No deal.

I guess dividing by stakes makes sense too. But 4 forums probably defeats the purpose of what you're trying to accomplish. I'll just rescind my vote and let others decide what's best.

I vote for 2

Small stakes / micro
And everything bigger

Think merging them is bad for everyone and likely to reduce content from expert/knowledgeable posters and even just enthusiasts who play bigger games

Kind of hard to justify someone talking about an interesting 100/200 hand in the same section as someone who might have bought in for less than $2 playing online

(Not that we are seeing a lot of 100/200 post but its not really any better if someone wants to post about 20/40, 30/60, 40/80 with or without kills, they're still buying in for upwards of 500x the micro player)

I don't mind 1 forum with a micros/ss subforum either, that way all the LC and preflop checkup threads can be in the same place

My vote is for 1 live, 1 online.

Here's my slightly informed guess -- in the next short while (few weeks?) a bunch of ideas about how to clean up the forums are going to be discussed seriously. Clearly, 8 LHE forums aren't going to happen. The smaller stakes subforum idea seems cool to me, but I'm not sure if that has any practical difference as far as "there are so many forums with zero traffic".

It is interesting to see how evenly split the ideas of smaller vs. larger and online vs. live are. Personally, I see the benefits of each and am split in my own mind. I'm guessing (with no inside knowledge) that the Powers That Be may have to be talked into anything more than the LHE Strategy section which is just all limit. If we want more than one, BBB and I can push it. This is the 4th or 5th time the idea of cleaning up dead forums and rearrangement has come up, but it seems more serious this time. Just like last time. lol. Even on SSSH, which was a harder playing forum, people posting hands about 6m games in the smallest micros were treated pretty nicely. Screw up a 30/60 hand preflop, expect wrath. Screw up a micros hand, gentle nudges.

I don't really care as long as I can have my very own "White Men Can't Jump" analogy containment thread.

I would say for live games have one forum for 10/20 and below and one for anything bigger. And for online games make one for 2/4 and below and another one for anything bigger. I do think there is a pretty big difference between live games and online games and also a pretty big difference between the way higher and lower stakes games tend to play.

I feel like people post hands from all these limits at least somewhat regularly and so that none of these forums would become completely dead. It would still cut the total number of LHE forums in half from what it currently is. But if there was one that would be at the most risk it would probably be the mid-high online one, so I could probably get on board with just having one online forum for a total of 3 forums.

I don't really like the idea of a sub-forum. It's more clicking and I feel like a higher chance of becoming a wasteland.

LHE has declined but not to the degree that stud or draw has and I don't think condensing it to one forum is warranted yet. It is still spread in many major poker markets in the US and on pretty much every online site. I would say the number of LHE tables spread in the combined live and online world at any given time is still probably more than any other poker variant except NLHE.

1 forum = limit Holdem content
1 forum = limit Holdem no content

I would likewise prefer one forum for constructive/nice content and advise (good for beginners looking for hand charts and stuff like that). This would also solve dougs concern previously mentioned.
Then have one forum for mostly sarcastic and/or one line responses or people trying to be funny (that may or may not be good advise). This way nobody gets upset at the responses they get since they know what to expect).

For example a sticky that says if you post something really stupid people are going to tell you this is really stupid

Also don't think the distinction between stakes matter as you can easily play a 4-8 hand and just call it a 40/80 hand because you think you will get better responses. This has to happen often given some of the hands

Small / micro stakes
Medium / high stakes

Usually the questions and strategic talk is similar in both (the former with more fundamental talk and the latter with more specific stuff).

I don't know the best way to go about it, but I think some consolidation is a good idea.

I would hate to lose the Limit > NL forum.

Just make a thread and sticky it.

Just make sure to also move the LHE section below the NLHE section in the left nav.

Alternatively you could play a 30/60 game that plays like a 3/6 game.

Also: I love when we get a round of straddles going, straddles make people do crazy ****! Cause my game needs more action

We had a round of straddles and some other nonsense in the 40/80 game. One guy started the straddling by doing it on a time pot and he got a walk!

I don't post much, but lurk probably daily, and agree 100% with this.

Did he have to pay time, usually have to see a flop ya? Last summer at WSOP the O8 game did a time flop, seat number of door card pays, this is much better than time pot.

Other nonsense: the guy driving the table to straddle and I agreed to blind raise each other's straddle if it was folded to either of us (hijack seat), not really much of a bet since we would both raise ~80% there anyways (him probably 99%) but lol at the guy in the BB who just called 2 more when it was my straddle and the blind 3! goes in.

Flop needed to pay time, so he just won free money!

I like that idea, except it could take a while in a shorthanded game to get the door card to be an actual seat # and then the angling that could go with that "I'm in the 4 not the 5". And always easier to just go with the status quo.

If no one's number comes up on the board after the river card is dealt and pot is pushed, dealer keeps turning over cards from the stub until someone's number comes up.

And then what happens if it is the guy with $80 in his stack? That can't happen with a time pot.

Time flops >>>>>>>> time pots.
Time pots are sooo 2014.

depends. if the game is any good time pots are way better.

I always thought the nice thing about doing time pots was that if you're losing every hand, at least you didn't have to pay time too. I don't see any benefit to doing time flops. Just increases variance in a way that you can't use any strategy. Everyone paying their own time isn't really difficult.