So I have made a commitment to go through the golden archives and read the threads one by one. I'm only on the second one, which is a great thread giving some advice on $10nl by tenbob. My question isn't with the OP, as the advice is pretty straight forward and informative, but with this post found within the thread:

"I'd wager (my whole BR) that it won't work playing 1/2 or 2/5 online as many of the people who play there do it for a living (or at least a secondary income) so they study their game and use suboptimal plays to achieve optimal results (ie. deception)."


This is post #18 in the thread and is by jeffred1111 . Is he saying that there is better competition at 1/2 or 2/5 games when compared to $10nl? Any explanation is appreciated.

That's exactly what he's saying. You can't get away with limping every pocket pair up at those stakes for set value since players will neither let you see a cheap flop, nor will they stack you very often or as light as 10nl players will.

But ya, basically 10nl strategy will get you slaughtered at low-med/high stakes.

Wait I'm confused, isn't $10nl a low to mid stake? The way that I read this post was that he was referring to 1/2 5/2 as a lower stake but ironically tougher competition. I assumed $10nl was a higher stake. (Pardon my ignorance, at this point, I really only play home games, and freerolls)

10nl = 5 cent / 10 cent blinds = micro stakes

1/2 and 2/5 refer to 200nl and 500nl, ie $1/$2 blinds and $2/$5 blinds respectively, ie med stakes.

He's just saying as you move up in stakes, the competition becomes tougher, and nut-hunting is no longer really a viable strategy as it's very exploitable.

$10 equals the max buy in for .05/.10?

yep. That's how ring games are referred to.

10nl = 5c/10c blinds, $10 max buyin
200nl = $1/$2 blinds, $200 max buyin

etc etc.

Thanks Chuck T, I guess I made much more of that than needed.