Quote:
Originally Posted by Avaritia
I've talked about this often. At 1/2 someone will lose their "entire" $56 stack and go on some massive tirade berating the dealer and slamming the table etc etc.
At 5/10 I've seen people lose mid 4 figure pots and laugh.
There really is a big difference, tho you get good low stakes games sometimes and bad high stakes games too.
As an aside, it appears you are still trying to force things in a game where people dont fold. Stop.
It happens even at non-poker games too. Like someone can lose 10k at baccarat and just laugh it off, whereas if someone loses $20 at blackjack, they'll start swearing about how the dealer hits a 21 every single f**king time.
I do really like that 5/10 atmosphere. I used to play a lot of chess and I miss that friendly environment where you compete against someone, say "good game", shake their hand, etc. Maybe I'm just a romantic but I believe that poker should be a game where gentlemen play, gamble and laugh. It should be a game where people show respect and admiration for another man's (or woman's) play, not a game where degenerates throw their whole paycheck on the table and get extremely emotional about results because that's their child support money on the line.
On the last paragraph: I wouldn't say that players at 1/3 and 2/5 are incapable of making laydowns. There are plenty of non-stationy TAGfish regs out there that will fold a 1pr hand to a big raise. But I need to be selective about which hands I choose to bluff with, particularly preflop, and pick hands which have the right blockers and ideally some equity when called, rather than just bluffing for the sake of bluffing with a zero-equity hand and no blockers. The A6 bluff may have been unnecessary, same with the Q9 bluff and the 65s 3bet.