So since im not that bright and i probably will take this all wrong but do i understand you correct in saying that at BP More money means better players? I can name you a few people that sit at the.25/.50 that play better then half of the 1/2 table but just dont have the bankroll. So im not sure the point your trying to make? I watch people at the kiddie table walk with $350 or can be in for the same. If you ever play the kiddie game its not that far away from the 1/2. The difference in the big game is not that the players at smaller stakes arent as good its that they cant afford to take the $300 hit when L.A. or donkey of your choice sits down and cracks your AA with j2. So i agree with Scuba that the majority of the 1/2 table can afford the losses but that doesnt make them a better player. I watched Dexter try and stake Tony into the 1/2 game last week and offered him 50% of the winnings. I was shocked to hear him say no till i heard his response. He stated that he couldnt compete with the bankrolls on this table and poker was just as much about picking your table as how much money you have. And at that stage of the evening he would need at least $150. That statement makes alot of sense. I see players at ho chunk all the time playing 1/2 that have never set foot on the big table at BP. So in return he staked Justin for $80 which he lost in 10 min. So i wonder this Scuba are you trying to say that the players at the 1/2 are better because of the money they have or are there good players at smaller stakes they just dont have good jobs? I know a few people that could clean up in the big game if they had the bankroll to sit with. There are some real donkeys at the kiddie game but there are also players that are miles ahead of the donkeys at the 1/2?

Then my overall question ive been waiting to ask after all this mess and i hope to get a response from all..........IS BP BAD FOR YOUR POKER GAME IF YOU ARE TRYING TO IMPROVE YOUR GAME?

Yes Peter Pan. Of course once again you missed the point of my posts. For one, I never called any set of players better than any other set of players. This whole "better" arguement is in you own head, as you have a complex about your own confidence in your game. Now all of these .25/.50 players you "think" can crush the game. I find it hialrious. I have played the .25/.50 game. And there is real bad play. Yes, there are "decent" players. I play both games im not defending or bashing anyones play. My entire point about the bankrolls and higher stakes was simple, yet you missed it. The game of poker, at its heart, is mastering risk/reward decisions. So the level of risk is proportional to the amount of money you can afford to lose. Franks tried saying that losing 75 to some low stake players was comparable to 700 at the 1/2. I didnt agree. I said across the board, the amount those sets of players can lose are NOT as much as 10x more at the big game. Its not even as much as 4x more. Thus the level of risk is higher at the 1/2 game IMO. Im sure this makes no sense to you, but i can't help you out any futher.

As far as BP being bad for your game. It certainly depends on how you personally get better doesnt it? BP has vastly improved my game. they play poker there. Im not really sure what your expectations of poker are. And I can't really guess, as I have no idea who you are. But im willing to guess you have limited exposure to poker outside of BP. So how can you possibly make a judgement that BP is bad for your game? You have mentioned Ho Chunk. you cannot seriosuly tell me that Ho chunk has better poker play (across the board) than BP. I laugh at you. All though I have only played there twice, i hear the stories, and have seen the play for myself. You have some hollywood ideal of "Good" poker. Cuz in all honesty, you dont understand the nature of the game. TV poker isnt "real" poker sir. Poker is adjusting to the game you're in, the opponents you face.

Anyway, i have a suggestion for all you great players at BP that would crush the big game, yet cant crush life enough to earn money to play in it. Why dont you form a group, pool your resources, and rotate players that get into it? Eventually you can build up your bankroll, and send more and more players to the game to crush it. Soon you will rule the world!!! GL, at the tables and in life.

weeeeee im on the internet. Better then me? doubtfull.....craig, meh.

i got better at bp. i learned a lot. it had everything to do with my group of friends and how i learned from ben, more than anyone, but dawg, dozo, josh, scuba, craig, and even the donkeys there as well.

as for me not playing in the 1/2 game...im a cash donk. ive realized it. i dont have the mentality for it and i hate sitting there grinding it out. especially live, if i were going to play cash to grind id rather 10 table on the internet where i can see 100 times as many hands in the same amount of time. and even tho my edge isnt as significant as it would be in the bp 1/2 game, its a small price to pay to not have to sit with a bunch of assclowns and wait 2 minutes for every hand to play through.

also, i play for competition basically, and i dont see cash as being as competitive as tournaments. winning is something i enjoy, not the money. the money is secondary and i like it...but closing a tournament is where the thrill is.