1/2 vs 1/3

Dark_SaintDark_Saint Red Chipper Posts: 5 ✭✭
Hi All,

Currently going through the Live 1/2 course and upon a bit of research, found that American casinos have 1/2 with a $100-$300 buy in.

I’m from Australia and my casino offers 1/2 ($100 buyin max) and then 1/3 ($100-$300) max.

I usually play 1/3 but was thinking to drop to 1/2 until I understand more of the concepts in the course and become a profitable player there and then move back up to 1/3.

But my question is, should I drop to 1/2 with only the $100 max buy in while studying the course or will the concepts not be as relevant due to smaller buy in size and I should compare the 1/2 course to my 1/3 game?



  • EazzyEazzy Red Chipper Posts: 1,018 ✭✭✭✭
    There is a lot of factors that go into this.

    On the surface...a 1-2 game with 100 is probably so heavily raked that its very hard to beat...and the 1-3...with300 rake is more beatable....the 1-2 becomes even worse if player buy in for 50 or something...and that can really be short stack hell...supper boring... I

    But ...the worst playing for fun players play the 1-2 and anyone who can play at all play the 1-3... its easier to play against really bad players...they tend to be more passive...and straightforward...(though more erratic on the early streets)

    In general you have a smaller edge against short stacks. But if they are really bad short stackers your edge sores. It can kind of be like being the first kid in your kindergarten class to fiugre out how to beat tic tac toe...and get to play everyone else for money. But its kind of boring..

    Would imagine the 1-3 game is better to learn, an play some poker...but not necessarily more profitable if your poker skills are currently limited...
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 4,272 -
    I'd stick to the $1/$3 and buy in for $300, both because of the rake considerations mentioned by @Eazzy (how bad is it where you are - I've heard horror stories from Australia), but also for a reason we should probably emphasize more. Specifically, because 99%+ of poker hands played in the last 15 years have been online, and because 100bb is the default buy-in online, then unless specified otherwise most training material tacitly assumes 100bb stacks.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 5,007 ✭✭✭✭✭
    With a $100 max buy in, I see a couple different scenarios. One is a table where everyone wants to play deeper, so there is a lot of gambling to get bigger stacks and then play from there. But if the 1/3 game with a bigger buy in is one table over, then presumably everyone who wanted to do that would just go do it. Two is where people nurse their stack like an overpriced drink, and so you see a lack of top offs and a bunch of 20-40BB stacks as well as a few deeper ones. That's fine but it's quite different from 100+ stacks strategy-wise. It's just hard to make much money when a guy is sitting there willing to blind out waiting for QQ+ with a 30BB stack.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file