Worst Stakes for grinding WSOP

Not really sure what you're asking. "Medium" NL games would be 5-10 to 10-20 given the stakes offered.

Having said that, I don't have experience playing anything above 5-10 recently but 2-5 would probably be the best bang for your buck. You can make a grand in a few hours if you run ok and the players are still somewhat weak on the right table. Obviously, during WSOP there are at least several tough players at a 2-5. I sat at Horseshoe last year and it was like I was playing with 8 online pros. Just 3 betting relentlessly.

Anything without a time rake is small stakes.

Point is that out of towners thinking 5/10+ will be easy tend to lose. 1) they overestimate their skill and 2) they underestimate the skill of "business people" local or not and think that they have a massive edge.

Whether it is soft or not is irrelevant. And 5/10 is the absolute minimum stakes for anyone who has a clue about poker.

As an aside I'm not even sure what I was saying in the OP. I guess highlighting the irony of people who think 5/10+ will be soft but they themselves are the losers in the game

All games seem worse than everywhere else during the series. You guys seem to be talking about nlhe… most the games are plo now right?

For the 1-2 and 1-3 games, I'll say the following. I have a lot of experience in these streets, so I feel like I know what I'm talking about here. On an average table you walk up to, of the 9 players there, you will find on average the following combination of players:

2-4 players are usually solid, reg "pros" who know what they're doing (good fundamentals), generally don't make mistakes, and will usually end up winning the money between them.

2-4 players are usually "decent" "amatuers"; now, I use those specific terms in a strict sense, and together strictly; let me explain: they are "decent" in the sense that they know how to play, but cannot be as disciplined as the reg "pros" but not as the drunken wildcards (but can briefly slip into this, when the mood strikes); and of course, they are still very amatuer: they have likely lost money over their career, and deep down inside, know they will continue losing because they just have "bad luck"; typically the most chatty during the game, thinking they can "talk someone into calling"; over-confident when they shouldn't be, bluffing in the wrong spots usually; these are the cats who smile and show the bluff when they pull it off; mostly lose money.

1-2 players are overly tight, nitty rocks who won't lose anything and won't play too long, either; a lot of times, the older crowd; usually win or break even, but rarely lose; and if they lose, they're gone pretty quick.

1-2 players are the wildcard, can either be drunk, weird, or rando-spazzo-crazy balls, trying to "make moves" and playing utter dumbass hands; and sometimes wins

No such thing as a pro in 2/5, That's like describing a McDonald's cashier as a professional. Well I guess that's their job, but you have to be very mediocre in life to end up there. And even more mediocre to describe yourself as a professional McDonald's cashier.

He had pros in parentheses which connotes they aren’t really pros

But man you sound a bit like an uppity ‘bag though. Your OP and the rest of thread to no surprise is useless rambling

I‘m mean can you really earn a living playing these games? Even if you are crushing you maybe make 10$/hour.

I think there are some livepros at 1k who make around 50$/hour, but it‘s a tough life and I can imagine it‘s quit hard mentally as well, because they play massively underrolled.
So I would compare them more to really hard working shift workers.

i didnt know mcdonalds employees made $50+ an hour

If you're factoring in taxes (or lack of taxes) lawyers barely make that in Canada.

"quotes" but yeah I guess I do look down on the 2/5 guys. Fair enough.

I spoke with a couple of young guys playing 2-5 at venetian last wsop (25-28) who tried to argue with me you can most certainly make 100k a year playing that game. Of course that particular day they ran hot and left up over a buy in each (500$+) .

Point is, unless they routinely play in very soft games, which i wouldn't regularly describe that game as, they aren't pulling in 30-40$ an hour imo. Which is the minimum id want to make to call myself a pro. Any thoughts?

None of the 2/5 guys in Vegas, as in zero, have earmarks of steady income. Zero 2/5 players have a decent house, their kids in Meadows or a golf membership from Dragon to Sohi to TPC.

In any case, a lot of the 2/5 type players, e.g. simplistic poker strategies, little to no personality/intellectual curiosity etc..., try to "snipe whales" in 10/20+ games and routinely lose summer after summer.

PSA: If you're a 2/5 player who can't afford to gamble it up, stick with 2/5. Those whales almost always beat you. The biggest tell is that X did Y without regard for the metagame. The earmark of a loser.

I don't argue poker with other players at the table generally; it is like attempting to teach a pig to sing .... it wastes your time and you'll only annoy the pig.

........................ Robert Heinlein (?)

Good 2/5 players can easily make $50/hr, which creates a seeming paradox because almost nobody is doing that. The obvious explanation is that most 2/5 players are bad.

The populations overall estimation of other players is way inflated, because they can’t say another player that’s similar to them is bad because then they’re admitting they’re bad.

The idea that the breakout for most 1/2 1/3 tables is anything close to 2-4 solid regs, 2-4 decent amateurs, 1-2 nits , and 1-2 wildcards is outright laughable. 90% of 1/2 players aren’t beating the rake, and if you aren’t +EV the only appropriate player descriptions are some form of bad.

Taking me too literally. Sorry, we were discussing whether it was possible etc. Of course I use some discretion about calling someone an outright liar, but the guy above you pointed out a couple of things that have merit. Although I don't think you have to have a country club membership to be doing well in life.

I bet he has a strong handshake, son.

Whats more likely is variance hasn't truly whacked them in the head yet and they haven't went on 6 month downswings. Its soul crushing and if you're relying on a 35$/hr income, a 6 month run in the red will kill your hourly.

I have to think that inside your head, you heard the cashier ka-ching sound drop the whole time they're telling you this. Between the OP's take and the dudebros you met in that game, I am constantly reinforced as to how strong Dunning-Kruger is in poker. I can almost see the dollar signs in yours and floatingtheriver's eyes, which is weird because I don't know what either of you look like.

Somewhere among these forums (or maybe elsewhere), there was a conversation about the annoying things that people say at the poker table. Quotes from Rounders were among those. And while I agreed with that notion, it seems like those are also the players you want at your table, the "tell me you're a fish without saying it" moment. I can only assume the "overly confident in the skills" that FTR spoke of ranks right up there – annoying but lucrative. 😀

Also, for what it's worth, McDonald's employees where I live (Northern California) make $20.50 per hour. Thus, an even higher bar to reach for players to call themselves pros haha

I don't have dollar signs in my eyes these days at the poker table. My point was to help out the young buck/broke players this summer. Should they find themselves at the bigger games, where they might spot me, good luck I say.

Vegas cash games during the wsop suck ass. If you wanted to make money playing 2/5 or 5/10NL you'd be much better off heading to LA or TX or FL while many of the pros have gone off to Vegas.

Although $50/hr at 2/5 is not that difficult if you're in the right games. It's not glamorous, but if you're working 40hrs/week and 50 weeks a year, that's a 100k/year, in cash, and you get to make your own schedule, take off when you want, travel, etc. Maybe you're not killing it at life or whatever, but it's still better than the vast majority of Americans.

Someone here made a thread and it seemed to be legit. Making nearly a 100k a year at 2/5 and sounded like he wasn't in a super high cost of living area. And only averaging something like 30-35 hrs a week. (And over a span of around 10 years)

Certainly beats working as a cashier. You sound like the type of person who would rather play in a nitty 5-10 game than a 2-5 full of recs and drunks

Come on…….OP is half ****** and that is the good half for sure…….why would you care about what others make and what stakes others play? You insecure? Lmao…..talking about stakes you play…..what a joke….if you are halfway decent you definitely don’t need to talk about stakes you play obviously trying to impress someone that does not give a ****! Poker is an individual game and people should do what they need to do for themselves…..nobody knows others stories or history…..who cares what others think…..if that is what you are worried about…..you just don’t get it! Now….cash games in LV are just not great period during the WSOP or not….but if you must play….find time games….rake is a killer always….just be yourself and do what you have to do! I played in LV full time for 15yrs believe me i know….so many different reasons why people play anyways….figure out your intentions and go from there! Game selection is always #1 these days!

Hiyah! Bang! Pow!

He moved up to where they would respect his raises

They weren't particularly talented, no. People dont have a good grasp on math, negative sessions are just brutal to an hourly rate. Also, if im making 100k a year at a job, its not the same as attempting to do it playing poker. These guys are just young and naive and its OK, I had to learn too.

Man, you guys dont have me thinking too positively about playing cash at WSOP in a couple weeks.