Cash Game Do players take micro stakes games seriously? (1 Viewer)

[Psypher1000]

It honestly depends on the crowd. I've seen microstakes games run from extremely serious to people just not caring/trying to buy every pot and everything in between. I've seen folks regularly run pots of .25/.50 pot limit games up to $300+ each hand, and I've seen $1/$2NL run super nitty and average maybe $30 pots. The stakes/limits are almost like suggestions - you can call a game "microstakes", but the players will ultimately determine what the actual stakes are. If some folks want to play for higher stakes than you want those games to run at, you simply reserve their future invites for games you're wanting/willing to run bigger.

 

[ThrowBack]

Yes absolutley

It’s not about the money alone, it’s taking it from you

 

[tabletalker7]

Yes absolutley

It’s not about the money alone, it’s taking it from you

 

[ThrowBack]

There’s a story about Michael Jordan collection $5 on ping pong.

 

[LaBestiole]

I sometimes play 2/4€ and 5/5€ live games in casino. I can ensure you it is hard to remain serious when playing a 10c blinds homegame with friends after that

 

[grantc54]

I love poker but I have found I have a real hard time playing real poker under 1/2. I don't get excited by the risk/reward at 0.25/0.50 or lower (I'll play, just not my preference).

Edit: to this point, historically on average I've lost a lot more $$ playing 0.25/0.50 then 1/2. I just can't take it seriously.

 

[Taghkanic]

Do the people you play with play so loose that it ruins the game, because it's so cheap to just play every hand/call any bet?

Short answer to question above: Yes

Short answer to thread title: No

 

[Jimulacrum]

I read a book a long time ago that posited that it's best to play at stakes that touch on players' "gulp limit."

Not so much money that people are scared to play and have fun, but not so little money that players will have no fear at all.

What is that exact amount for your players? Hard to say; it's more about knowing the players. But make sure there's potential for the game to get big enough that they'll get nervous about losing a big stack they've built up.

Diatribe: No matter what stakes you play, there's always a chance some players will splash around and make loose plays. If anything, this should make the game better, not ruin it. It means you'll win a lot more medium-sized pots instead of small pots when people whiff. It also means you'll get paid off on all kinds of hands that you wouldn't otherwise get paid on—instead of having to wait for coolers to make any money because your opponents play so tight.

In my opinion, it's the opposite—a whole field of conservative players—that ruins a game.

 

[JustinInMN]

Diatribe: No matter what stakes you play, there's always a chance some players will splash around and make loose plays. If anything, this should make the game better, not ruin it.

SO FREAKING THIS. But everyone that wants to be a poker bully is to dumb to see this!

 

[Jimulacrum]

SO FREAKING THIS. But everyone that wants to be a poker bully is to dumb to see this!

I can't judge. I used to be like this to some degree. Loved a nice nitty game where I felt my raises were being respected enough that I didn't face many tough spots or weird beats.

It makes the game more consistent and less stressful. The big pots tend to be matchups of two or more predictable big openers, instead of a big openers against unpredictable speculative hands, where you end up making gross mistakes like stacking off on a 33Q board with AA against 37s.

But that's part of the game, and the reward for getting good at is is enormous—especially compared to the cost of holding yourself back by avoiding games where people play fast and loose.

 

[Sisu41]

I prefer micro because I'm not risking much but I still have fun.

 

[Taghkanic]

If I cut my stakes from 2/5 to .25/.50, here’s what would happen:

UTG: Straddle
UTG2: Double straddle
LoJack: Triple
Hijack: Quadruple
[Host: OK OK that’s enough guys]
Cutoff: I raise $20 blind
Button: All in for $50
SB: Fold… I guess?
BB: Call
UTG: Call
UTG2: Call
LoJack: Call
HiJack: Call
Cutoff: Priced in, I call
Small blind: Can I have my cards back?

[Next hand]

UTG: Straddle
UTG2: Double straddle
LoJack: Triple straddle
[etc.]

 

[Chubbs]

My group plays a micro .25/.25 game and everyone “cares” and wants to win. Now some players are a bit loser than others or don’t know the game as well as others so they seem to be a bit crazy and play every hand and call down with bottom pair, but we all want to win each others money, if for no other reason than bragging rights.

If money is involved, people will want to win.

 

[allforcharity]

It's not the stakes. Ultra-competitive people and those who really want to learn and improve will take it seriously.

I know tons of table top game game afficionados, and there's no money on the line there. Everyone wants to bring the beatdown on everyone else.

 

[4SUMERZ]

We play for .25/.25, $25 buy in...we are all competitive on the Poker table or golf course etc, no matter the stakes...it's a lot more about socializing but we all want to have the biggest stack at the end of the night.

 

[horseshoez]

It's not the stakes. Ultra-competitive people and those who really want to learn and improve will take it seriously.

I know tons of table top game game afficionados, and there's no money on the line there. Everyone wants to bring the beatdown on everyone else.

+1. I could be playing for free and I’m still ultra focused. Still trying to maneuver my way into felting other players the same way I would if there was money on the line. Changes nothing for me, but every person is different.

 

[TX_Golf_N_Poker]

If I cut my stakes from 2/5 to .25/.50, here’s what would happen:

UTG: Straddle
UTG2: Double straddle
LoJack: Triple
Hijack: Quadruple
[Host: OK OK that’s enough guys]
Cutoff: I raise $20 blind
Button: All in for $50
SB: Fold… I guess?
BB: Call
UTG: Call
UTG2: Call
LoJack: Call
HiJack: Call
Cutoff: Priced in, I call
Small blind: Can I have my cards back?

[Next hand]

UTG: Straddle
UTG2: Double straddle
LoJack: Triple straddle
[etc.]

It's all about matching the stakes to the players. Taking a bunch of guys used to playing $2/5 and making the game 25c/50c obviously is not going to work.

I first started playing cash games about 5 years ago. 5c/10c blinds with $10-20 buy in. Mostly with family and people who only play poker a few times a year. At that time I said, I only play poker for fun. The money is not important, it's just how we keep score. So of course, when I joined PCF, I needed all my cash sets to have nickel chips.

Then I started playing a little more, and with some new people. Joined a group with other PCF players, and was a little nervous about the size of the game. It was 25c/50c with a $40 buy in. BUT, these guys were pretty splashy, and somebody usually got it all in within the first few hands. And there were lots of rebuys, which grew as the stacks grew. (half the big stack limit) I dealt with it by only taking what I was willing to lose (around $100-150) and playing tight. But I learned a lot and eventually I loosened up and started winning some and taking larger amounts with me.

FF to today and sometimes these same guys play a $1/1 game, I've got another game I play that's $1/2, and I play in a local cardroom that's $1/3. Through a lot of experience I'm more confident in my game and more comfortable with more money on the table.

Just a question for people that run or play in micro stakes games regularly ($.10 blinds). Do the people you play with play so loose that it ruins the game, because it's so cheap to just play every hand/call any bet? I ask because I want to start a regular game and it would be easier to convince some of my cheaper friends to join in if it were smaller stakes.

So to answer OP's question, it all depends on the players. After playing bigger games, I now find I'm more splashy when I go down to the smaller games. I think it would be a mistake to hold a 5c/10c game and invite half beginners, and half guys that normally play $1/2 or bigger. I don't think it would go well for the beginners. Try to field a full table of beginners and players who mostly play low stakes. Maybe up to 25c/50c players and players who play nitty no matter what the stakes. Then on a different night, hold a game with higher stakes for the bigger players.

 

[TX_Golf_N_Poker]

View attachment 1199732

LOL, I actually own this shirt! Got it for Christmas last year!

 

[mcfilthy]

My 5¢/10¢ game is more about bragging rights than cash.

I like this

 

[mcfilthy]

LOL, I actually own this shirt! Got it for Christmas last year!

Might be the next shirt I buy

 

[TheOffalo]

LOL, I actually own this shirt! Got it for Christmas last year!

View attachment 1278521

I bought that shirt as a white elephant gift for my poker group. Turned out another guy bought the same shirt for the white elephant gift...

...And then we picked each other's gift!

 

[UncleMilty]

Lots of good advice on this thread.

 

[horseshoez]

Then I started playing a little more, and with some new people. Joined a group with other PCF players, and was a little nervous about the size of the game. It was 25c/50c with a $40 buy in. BUT, these guys were pretty splashy, and somebody usually got it all in within the first few hands. And there were lots of rebuys, which grew as the stacks grew. (half the big stack limit) I dealt with it by only taking what I was willing to lose (around $100-150) and playing tight. But I learned a lot and eventually I loosened up and started winning some and taking larger amounts with me.

This scenario mirrors our weekly game, a common experience for many. Ultimately, the nature of the game hinges on expectations. In most cases, any 25¢/50¢ game with a $40-$50 buy-in tends to become splashy early on due to several factors:

1. Some players may quickly find themselves short-stacked.
2. Making substantial bluffs at these stakes, aimed at forcing opponents to fold, is how can I say.....challenging. The likelihood of successfully executing an overbet or a jam, only to have an opponent with $20 left, is slim.
3. Many players view these stakes as an opportunity for carefree and generally harmless fun.

As seen in many of the comments above, every player has their own style. So, as the host, it's important to figure out which stakes work best for each person. Keeping this in mind is key because different stakes usually match up with different comfort levels and how seriously players take the game.

 

[Sisu41]

This scenario mirrors our weekly game, a common experience for many. Ultimately, the nature of the game hinges on expectations. In most cases, any 25¢/50¢ game with a $40-$50 buy-in tends to become splashy early on due to several factors:

1. Some players may quickly find themselves short-stacked.
2. Making substantial bluffs at these stakes, aimed at forcing opponents to fold, is how can I say.....challenging. The likelihood of successfully executing an overbet or a jam, only to have an opponent with $20 left, is slim.
3. Many players view these stakes as an opportunity for carefree and generally harmless fun.

As seen in many of the comments above, every player has their own style. So, as the host, it's important to figure out which stakes work best for each person. Keeping this in mind is key because different stakes usually match up with different comfort levels and how seriously players take the game.

that's why I do .25/.25, or single blind .25

 

[TX_Golf_N_Poker]

This scenario mirrors our weekly game, a common experience for many. Ultimately, the nature of the game hinges on expectations. In most cases, any 25¢/50¢ game with a $40-$50 buy-in tends to become splashy early on due to several factors:

1. Some players may quickly find themselves short-stacked.
2. Making substantial bluffs at these stakes, aimed at forcing opponents to fold, is how can I say.....challenging. The likelihood of successfully executing an overbet or a jam, only to have an opponent with $20 left, is slim.
3. Many players view these stakes as an opportunity for carefree and generally harmless fun.

As seen in many of the comments above, every player has their own style. So, as the host, it's important to figure out which stakes work best for each person. Keeping this in mind is key because different stakes usually match up with different comfort levels and how seriously players take the game.

I agree. I personally think that this group of people (the game I attend) are mostly more suited to the nights that we play $1/1 with a $100 buy in. Furthermore, I think our 50c/50c game would be better served by increasing the initial buy-in from $40 to $60. But I do understand that from the position of a new player looking at joining this group, the lower buy in might make some players more comfortable. I myself would probably have not joined this game 2-3 years ago had they been only playing $1/1 with a $100 buy in.

 

[horseshoez]

I agree. I personally think that this group of people (the game I attend) are mostly more suited to the nights that we play $1/1 with a $100 buy in. Furthermore, I think our 50c/50c game would be better served by increasing the initial buy-in from $40 to $60. But I do understand that from the position of a new player looking at joining this group, the lower buy in might make some players more comfortable. I myself would probably have not joined this game 2-3 years ago had they been only playing $1/1 with a $100 buy in.

I found that the best way to explain an increase is the following, “I don’t want you to feel forced to get all your chips in just because you’re short stacked early in the night. Rather you feel like you can still build on what you have because you started with more.” Even the tightest and most frugal player will appreciate the sentiment.

 

[TX_Golf_N_Poker]

I found that the best way to explain an increase is the following, “I don’t want you to feel forced to get all your chips in just because you’re short stacked early in the night. Rather you feel like you can still build on what you have because you started with more.” Even the tightest and most frugal player will appreciate the sentiment.

It's not my game, so it's not my place. I don't think any of the regular players would object to a small increase to the initial buy in.

 

[horseshoez]

It's not my game, so it's not my place. I don't think any of the regular players would object to a small increase to the initial buy in.

Oh I just meant in general for those who are afraid to offend or scare away their players by suggesting an increase. I think many would be surprised how often it happens, especially in a very social and friendly game.

 

[MrCatPants]

I think our 50c/50c game would be better served by increasing the initial buy-in from $40 to $60.

This is why I started the other thread on starting stack sizes. But as you mentioned, it makes it more accessible to newbies - particularly overall poker newbies.

 

[TX_Golf_N_Poker]

This is why I started the other thread on starting stack sizes. But as you mentioned, it makes it more accessible to newbies - particularly overall poker newbies.

I hadn't seen that yet. I guess I should follow you so I see when you post new threads, LOL.