All Categories› Poker› Poker Chat

You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

Sky Poker forums will be temporarily unavailable from 11pm Wednesday July 25th.
Sky Poker Forums is upgrading its look! Stay tuned for the big reveal!

Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in

2»

Comments

  • scotty77scotty77
    edited January 2012
    I don't think any one is a 'pro shortstacker' at 10bb.

    Think you need to BI for 30 min for that strat to be succesffull
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • NODEALNODEAL
    edited January 2012
    Clearly, most people think somewhere between 20/40 is ok and doesnt hold to the veiw I have of full stack.

    What about my suggestion of the possibility of a player that objects to this having the option to reduce?
    Would someone who supports lets say a 30 pound buy in on a £100 max table please comment.

    Would the player who dont mind £30 buy in on a £100 table object to a counter tactic?

    At this point in time the only option is to sit out or leave the table.

    Please dont get caught up in thinking that the industry standard as the industry standerd might be wrong and I can give lots of examples of that as most people will know.

    We very rearly change anything because most people dont try.

    My gut instinct tells me its wrong and the industry standerd just doesnt mean anything other than tuff luck thats the way it is.

    The purest form of poker an original is a home game and I would put money on you guys who say its ok online would tell the guy to get on his bike. 
    Why dont they let people buy in to the wsop shortstacked??   The answer is that they would be aiming to win the top prize without contributing thier fair share and yet we allow this in our cash games.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • pryce6pryce6
    edited January 2012
    20 is fine.

    This rake race/happy hour/reg infested tbls has started to bore me silly though.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GLifUloseGLifUlose
    edited January 2012
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in:
    20 is fine. This rake race/happy hour/reg infested tbls is started to bore me silly though.
    Posted by pryce6
    this /\.  I have a big long list of reasons why happy hour is a bad thing for everyone but don't quite have the energy for a 1k word post just yet.. maybe in time though.  Hopefully before all of the fish go broke and the regs are just paying rake between themselves...
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited January 2012
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in:
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in : this /\.  I have a big long list of reasons why happy hour is a bad thing for everyone but don't quite have the energy for a 1k word post just yet.. maybe in time though.  Hopefully before all of the fish go broke and the regs are just paying rake between themselves...
    Posted by GLifUlose
    Why can't you back yourselves to win money off eachother?

    They're only 50/100 nl regs, they must be exploitable? 

    Obv makes sense to look for fish etc but if there aren't any is it really that big a disaster at the lower/mid stakes on sky? U just have to 'play' different? 

    It's not like it's the 6 best players in the World playing against eachother so it's a total stalemate? Or is it?

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GreekWayGreekWay
    edited January 2012
    I think Sky will do the most reasonable and increase the minimum buy-in to 20bb cause that's the minimum in every other site. 

    Fair decision imo.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • pryce6pryce6
    edited January 2012
    Why do you have to post stupid stuff Doh.

    I understand if you sat at a table with 5 50/100nl regs you would be the fish at the table, so it's slightly different for you. But playing against 5 people who literally only put money in the pot when they have aces, kings or a set is extremely boring and although I'm going to make a profit it's hard to get enough AAvKK or set over set encounters in my favour to do my shopping at waitrose this month.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited January 2012
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in:
    Why do you have to post stupid stuff Doh. I understand if you sat at a table with 5 50/100nl regs you would be the fish at the table, so it's slightly different for you. But playing against 5 people who literally only put money in the pot when they have aces, kings or a set is extremely boring and although I'm going to make a profit it's hard to get enough AAvKK or set over set encounters in my favour to do my shopping at waitrose this month.
    Posted by pryce6
    too boring or too hard? Figure something out, if they're that bad I'm sure there's a way to do it. 

    You'll get the same amount as they do presumably, that's not how you expect to make your money playing cash surely. If it is doesn't that make you as bad as 'them' ?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • YOUNG_GUNYOUNG_GUN
    edited January 2012
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in:
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in : too boring or too hard? Figure something out, if they're that bad I'm sure there's a way to do it.  You'll get the same amount as they do presumably, that's not how you expect to make your money playing cash surely. If it is doesn't that make you as bad as 'them' ?
    Posted by DOHHHHHHH
    Stop flirting u 2, get a room :)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • zingzing
    edited January 2012
    lol @ dohh argueing about playing with regs when you avoid them like the plague and have been at 30nl for your life without having the balls to move up

    like pryce said you will always win small it's just a matter if you can be bothered to grind for it
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited January 2012
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in:
    lol @ dohh argueing about playing with regs when you avoid them like the plague and have been at 30nl for your life without having the balls to move up like pryce said you will always win small it's just a matter if you can be bothered to grind for it
    Posted by zing
    Not arguing fella just posted a question, got a reply, so asked another question.

    Trying to learn/understand if anything. 

    Even @ 30nl u get loads of people that fit pryce's description, and I try and outplay them all the time. It seems that in itself is a mistake as it can't be done? :s find that hard to believe like. 

    Think of me as a nl4er trying to get a sneak peek into the mind of a pro, might get answers then ;)


    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • CrazyBen23CrazyBen23
    edited January 2012
    Stanley644 is the exact reason why this needs changing, he plays every 40/50nl table with 10bbs, i for one am now logging off becuase of this genuis, sooner u change this the sooner you'll recieve my rake, good-day.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Tikay10Tikay10
    edited January 2012

    Guys, quit with the flaming, please.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • lynx3ffectlynx3ffect
    edited January 2012
    Always going to get some arguments in a thread like this...contenious subject open to debate

    Shame not more people have voted but 30bb seems to be the happy medium....what are timescales for implementation?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • djblacke04djblacke04
    edited January 2012


    here is a suggestion,yes you should have minimum buyins of 50BB but why have a maximum? 


    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • belsibubbelsibub
    edited January 2012
    Will have to change from I.E.9 can't see vote on opening post.Don't play alot of cash but think 25bb's(1/4 of max buy-in) would be a good compromise.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • walesboywalesboy
    edited January 2012
    I only play the small stakes where you get quite a few of the 10bb players.
    I don't mind playing them as they may double/triple up but more often than not they stay on the table but are not sure how to play with the "larger" stack or just carry on gambling.
    It is just another way of playing which you have to adapt to.
    variety is the spice of life guys
    i voted to keep it the same.

    maybe you could have some cash tables (like those where you can start with 200bb) which specifically has only a full 100bb "buy in"? the TV and other tables are highlighted differently so maybe others could be too?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cleansweepcleansweep
    edited January 2012

    Why change things?
    If you're good enough to play on the table, Your opponents stack should never be an issue!
    Your mindset should always be how and when you're going to take it!

    Change can be good! but the changes taking place at the minute do seem to isolate smaller bankrolled recreation players IMO.
    If those players are discouraged you'll end up playing the same faces over and over again!
    I voted for 10 bb but would always stake the maximum if I could afford it! some players can't and don't want to put in more than the minimum. please let them be!

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • zingzing
    edited January 2012
    bump

    any update on what you'll up the minimun to yet and when it'll be implemented?

    reggy shortstackers at 200 starting to tilt me
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • beanehbeaneh
    edited January 2012
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in:
    bump any update on what you'll up the minimun to yet and when it'll be implemented? reggy shortstackers at 200 starting to tilt me
    Posted by zing

    shortstackers on sky are hardly an issue, i've never seen a non losing one !
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • beanehbeaneh
    edited January 2012
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in:
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in : Not arguing fella just posted a question, got a reply, so asked another question. Trying to learn/understand if anything.  Even @ 30nl u get loads of people that fit pryce's description, and I try and outplay them all the time. It seems that in itself is a mistake as it can't be done? :s find that hard to believe like.  Think of me as a nl4er trying to get a sneak peek into the mind of a pro, might get answers then ;)
    Posted by DOHHHHHHH

    This might be the worst idea ever but check this thread doh!

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Tikay10Tikay10
    edited January 2012
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in:
    bump any update on what you'll up the minimun to yet and when it'll be implemented? reggy shortstackers at 200 starting to tilt me
    Posted by zing
    Yes, the decision has been made, & the start date, both of which will be announced shortly. I am quite sure everyone will be happy. *

    * T & C's apply.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • UnknownUnknown
    edited January 2012
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in:
    If you're good enough to play on the table, Your opponents stack should never be an issue!
    Posted by cleansweep
    This is so fundamentally wrong, I can't even begin to explain it. A 10bb raising vs a 50bb stack raising vs a 100bb stack raising vs a 200bb stack raising are all completely different situations that need serious considerations. 10bb stacks force short-term all-in action by constantly getting marginal hands in preflop, disrupting the play of everyone else, and also giving them the worst return possible on their gamble when the pot they win caps the rake, whereas any larger stack would beneift on amounts won after the rake caps.

    e.g. £0.50/£1, £10 stack goes all in from SB, BB calls. SB wins, pot £20, 5% rake, £1, SB is +£9 on a £10 bet. 

    With tiny stack sizes, rake eats up a chunk of any pots they win.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • freechips1freechips1
    edited January 2012
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in:
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in : This is so fundamentally wrong, I can't even begin to explain it. A 10bb raising vs a 50bb stack raising vs a 100bb stack raising vs a 200bb stack raising are all completely different situations that need serious considerations. 10bb stacks force short-term all-in action by constantly getting marginal hands in preflop, disrupting the play of everyone else, and also giving them the worst return possible on their gamble when the pot they win caps the rake, whereas any larger stack would beneift on amounts won after the rake caps. e.g. £0.50/£1, £10 stack goes all in from SB, BB calls. SB wins, pot £20, 5% rake, £1, SB is +£9 on a £10 bet.  With tiny stack sizes, rake eats up a chunk of any pots they win.
    Posted by CoxyLboro
    coxy how you finding nl4 with 7.5% rake and no cap?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • UnknownUnknown
    edited January 2012
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in:
    In Response to Re: Cash Tables - Minimum Buy-in : coxy how you finding nl4 with 7.5% rake and no cap?
    Posted by freechips1
    37bb/100 after 3000 hands, not going too bad.

    And the cap is £1.40 according to Sky search
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.