1 hand an hour? Do people insta-muck QQ to your pre-flop $20 raise?

He have talked about this at length in this thread about the rake. If you are playing in a 2-5 NL game that is being raked 10% to $4, you are paying a lot more than a $5 time charge.

Stan

This is another reason to have the time charge. A loose player loves time charge and these are the guys you want to play with. Who wants to play in a tight 2-5 nl game?

Stan

The difference is,

We have shuffle machines on all of the poker tables. This makes the game faster. Our dealers are good and fast.

In a post above, Blue said something about 25 hands X $4 = $100 per hour. I will assure you that we get close to that number every half hour. I would have a hard time taking rake on that game. I would look like a greedy person.

Stan

To be honest a rake game is where you need to be if that is how you play. I just can't take rake on that game. It just wouldn't be fair to my players.

Stan

Like my dead mom always told me, "you couldn't be happy." Whatever it was she said "You couldn't be happy, World War II was over, but you couldn't be happy, so you started the Korean War, but you couldn't be happy, so let's attack the Vietnamese, but you couldn't be happy, so then you go attack Iraq, because you couldn't be happy."

Stan, bring back the rake, because I couldn't be happy, being happy with the time charge...

The only possible leak in this argum^H^H^H^H^M discussion is that NL hands often take longer to play out, over the long run, than do limit hands. I'd say that with a premium dealer like Fuji, Mabel, Foon, etc... you can pump out 25+ hands/hour - easy.

But, the nature of NL (and one of the myriad reasons that I do not play NL) is that, on average, over the long run, hands take longer to complete. Getting 25 hands/hour, on a consistent basis, would be hard to do.

That said, I think that time on 2-5NL is the right approach for that game. As time is the right approach on limit games 10-20 and up. Just my opinion... YMMV.

This is 100% dead on....getting 12 or 13 hand a dealer down just doesn't happen there.

I've done the math based on my play, and I think the time charge is much better than a rake. If you were a short-stacker or a setminer it would differ - but frankly I'd rather play at a casino where the rules discourage that anyway.

At 2/5 NL I'm pretty indifferent b/w time and rake. But I think time is much better in LHE, at least for the stakes where they charge time, where the game moves fairly quickly and almost every pot would hit the rake maximum.

Yeah, that was me. I told you over in the chasing the BBJ thread that I was going to win it.

Now I am going to take down the final drawing.

Is anyone else sort of blown away that Stan comes into these threads and explains his management decisions? I mean, I've been reading the thread for months but I am still not used to it.

As a mathematician, I respect crowd consensus. Given how popular the 2/5 NLHE game is at the Borg it would seem that a consensus of poker players believe (as I do) that the time charge is on average less expensive than rake. Mike

Stan, would there be a difference in comp $$'s between rake vs. time in the 2/5NL?

IIRC, when the PCG was timed, it paid $2.??/hr vs. the $1.??/hr now that it's raked?

all the 10%/4 games I play in are $1 comp
all the $5/hh games I play in are $2 comp

Just one of the reasons why when play in AC, it will be at Borgata.

I thought that might be the case... I seem to remember PCG as $1.25/.50 though. I'm probably wrong (again).

See you Saturday - do not start without me!

Don't show up late then
(Though I can just blame NJChick)

DAMN! Same table, guy next to me won final drawing.

The time charge definitely cost more than a rake at 2-5NL. You are all wrong. And if you are not a set miner, super nit, you are putting money in pots/playing hands that have negative expectation. I dont do that. In a 10 handed no limit game, super tight is right.

Just got back from a great 24 hours at the Borg. The room was not very busy because Caesar's BBJ was 4.6 million dollars or something apparently, but I was playing $1/2 and therefore had no problem finding a table. I played for 14ish hours over the two days and was surprised to find that not one single player who sat at my table during that time played anything but super straight-forward and ABC. As a result, I played super-aggressively (as seems to work really well at 1-2) and won 4 buy-ins.

Question for you guys: At this point, I am super-comfortable at 1-2 and feel like if I play long enough, I'll win 7-8 out of 10 sessions just because I win most of my pots without showdown. Obviously it's a swingy style, but when people fold so often, the variance is lowered imo. Anyway, my question is how much different is the 2-5 game? I'll definitely play tighter for a while to adjust to the stakes, but if I'm crushing the 1-2 game, should I be able to assume that I'll be +EV in an avg 2-5 game?

ps Thanks Stan for the poker rate hookup.

Meh, anyone who is truly crushing the Borgata 1/2 game will be +EV in the Borg 2/5 game.

It does play differently though, not as straight forward, more people who think they are poker superstars trying to pull off the moves they saw Phil Ivey pull on tv.

seems weird that people play ABC poker at 1 -2. everytime ive played everyone limps every hand. usually when i play aggressive at that level people call with crap and i lose. so watev. if you win 4 buyins you had to run good anyway. maybe you ran good on the table draw or maybe you ran good that you did not run into aces.

people overrate their pokering skillz while winning.

You are correct...the limping is not ABC. I meant more straight forward and not aggressive in general.

I ran pretty good but tbh, I won a lot of my money after a bunch of people limped, i raised and got a few callers and took it down after betting the flop, then turn, no matter my cards. And I lost the two biggest pots I played (one I played horribly, one I got sucked out on horribly after the money went in on the turn). Of course I ran better than average but it was hardly like zomg I can't miss. No sets in 13 hours, aces three times, kings once.

honestly, i feel like im in the same place you are, but over a longer course of time and at several different places...i always tell myself the next time i go, ill give 2/5 a shot, and then i settle for playing more 1/2.

i really just feel so comfortable at the 1/2 games and make decent enough money to be content with it....some day soon, ill take my shot.

ill be playing tomorrow from about 6pm on...maybe ill run into one or two of you guys.