5NL vs 10NL on Stars--BUY IN
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 138
Having spent alot of time bouncing back and forth, 10-12 tabling 5NL and 10NL, I've found 5NL to be much more profitable simply because the max buy ins for both levels are the same. If I can see hands for half the cost at 5NL, why play 10NL if the max buy-in is the same? Can someone help me with the logic here? Wouldn't 10NL be much more profitable with a say, $15 buy in?
I can still make similar raises on 5NL, so why pay higher blinds with the same sized stack? I wish Stars would raise the max to $15 here. It would make the game SO much better. Any thoughts?
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,813
Intriguing but I found that at 5nl it was very rare that I managed to get my entire $10 stack into a pot for 2 reasons:
1. Most of the other players are only 100BB deep
2. The smaller bet sizes make it a lot harder to get 200BB into the pot
It would be nice to see deep stack tables at 10nl though.
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,919
I liked 5nl a lot more, rake didn't hit as early in hands with 1-2 streets of value. On certain river cards you could easily shove the nuts on 50bb pots and get calls from second pair or ace high.
If I had to just play one of those limits for life it would be 5nl.
But, the thing about 10NL that I found that is almost necessary is to use it to adjust to the 100bb stacks before transitioning to 25NL. I tried to make the leap from 5nl to 25nl and that was a massive fail.
