Which poker game has the higher ROR

[Thunder]

Assuming you have a trip bankroll of $400. Would you play a 1/3 NL hold 'em game with 5% rake or would you play a 1/2 game with a 10% rake?

 

[Sucker]

Assuming that the maximum rake is the same; it's STILL one of the last things
that you would want to look at when deciding which game to play. The MAIN thing is "How good are the players?". Sometimes the lower limit games have worse players, sometimes the opposite is true.

 

[1357111317]

Assuming that the maximum rake is the same; it's STILL one of the last things
that you would want to look at when deciding which game to play. The MAIN thing is "How good are the players?". Sometimes the lower limit games have worse players, sometimes the opposite is true.

I dont know of any poker room where on average the 1/2 table has better players than the 2/5 table...

 

[Sucker]

I dont know of any poker room where on average the 1/2 table has better players than the 2/5 table...

I guess you haven't been to the Horseshoe in Tunica then.....

Seriously though, I absolutely agree with you - on AVERAGE; the 2/5 tables have MUCH better players than the 1/2. But there ARE exceptions to every rule.

 

[Thunder]

well obviously I'd go to the game with the worst players I'm asking this question with the assumption you don't know anything about the players. It's a simple risk of ruin question.

 

[Sucker]

When posed as a simple ROR question, it's STILL not 100% clear-cut. I depends upon three things that I can think of (and probably more):

1) The skill level of the players. A good rule of thumb to follow for this is:
On the average, the lowest limit games in a casino attract the weakest players, and the highest limits attract the 2nd weakest. The middle limits are usually the toughest, because they are often frequented by pretty good players who are trying to build BRs.

2) The maximum rake. The 5% and 10% figures are often misleading, because in almost ALL poker rooms the MAX rake is the same. For example, if the max rake is $5 and the players at both games are building pots of $100 and more, the rake is going to be the same for either game.

3) Your playing style. If you like to play the small ball game, where you're trying to pick up a lot of small pots; you would probably want to lean toward the 5% game. If you like to sit back & wait for the big pots (or build them YOURSELF), you'd lean toward the latter game.

And don't forget: NONE of these precepts are ABSOLUTE. They will usually be present in varying degrees, AND they will also be co-dependent upon each other.

 

[fubster]

Off the top of my head, I'm gonna say that the 1/3 game would have a much much lesser risk of ruin. Players at all stakes 2/5 and lower are gonna be awful so there's not a lot to worry about in that dept. That's like saying "well the .05c/.10c games are a tough nut to crack compared to the .01c/.02c games"

Sure maybe the players are a bit "better" but the fact is, they're still awful. 2/5 live is about equal in skill to most 10nl games online.

 

[noman]

ROR Poker

Both 1/2 and 1/3 will have higher variance than a 2/5. Because of the types of players. And as statistically significant as you can play, be prepared to be surprised and gutted. Less surprises at 2/5

 

[fubster]

Both 1/2 and 1/3 will have higher variance than a 2/5. Because of the types of players. And as statistically significant as you can play, be prepared to be surprised and gutted. Less surprises at 2/5

I would say that actually the opposite is true. People have a misconception that it is tough to be bad players. This is not at all the case.

What kind of "surprises" do you expect at 1/2 that you won't see at 2/5?

Again, I say the whole "player skill level" argument is totally irrelevant to the question. Since the 1/3 game has a higher rake, you will have a higher ROR no matter what the bankroll.

Also, since you only have a trip roll of $400, the 1/2 game would be better since 100bb = $200, rather than $300.