Is there REALLY much difference between 2nl,5nl,etc upto 100nl? Long Thread.

Ok, I know this might annoy some people but there is a reason I ask this, so please hear me out first.

I don't want this to turn into a flame thread or anything like that, I purely want to hear what you guys think on this so it's just opinion based and I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts on what I've thought about on this and my theory behind why I'm even asking this question because lets face it why would a donkey playing 2nl/5nl even ask such a question. Clearly there are people who have grinded there way up from years ago through the micro stakes and are now playing 100nl and more.

I sat here thinking about this and why I suck so much at poker and why I'm struggling to break even at times at 2nl and 5nl. Obviously I do suck and need to work on my game, I realise this and have many leaks clearly because I've never advanced past 10nl using correct BR management. I recognise my leaks and try to fix them to become a better player on a regular basis and am pleased at improvement I have made of time, even if it's just little steps at a time. Of course there are days when I beat them but days when I lose 5 buy-ins or like recently even worse 10 buy-ins. Then 2 days ago I won 7 buy-ins etc.

A thought/theory on why I ask this question

I then started to think back to the days I was more of a recreational player, loving the odd gamble on roulette, black jack and poker. I'd work and if I wasn't doing anything at the weekend I'd deposit some money to various gambling sites. $100 here, $200 there and so on, quite regualry because I enjoyed the gamble. I even once deposited $600 to a roulette casino website which allowed you to watch your roulette live games and name appear on the TV (sky tv channel) It was actually smartlivecasino if anyone has heard of it. Anyway, in one night I ran that up to $2500 playing roulette and did the sensible thing I withdraw $2000 and then donked of the remaining amount to poker which they have.

This was going back just over a year ago now and I had very limited knowledge in poker but what struck me is that obviously I knew nothing about BR management and variance in poker so like a recreational player I would play, 50nl, 100nl, maybe 300nl as well just one table full stacked. Soon enough the lot would be gone but like I say the reason I asked this question is because like I say when I was thinking back it never ever - not even once occur to me to play anything smaller than 100nl. It seemed pointless and very boring to consider playing what I play now, 2nl/5nl etc. I loved the gamble of winning an all-in being a massive under dog and it was exciting as playing roulette but as I keep reiterating it did not occur to me once to play ANYTHING smaller than 100nl. This would happen at various sites where I'd have my full BR on one table playing higher limits like 100nl and wouldn't batter an eyelid if I lost it all, was just good fun and like I say BR management was non existent.

So like I say this was my last experience with playing poker and gambling so to speak just over a year ago but this has happened years prior to this. That's when I thought well this gambling is getting stupid and I'm of course losing money playing roulette and poker and my wife was getting annoyed with the amount of money I'd gambled with over the years so I said I was never going to gamble those sorts of monies again. She didn't mind me depositing another $100,00 (final) to play poker at pokerstars with and I've never had to deposit since but that's a different story anyway. So of course I've saved money by not gambling anywhere near the amounts I did back then and roulette doesn't interest me any more anyway. I thought "ok well, I can't really deposit any more money I'm sick of losing all this money etc so I'm going to try learn the game" which I have done.



I now sit here thinking at the stage I am with poker. I am sat, on a regular basis at 2nl/5nl 6max games and micro limit HU SnG's and thinking to myself and this was my actual thought process with questions and answers I asked myself.

How many of these players really are recreational players?

My answer to myself was, pretty much zero and the reasons are as stated as above - what in gods name would a recreational player be doing playing 2nl/5nl?

How many of the players at my tables are regular players who I see quite often and are grinding it out like me?

My answer to myself was, A high number of players and searches on these players confirm my theory. There are also hundreds of thousands from various forums including this one describing strategy, BR management and how to build a BR by grinding through the limits and so on.

How many of these players are in my situation? They decided they wanted to get better at poker and "beat" poker so to speak

My answer to myself was, Nearly all of them are grinders who want to move through the levels like myself so are battling against each other who all have quite a bit of knowledge in poker so it's quite a hard grind.

How many recreational players will be like the old me, depositing hundreds of dollars and sticking it on one table for a gamble for the thrill and fun at mid low/mid stakes?

Quite a higher number, I'm quite sure there are more recreational players at 50nl/100nl on various sites (not saying maybe PS/FTP) because 2nl/5nl just doesn't interest them, well it didn't interest me back then - wasn't fun enough. A lot more than say at the limits I'm playing I'm quite sure off. You may ask yourself why I think that, well for one what made me think this was I've been reading a lot of HA of low/mid stakes poker games and see how BAD some of these players are. They are stacking off with one pair on a wet flush/draw heavy board after being re popped numerous times. Even people at the limits I play will fold these hands..


Of course at big named sites like pokerstars and fulltilt this is less likely to happen as opposed to a gambling website that has casino games etc but still with all the adverts on TV these days they are surely flocking to poker only web based websites too for a recreational good old gamble on poker with a BR on one table.

I just think that with the current climate of poker at the minute and all these forums/stratergy websites I think the micros are quite a tough area to be stuck in as most of the players consist of people like me who read everything, watch everything and so on and trying to grind it up.


Of course this might upset some people this thread and people might see it as a whine by me because I don't crush or comfortably beat micro stake games but this really isn't any of that. It's just I wanted your opinions on what I was thinking and the standard recreational players game and why I think that there might not be as much difference between these limits as everyone makes out there is.

A recreational player is highly more likely to donk off a couple of hundred dollars at 50nl or 100nl than say 2nl/5nl as it's more fun and interesting. Like I say I was one of those player and it never EVER occurred or interested me in playing 2nl/5nl as it was literally nothing..and most definitely not fun where as playing 50nl/100nl or even 300nl was really good fun at the time even though I lost it.

It's like the Chris Ferguson challenge. He really really struggled to start with, once he got his roll to play the bigger games his profits just soared and no I'm not saying mid/high stake games are easy to beat at all so please don't think I'm saying "I'd beat higher limits if I had the BR" because I know for a fact I'd be crushed. I just don't think people(mid/high limit) give us micro limit players enough credit in thinking they are actually quite difficult because when these guys was playing them and moved up it was totally different in the sense of no forums/strategy guides/BR guides etc. I think it was easier back then to grind them up, anyone can clarify that? That's just my thought on that as information was much less and there was no where near as many regs as there are these days. I also think if any mid/high stake player played with correct BR and tried grinding out the micros again, they would struggle quite a bit more than they first did!


Any feedback would be nice, just please don't flame me.

Good post (thanks for taking the time to write it). I'm not an online cash game player (but do dick around a bit on micro cash tables.. for 'fun' but always with intentions of winning). THe thing is, the regs. at the 100nl tables (even the 50 or 25nl tables) would OWN the regs. at the 5nl & 10nl but 'yes' you do find some big-time recreational donkeys who prefer playing above the micros (100nl+) (ie. your typical rec. casino $1/2 player, playing some hands online & just others (as you've mentioned) who've seen the tv ads have played a bit around the kitchen table & want to give it a shot).

So.. what's the solution?? Learn to beat the regs. at 5nl tables.. then the ones at the 10nl tables.. then 25 & so on & so on (just my opinion but doubt it's far off from what regs. would suggest.... although they might just 'suggest' to move directly to the 100nl tables.....)

I've got friends here in town where I live & they'd never consider playing on any table under 100nl & often much higher. One of them ran $200 up to $8k in one evening, was on the phone wondering how he could withdrawl asap (while playing the $5/$10 tables). Couple hrs. later... he never called back?
A wk or 2 later & they're knocking on my door wanting me to ship them $50.

Poker Orifice said:

Good post (thanks for taking the time to write it). I'm not an online cash game player (but do dick around a bit on micro cash tables.. for 'fun' but always with intentions of winning). THe thing is, the regs. at the 100nl tables (even the 50 or 25nl tables) would OWN the regs. at the 5nl & 10nl but 'yes' you do find some big-time recreational donkeys who prefer playing above the micros (100nl+) (ie. your typical rec. casino $1/2 player, playing some hands online & just others (as you've mentioned) who've seen the tv ads have played a bit around the kitchen table & want to give it a shot).

So.. what's the solution?? Learn to beat the regs. at 5nl tables.. then the ones at the 10nl tables.. then 25 & so on & so on (just my opinion but doubt it's far off from what regs. would suggest.... although they might just 'suggest' to move directly to the 100nl tables.....)

I've got friends here in town where I live & they'd never consider playing on any table under 100nl & often much higher. One of them ran $200 up to $8k in one evening, was on the phone wondering how he could withdrawl asap (while playing the $5/$10 tables). Couple hrs. later... he never called back?
A wk or 2 later & they're knocking on my door wanting me to ship them $50.

Click to expand...

Yeah I don't doubt for a minute the regs at 100nl could own the 5nl regs it's was just I personally think from personal experience (plus the examples you gave of your friends playing no lower than 100nl) that a recreational player wouldn't ever play anything lower than 50nl/100nl that's why I thought when I saw some HA how terribly bad some players was and realised a lot are recreational.

I totally understand about trying to crush the 5nl and so on and that's what I'm trying to follow by playing 5nl and moving up gradually using correct BR management.

I just think there are many more regs and people learning the game as opposed to 50nl/100nl ( i know I will be flamed for basically saying they're are fish at 50nl/100nl)

The only sort of people playing my limits are people exactly like me, there are very few people who are recreational fish, I just think there might be more at the higher limits for reason as stated thus getting a bigger edge?

I know this definitely sounds like I'm saying higher limits are easier but I know they're not, I'm just on about in general with a recreational player. I guess it's a hell of a lot more true at casino websites.

You get the grinders who know BR management and something about poker playing the HU's SnG $1 or $2 and don't get me wrong they are still really bad, but I did a test and played a few $10.00 HU SnG and the skill level was probably worse, as in they will call down with any pair its like they are definitely recreational and a $1.00 double up SnG HU just doesn't interest them.

I was one of those players and when I check back my history when I used to play poker recreational I now laugh at the limits I played. $30,00 18man SnG was in my list along with many other $10.00 ones and so on lol and I think I've even done up to $100.00 SnG HU before and it's just so weird how much I treasure such a small amount of money with poker these days.

The thing is, I value my current pathetic BR more than when I had like several hundred dollars and blasting out big SnG's or 100nl cash games with 1 or 2 buy-ins., so weird.

two words: table selection

ramdeebam, I do think you are kind of on to something, though I also firmly believe in overall numbers there are more recreational/clueless fish at 2-10nl than at 25-100nl. Remember; there are plenty of recreational players that maybe won some cash in a freeroll or are just testing the waters out at 2-5nl.

I agree that most first-time recreational DEPOSITORS, particularly those without any inclination towards proper BRM, will most likely hit the 10nl+ tables first because that's what they are used to from their home game/casino experiences and also that the 10nl+ tables can earn them actually useful money in the real world if they come out on top in a single session.

For this reason, one can find some 2nl tables that play tougher than some 25nl tables, though obviously there are some 25nl tables which play tougher than most 2nl tables.

At these levels, to really maximize your winrate and grow your bankroll, I think what it really boils down to is table selection, and isolating or getting out of the way of certain opponents. Play more with the 75/5 calling station fish than the 16/14 tricky TAG.

You can find soft seats with a fair amount of ease from 2-25nl. On the whole, I actually think there are more 2nl soft seats than 25nl soft seats, but it doesn't really matter because soft 25nl seats do exist without too much effort required to find them. This is why I think if one has the discipline and wherewithal to beat and grind a bankroll through 2nl and 5nl, there shouldn't be too much problem continuing to beat 10nl and 25nl.

The other thing to remember is that some poker sites will have more soft seats than others. When your bankroll is high and you begin to be able to take advantage of loyalty programs and the like, it is important to keep your play at a site that offers both peace-of-mind (low probability of scandal) and good frequent player incentives. However, for us micro grinders these things don't really matter... we just want to get our bankrolls growing as fast as possible (and to gain hand experience and learn along the way).

lmao ram , this is so true of course it doesn't mean anything to us micro players because we still have no BR to last long at high limits and still realize there are to many better players too .

I practice BR management and haven't played any good money games since learning of it and trying to bring my game up . I play the $3 - $10 games now with the $10 ones being few and far between .
I used to deposit $100 thinking that's the regular amount I would take to a live poker game , win or lose . then play $20 - $50 SnGs and $100 nl for fun never dreaming of playing the low limits till down to nothing . I remember now that I was kicking butt at the 20 and 50 SnGs on titan before they dumped us . of course I lost it all eventually because of variance and no BR management . I really believe I could make it at those limits if I had the money to handle downswings .

you got me dreaming again cause like you , I am getting tired of grinding for so little

moving to cash games

dakota-xx said:

moving to cash games

Click to expand...

Sorry!

It was actually in reference to not just cash games I guess, it's just that's what I'm playing at. Kind of represents SnG's and whatever other game modes there are.

yes I agree , just a reference to poker in general . or gamblers period .
if they're recreational players they likely be playing higher limits .

tl;dr

(jk)

You are giving the players at the micros way too much credit imo. There are fish/recreational players at all levels, but there are more at the lower levels. Now, there are still plenty of "regulars", but there is a difference between a good regular and a bad regular. You will find many bad regs at the micros, and you won't see many good ones. Why? Because they move up. You can make plenty of money off of the bad regs, you just have to figure out how to exploit them (and it's pretty easy ).

So as you move up, there will be less fish and more regs, and those regs are going to be better than at lower levels.

This just simply isn't the case. Perhaps the recreational players who go to the casino to play 1/2 few times a year are going to deposit 400 and jump into 1/2 online - but there are plenty more players who are basically doing the same thing but only depositing 20-50$ or whatever after graduating from facebook poker, etc. and playing the micros. That and the fact that nobody at micros actually know what they are doing (or they move up) means that the quality of play at the micro is and always will be absolutely terrible. Midstakes cash games nowadays typically run around 1 fish, and absolutely anybody on any 5nl table in the world would be enough to start a profitable midstakes table.

On the positive side of things, as you improve you don't necessarily notice an increased difficulty as you are (hopefully) improving at a faster rate than those around you.

I think that in general bad regulars are where people playing 50nl and such make most the money from.. I might be wrong but I doubt there could be so many grinders who make a solid profit if they just won money from the few recreational players who deposit a few hundred at a time.

I do kind of agree with you, but at the same time there must be a reason that 100nl would be harder than 5nl..

+1 to what feitr said.

Whenever I move down from my regular stakes, it feels like shooting fish in a barrel. So the notion that games are any easier if you move up is pretty ridiculous, imo.

how do you reconcile the following two statements?

ramdeebam said:

Nearly all of them are grinders who want to move through the levels like myself so are battling against each other who all have quite a bit of knowledge in poker so it's quite a hard grind.

Click to expand...

and

ramdeebam said:

...and no I'm not saying mid/high stake games are easy to beat at all so please don't think I'm saying "I'd beat higher limits if I had the BR" because I know for a fact I'd be crushed.

Click to expand...

i hope you see that you are contradicting yourself here. if you think it is a pool of competent players, why do you also think that you'd be crushed if you move up? if everyone was the same, chances are anyone could play with the same winrate at any of those levels, and this is just not true. so all this sounds like a rant to me; while you may not see the difference in levels, you have perhaps not played high enough to do so. i had a very... "disappointing" experience just a few days ago trying to move up and getting crushed hand after hand, so i think i'd know...

all that said, this

ramdeebam said:

I also think if any mid/high stake player played with correct BR and tried grinding out the micros again, they would struggle quite a bit more than they first did!

Click to expand...

may be objectively true. the problem with this notion is that currently i am quite a bit more skilled than i was when i was playing 2 and 5nl. if you put me with my then-knowledge and experience in the current pool, chances are i'd feel much worse, but right now... i doubt it.

good luck with your grinding!

BelgoSuisse said:

+1 to what feitr said.

Whenever I move down from my regular stakes, it feels like shooting fish in a barrel. So the notion that games are any easier if you move up is pretty ridiculous, imo.

Click to expand...

I didn't say they was easier nor think they are. I did reiterate this several times as I didn't want people thinking thats what I meant. I am in no means a good player at all like I say but I was talking from my personal experience from when I just played poker as a recreational player.

I like many others woulden't find micros interesting enough to play so never once played them, it didn't even cross my mind at any time. It was at least 50nl and even that was to small for me - usually 100nl I would play and donk my cash of.

I think there are also plenty of stingy recreational players, or some who just got a few bucks from a friend or something... but there must be the reasons.

benevg said:

how do you reconcile the following two statements?

and

i hope you see that you are contradicting yourself here. if you think it is a pool of competent players, why do you also think that you'd be crushed if you move up? if everyone was the same, chances are anyone could play with the same winrate at any of those levels, and this is just not true. so all this sounds like a rant to me; while you may not see the difference in levels, you have perhaps not played high enough to do so. i had a very... "disappointing" experience just a few days ago trying to move up and getting crushed hand after hand, so i think i'd know...

all that said, this

may be objectively true. the problem with this notion is that currently i am quite a bit more skilled than i was when i was playing 2 and 5nl. if you put me with my then-knowledge and experience in the current pool, chances are i'd feel much worse, but right now... i doubt it.

good luck with your grinding!

Click to expand...

Hmm. Like I say, I know I'm not a good player and why do I think I'd be crushed if I moved up? Well not nessarly saying I'd be crushed big time but I know it would be more difficult. I was pointing out from what I was thinking when I was a recreational player and many people I played with years ago was also and noone ever thought "lets play micros"

It was a case of lets play 100nl, something that had a meaning to play. From my experience like I say there are a very low amount of recreational players like myself back then who would think about playing 2nl or 5nl for fun. It isn't appealing to play this at all. No one ever deposited $10 or $20 to a gambling website like the ones I did. You would deposit several hundred and donk the lot off.

For one, the roulette wheels are usually $1.00 a number or "area" at least, so why would I or anyone playing anywhere from $10 - $300 per spin on a roulette wheel be interested in playing 2nl or 5nl poker at the same website? That was the comparison I was making and like I say I doubt it's as much so at poker only based sites, more so the gambling/casino websites.

feitr said:

This just simply isn't the case. Perhaps the recreational players who go to the casino to play 1/2 few times a year are going to deposit 400 and jump into 1/2 online - but there are plenty more players who are basically doing the same thing but only depositing 20-50$ or whatever after graduating from facebook poker, etc. and playing the micros. That and the fact that nobody at micros actually know what they are doing (or they move up) means that the quality of play at the micro is and always will be absolutely terrible. Midstakes cash games nowadays typically run around 1 fish, and absolutely anybody on any 5nl table in the world would be enough to start a profitable midstakes table.

On the positive side of things, as you improve you don't necessarily notice an increased difficulty as you are (hopefully) improving at a faster rate than those around you.

Click to expand...

Yes well that was my point about a recreational player like I was back then. I would quite regularly play roulette online as I loved it and would mix in some poker at the same time especially if I won something quite big and donk of a full stack on 100nl or even 300nl within half an hour or whatever it may be.

People from facebook league or other sources depositing small amounts of money and playing micros in my eyes are people who are learning the game at the moment like myself so have more knowledge than say the old me who would full stack a table at 100nl. There is no interest in the most part for people to deposit a small amount not wanting to learn the game. I was going of personal experience and I've been on both sides now.

As for only one fish, I can't see how that is true. Maybe it's true on pokerstars or FTP but I was thinking more from casino based websites there was plenty of fish - like myself at the time who would like a gamble on roulette and play poker too.

imwatcher said:

I think that in general bad regulars are where people playing 50nl and such make most the money from.. I might be wrong but I doubt there could be so many grinders who make a solid profit if they just won money from the few recreational players who deposit a few hundred at a time.

I do kind of agree with you, but at the same time there must be a reason that 100nl would be harder than 5nl..

Click to expand...

I'm not saying they make most profit from recreational players on PS and FTP in particular. This is more so from casino based websites which offer poker as well. I think the majority of people at a poker website are there to learn poker and of course there are recreational players too who have no interest in roulette and so on so just go to a poker only based website.

imwatcher said:

I think there are also plenty of stingy recreational players, or some who just got a few bucks from a friend or something... but there must be the reasons.

Click to expand...

I personally think that people who loan small amounts of a friend from a poker site are often someone trying to learn the game themselves and that person who gave them the money is a grinder themselves.

I'd of never dreamed of loaning someone a small amount of money for recreational play - it just doesn't make sense to do that. It makes more sense to loan someone several hundred to play high stake games on roulette or poker who fancy a gamble. I just can't see the incentive to someone who wants to have fun and a gamble to loan or deposit $10.00 to a site and go sit at a 2nl table unless they are really trying to improve their poker game, like me and many many others and move up through the limits.

I kind of agree with Ram, for recreational players, playing 2-10NL is not worth their time if they want to gamble. I just think grinding 2 and 5NL is soul destroying and to get a better idea on how to play while trying to move up maybe 25NL is the place to start where rec. players will drop down to and feel it's real money and where micro grinders can move up to and with a bit of work on their game, beat it.
That said, i'm terrible at cash, and cash BRM, with winrates like:
-5.36BB/100 over 15k hands at 2NL because I just lost motivation playing for cents
4.5BB/100 at 25NL over 7.5k hands where I cared about how i played
0.18BB/100 at 50NL over 4.5K hands where i really tried because of the impact of the money on my BR
And after that I have spewed a couple hundred here and there at 100 and 200NL when tilted/drunk/fancying a gamble.
So I really don't know what I'm trying to say except maybe save and deposit enough to play at stakes where the amount won/lost will be meaningful?

You know, it may be true that recreational players who play 200nl live will also tend to play 100nl or 200nl when they play online (and get raped, obviously). It does not in any way mean that there are no recreational players at lower stakes.

There are actually quite a lot of recreational players who couldn't possibly afford to play live games because the stakes are way too high but can afford to play the game recreationally online because they can find stakes they can afford. If you make $10 an hour at your job, 10nl does not feel that small at all, imo.

ben_rhyno said:

I kind of agree with Ram, for recreational players, playing 2-10NL is not worth their time if they want to gamble.

Click to expand...

Just because YOU don't feel like gambling if it's only $10 does not mean that it does not feel like gambling to someone else. Wealth, income and risk tolerance levels vary over a huge scale and trying to define absolute levels below or above which it feels like gambling is as stupid as it gets.

No, don't try and be insulting/arrogant saying it's as stupid as it gets,maybe 10NL is the level for many, 25 is the limit for me, and it will be much higher for others, but it wasn't about when it feels like gambling, it's about when it feels significant enough to be taken seriously and you choose to think about every move you make and evaluate it. At 2NL and 5NL i'm pretty sure well over half the people won't be affected by losing a buy in or 2 unless their building from a freeroll mincash or something.

BelgoSuisse said:

You know, it may be true that recreational players who play 200nl live will also tend to play 100nl or 200nl when they play online (and get raped, obviously). It does not in any way mean that there are no recreational players at lower stakes.

I wasn't saying there aren't any I was saying in general I think there are a lot more at 50nl/100nl as opposed to 2nl/5nl.

There are actually quite a lot of recreational players who couldn't possibly afford to play live games because the stakes are way too high but can afford to play the game recreationally online because they can find stakes they can afford. If you make $10 an hour at your job, 10nl does not feel that small at all, imo.

Click to expand...

This is true I guess. However, say for example someone earns a wage of $500 per week, they don't necessarily play recreationally every weekend. It could be money saved over a month or something and like when I would play recreationally I would deposit around $200-$300 for a nights fun instead of hauling myself to a live casino. I wouldn't think "ok I have so many buyins at 10nl. My first instincts and I remember it very well was to join a table that I could put my maximum buyin on, like a 300nl or maybe fancy $150 on a roulette wheel and then play full stacked at $100nl. So say this happens to one person a month who decides to gamble $200 a month and there was me and many people like me who would do it nearly most weekends with even more money. Then take into account how many tens of thousands of people do this in total over a course of a week. That's a lot of recreational play at mid/high stake player who are having a good old fun gamble. Millions upon millions gets gambled alone in the UK a week as "fun", then other countries on top of that it just escalates and like I say I bet the vast majority of the people are just recreational who will play 100nl +

BelgoSuisse said:

Just because YOU don't feel like gambling if it's only $10 does not mean that it does not feel like gambling to someone else. Wealth, income and risk tolerance levels vary over a huge scale and trying to define absolute levels below or above which it feels like gambling is as stupid as it gets.

Click to expand...

I understand where you're coming from and there will be of course players who simply can't afford to deposit more than $20.00 for a gamble but I think a "normal" recreational player who fancies a gamble will deposit more in the region of $100+

People see it as a night in as opposed to a night out and have the thinking cap of "well I'd of gone out tonight and spent $200 on a night out so I'll sit on the computer and play with $200 instead

ramdeebam said:

This is true I guess. However, say for example someone earns a wage of $500 per week, they don't necessarily playing recreationally every weekend. It could be money saved over a month or something and like when I would play recreationally I would deposit around $200-$300 for a nights fun instead of hauling myself to a live casino. I wouldn't think "ok I have so many buyins at 10nl. My first instincts and I remember it very well was to join a table that I could put my maximum buyin on, like a 300nl or maybe fancy $150 on a roulette wheel and then play full stacked at $100nl.



I understand where you're coming from and there will be of course players who simply can't afford to deposit more than $20.00 for a gamble but I think a "normal" recreational player who fancies a gamble will deposit more in the region of $100+

People see it as a night in as opposed to a night out and have the thinking cap of "well I'd of gone out tonight and spent $200 on a night out so I'll sit on the computer and play with $200 instead

Click to expand...

This

ramdeebam said:

People see it as a night in as opposed to a night out and have the thinking cap of "well I'd of gone out tonight and spent $200 on a night out so I'll sit on the computer and play with $200 instead

Click to expand...

You know, the minimum wage in the US is something like $7.25/hour. People who earn that kind of money can't possibly think of spending $200 on a night out.

You really need to stop generalizing your own perception of the value of money as having any relevance whatsoever to people with vastly different income levels.