixed stakes?

Thanks for the giraffes Sol!

Also really puts lol 1000 hour segments into some real perspective. Pretty sure if you posted those different 1000 hour segments as different users and then claimed you were the same person playing the same game you'd be lol'ed outta here based on some Std Dev math. And yet (assuming 1000 hour segments at 2/5 NL) the -9bb/hr whale versus 0bb/hr lame-o breakevener versus the 20bb/hr crusher turns out to be the exact same guy.

How have things gone since?

ETA: Also, if (???) I've totalled/read those 3 giraffes correctly, does that overall you were a $18.33/hr (3.7bb/hr) winner over those 3 years? Hard way to make an easy living, imo.

Glol@livesamplesizes,imoG

I suspect he has just gotten better over time.

No. Sol has been a pro for a very long time. He plays (or at least used to) a very aggressive style, so the chance of going on extended runs that are highly different than his expectations is more likely than it is for most live players, but he was not some 2/5 noob in 2014.

IIRC he was crushing before that, but he can confirm.

GcluelessETA:slowponynoobG

Ah ok. Didn’t know all that. Thanks for sharing.

Still, even pros can improve.... I wonder if he was playing the same style both times?

If it were a single stake then it would be close to 0% chance that it was pure variance. If you lose 50k at 2|5 you're just a losing player. However since he played mixed stakes it's really hard to tell. It appears there were some 15-20k losing sessions in there so he could have been playing really big. If he played 900 hours of 2|5 500 cap and 100 hours of 10|25 uncapped then some run-bad at 10|25 could easily wipe out all of his 2|5 profits. He might have even been a decent winner in BB/h over the same sample he lost 50k.

Yeah, didn't notice that originally, but that's a possibility since it looks like he has a half-a-dozen huge $15K - $20K losses (which seems large for 2/5?).

GcluelesssteaksnoobG