Micro stakes HU cash sites

[minSim]

I'd like to try some HU cash games. I usually play 6max at Stars, but their HU cash games start at 50NL which is too high for me to start of.
I tried some HU SNG's already, but I don't like SNG formats.

Does anyone know some sites that have lower HU cash games?
Preferably all of 5NL, 10NL and 25NL so I can move up or down a bit.

Also Neteller support (I'm from Europe) is needed (if you don't know it right away, I'll find out myself).

[Jason]

I've asked a similar question in the past and basically you can go to Ultimate Bet and/or Absolute poker where they have HU cash games for as low as $2NL I have heard. Unfortunately, the rake is VERY hard to beat I am told, so you may want to do more research for the limits you want to play and the rake structure to decide if it's even worth your time.

Alternatively, you could play HU SNG's @ Stars where they start as low as $1. It's not the same as cash, but still good for honing your skills and easing your way into it. I'm told it's a good place to start as far as the competition and rake structure goes until you have the bankroll and skills to jump up to $50 HU cash games.

Lastly, many players believe if you are a reasonably skilled player and can muster up the bankroll, that $50NL on Stars, even with the bad rake structure, is very doable because there are plenty of fish. They say you just have to table select and know when to walk away from an opponent if things aren't going well.

For me personally, I've had trouble @ $50NL every time I've given it a shot and I do table select. I'm not sure if it's bad luck or bad play, but it's been a comedy of errors so far. I've done well @ the $1 HU SNG's but that's probably just because the competition is horrible. I thought about trying UB or Absolute so I could play lower stakes, but I'd probably be tempted to go for the first time deposit bonus first which would mean I'd need to play my regular full ring game first, so it's a tangled web of decisions.

I personally don't understand why Stars and Tilt don't offer HU @ $2NL, $5NL, $10NL, and $25NL. I also don't understand why $50NL rake is so bad. If they want to get players to play new games and try new things, they need to give us better entry points. $50NL HU on both sites seem largely like solid winning players who won't play each other sitting and waiting for a fish. The lowest HU stakes should be like full ring and 6max - full of fish.

[Numbr2intheWorld]

I've heard the rake is just too high. If you're not good enough to be playing 100 NL + playing hu that low is throwing money out the window.

[minSim]

Ah ok, thanks for warning me guys.

It's unfortunately cause I really like playing HU, but I don't like SNG's. And building my bankroll to start of with 100NL HU and knowing I'll likely be donking away the first 10-20 buyins isn't something to look forward to lol.

How is the general competition at 100NL HU? Is it on the same level as 100NL 6max or way better?

[IowaSkinsFan]

Honestly, I think your better off playing 6 max or full ring cash and nitting it up until 100 or 200nl and then going from there to HU... because of rake issues.

[minSim]

Honestly, I think your better off playing 6 max or full ring cash and nitting it up until 100 or 200nl and then going from there to HU... because of rake issues.

Your comment has been circling through my head for a while now. Do you mean nitting it up very much primarily for rake issues, or do you think it's the best game approach for these stakes in general?

Also, what (range of) stats are you thinking of when you say 'nitting it up'?


(some explaination from my part; I know from your articles from a while back (1-2 years already I think) that you've always advocated a tight style at smaller stakes. I wonder if your comment is still based on that same thoughtpocess or if it has been 'updated' in some form.

I think the general 100NL games (all micro and small stakes probably) have evolved quite a bit the last year and it's commonly filled with 21/18 tags with steal percentages of 35% and 3bet% close to 10% and there's max 1-2 more obvious fish per table.
That's not to say they usually don't have pretty big leaks, but preflop and on the flop most players are playing very much 2+2 / any trainingsites - style.

I watch a lot of videos and close to everyone is advocating at least the same style, or even more LAG. (and well, so do I play basically). I find it interesting that you're advocating a (probably) way more tighter style than similar players as good as you. If you wanna share some more thoughts on it I'd be very interested in hearing them.)

[Jason]

I don't think it's as easy as that. There needs to be an entry point where either

1) The fish are so bad and plentiful that any competent player can be a winner

or

2) The stakes are so low that any loss at the tables is negligible and can easily be replenished through other stakes or moving up in this one

From my observations, HU @ $50NL is no cakewalk. There are tons of winning regulars just sitting. Even when you finally get a fish, they aren't as awful as you'd hope and if you're just learning the game, you have your own issues to deal with PLUS you have normal HU game variance which is through the roof as it is and then to add insult to injury, the rake is ridiculous. In the few matches I've played with fish, I have a hard time relaxing when I play because I feel like the clock is ticking in terms of the rake taking the fish's money. The rake is always taking and most fish don't reload.

I guess I'm going to keep playing Full Ring and hopefully down the road transition to 6 max and see how high I can take that, too. Once the dust settles, I hope that the money and the skills I've developed from FR and 6max can help me succeed @ HU if I choose to take that route or at least I'll be making so much money @ whatever stakes I'm playing there that burning several buy-ins @ $50NL HU won't matter as much. As it is now, from $200NL, it hasn't worked for me as well as I've wanted. It's hard to say how much of it is rake versus my play versus bad luck, but I'm not sticking around to find out. I'd much rather be playing like $25NL or $10NL HU if it existed in a rake structure that was fair.

I'll also probably start doing more HU SNG's because they do have micro stakes for those and it's better than nothing.

[minSim]

My last post was actually meant for 6max Jason, but your experiences are good input for my HU aspirations, ty.

[Figment]

On the heads up front, my friend who went from the $200 NLHU cash up to now playing at the $1000, the rake is less brutal at that amount. He played around at lower amounts but the rake is just brutal even at the $100. As for the $50, I played around on them the other day for a change of scenery and my opponent was down $20 and I was up $10 over amount 20 minutes of play in which we saw the flop maybe 20% of the time.

It was brutal and I wouldn't ever consider doing it full time.

[LuckySlevin]

pokertime have $10 hu cash tables (minimum buy in $1) and (0.09euro +0.01euro) husngs

[CallaGolf]

I'd like to try some HU cash games. I usually play 6max at Stars, but their HU cash games start at 50NL which is too high for me to start of.
I tried some HU SNG's already, but I don't like SNG formats.

Does anyone know some sites that have lower HU cash games?
Preferably all of 5NL, 10NL and 25NL so I can move up or down a bit.

Also Neteller support (I'm from Europe) is needed (if you don't know it right away, I'll find out myself).

I play mostly NLH HU, and I play at Stan James (microgaming network)
What blinds are you looking for? I play all from 0.50/1.00 to 5/10
I usually buy in for 100xBB

btw, if you want to see a great HU pot.....

w w w . goal4now.net/index.php?option=com_jmultimedia&view=media&layout =default&id=7&Itemid=18]Isildur1 and Antonius $1.3M

nice pot, huh?

[swany50]

if u play HU at ultimatebet the rake is pretty bad at 2nl and less bad at 10nl. the good thing about the rake is u can work off ur deposit bonus fairly quickly. that + rakeback and it should be profitable if u play well