Limit Versus No-limit Cash Games?

[TravisG 0]

I suppose the FR LHE is pretty mindless though, but it is in no way more boring than FR NL.

oh hell, qft. below .50/.1 every pot in a full ring game seems to be a family pot.

[bigcoled 1]

No offense bigcoled but your advice and analysis is appreciated but off in many respects.Just keep in mind that Limit and No Limit are different games. They take a different approach. I'm an experienced poker player but most of my experience is at limit holdem. I would be a fish in a 5/10 NL game online while the 5/10 NL players would be at a disadvantage in my 25/50 limit game unless they have a lot of limit experience. Limit may appear to be simpler than No Limit but you actually have more decisions to make in an average limit session than you do in an average NL session with capped buyins. That's one of the reasons that it's easier to multi-table NL than it is to multi-table Limit.

My intent wasn't to say limit is easier... my intent was to say you see alot more of the game in limit then you see in no limit... you see alot more show downs as well as a far larger number of turns and rivers, not to mention flops, thus giving you a better feel for what hands are really in play and how often... I would never say limit takes less skill, but it is a great starting point for the intense hand reading skill no limit requires at the earlier stages of a hand. Limit is mechanical, the skills of learning when to slow down, when to call down, when to fold, and when to raise for isolation, and when to raise for a free card... NL takes certain aspects of the game to different levels, the decisions you are making are going to weigh far more heavily on your overall outcomes... It's less mechanical and more not neccisarily thoughtful, but maybe creative or artistic... You are very right in saying the approaches are different, but the game is the same, and you see alot more of the game in limit, and the money today is to be made hand over fist playing No limit Hold'em, that factor, the fact that so many players are playing NL is the only reason limit hold'em is a stepping stone to being a great no limit player and not an end point for those looking to maximize their overall profit potential playing poker... Some people may never have the creativity or the nerve to become no limit players... That's the nature of the game... But players looking to find where the most money is to be made, that's in the NL ring...I agree with you for the most part, but I don't think you took the entire intent out of my post...

[Zach6668 513]

I agree with you that LHE is great practice for an NL player in learning how to read hands well.

[FCP Bob 1,321]

My intent wasn't to say limit is easier... my intent was to say you see alot more of the game in limit then you see in no limit... you see alot more show downs as well as a far larger number of turns and rivers, not to mention flops, thus giving you a better feel for what hands are really in play and how often... I would never say limit takes less skill, but it is a great starting point for the intense hand reading skill no limit requires at the earlier stages of a hand. Limit is mechanical, the skills of learning when to slow down, when to call down, when to fold, and when to raise for isolation, and when to raise for a free card... NL takes certain aspects of the game to different levels, the decisions you are making are going to weigh far more heavily on your overall outcomes... It's less mechanical and more not neccisarily thoughtful, but maybe creative or artistic... You are very right in saying the approaches are different, but the game is the same, and you see alot more of the game in limit, and the money today is to be made hand over fist playing No limit Hold'em, that factor, the fact that so many players are playing NL is the only reason limit hold'em is a stepping stone to being a great no limit player and not an end point for those looking to maximize their overall profit potential playing poker... Some people may never have the creativity or the nerve to become no limit players... That's the nature of the game... But players looking to find where the most money is to be made, that's in the NL ring...I agree with you for the most part, but I don't think you took the entire intent out of my post...

Now that's a post I agree with for the most part, especially about the hand reading aspects as Zach says.I do disagree a little bit about NL being the place to make the most money at currently for all players. As an example Mark (NoSup4U) and I play games that are roughly equivalent in size. He plays from 2/4 to 5/10 NL with the occasional shot at higher while I play 10/20 to 25/50 limit with the occasional shot at 50/100. He posted his 2007 results in the challenge thread and we both made about the same amount of money from poker in 2007. I played a lot less hands than he did since I didn't start playing again until April since I played very little while we were operating the FCP cardroom. The reason that my win rate per hand is higher isn't because I'm better at my game than Mark is at his but because the online limit games that I play in are easier to beat than the NL games are that he's playing in. More of the "serious" players are playing NL these days which leaves a smaller pool of limit players but the average ability of that smaller pool is less than the average ability of the pool of NL players at games that are roughly the same size.

[navybuttons 15]

Now that's a post I agree with for the most part, especially about the hand reading aspects as Zach says.I do disagree a little bit about NL being the place to make the most money at currently for all players. As an example Mark (NoSup4U) and I play games that are roughly equivalent in size. He plays from 2/4 to 5/10 NL with the occasional shot at higher while I play 10/20 to 25/50 limit with the occasional shot at 50/100. He posted his 2007 results in the challenge thread and we both made about the same amount of money from poker in 2007. I played a lot less hands than he did since I didn't start playing again until April since I played very little while we were operating the FCP cardroom. The reason that my win rate per hand is higher isn't because I'm better at my game than Mark is at his but because the online limit games that I play in are easier to beat than the NL games are that he's playing in. More of the "serious" players are playing NL these days which leaves a smaller pool of limit players but the average ability of that smaller pool is less than the average ability of the pool of NL players at games that are roughly the same size.

i like this post. although, i only agreed with bigcoled's post in the slightest part.

[Royal_Tour 0]

Copied from 2+2 2007 Graph Thread.

I'm pretty certain he started off playing small NL stakes.I dont think he played 93% HU LHE from 1/2 - 1000/2000 but maybe im wrong. coulda sworn he was just like sbrugby

[Zach6668 513]

I'm pretty certain he started off playing small NL stakes.I dont think he played 93% HU LHE from 1/2 - 1000/2000 but maybe im wrong. coulda sworn he was just like sbrugby

You're wrong.

[matdiddy22 0]

My intent wasn't to say limit is easier... my intent was to say you see alot more of the game in limit then you see in no limit... you see alot more show downs as well as a far larger number of turns and rivers, not to mention flops, thus giving you a better feel for what hands are really in play and how often... I would never say limit takes less skill, but it is a great starting point for the intense hand reading skill no limit requires at the earlier stages of a hand. Limit is mechanical, the skills of learning when to slow down, when to call down, when to fold, and when to raise for isolation, and when to raise for a free card... NL takes certain aspects of the game to different levels, the decisions you are making are going to weigh far more heavily on your overall outcomes... It's less mechanical and more not neccisarily thoughtful, but maybe creative or artistic... You are very right in saying the approaches are different, but the game is the same, and you see alot more of the game in limit, and the money today is to be made hand over fist playing No limit Hold'em, that factor, the fact that so many players are playing NL is the only reason limit hold'em is a stepping stone to being a great no limit player and not an end point for those looking to maximize their overall profit potential playing poker... Some people may never have the creativity or the nerve to become no limit players... That's the nature of the game... But players looking to find where the most money is to be made, that's in the NL ring...I agree with you for the most part, but I don't think you took the entire intent out of my post...

Try the enter button every 3 sentences or so.

[Royal_Tour 0]

You're wrong.

so he grinded small stakes LHE until he got to where he is now?

[navybuttons 15]

so he grinded small stakes LHE until he got to where he is now?

he was a limit prop for awhile, but yes, he basically grinded his way from low-limit LHE to the nosebleeds.

[Sculthorpe 0]

Now that's a post I agree with for the most part, especially about the hand reading aspects as Zach says.I do disagree a little bit about NL being the place to make the most money at currently for all players. As an example Mark (NoSup4U) and I play games that are roughly equivalent in size. He plays from 2/4 to 5/10 NL with the occasional shot at higher while I play 10/20 to 25/50 limit with the occasional shot at 50/100. He posted his 2007 results in the challenge thread and we both made about the same amount of money from poker in 2007. I played a lot less hands than he did since I didn't start playing again until April since I played very little while we were operating the FCP cardroom. The reason that my win rate per hand is higher isn't because I'm better at my game than Mark is at his but because the online limit games that I play in are easier to beat than the NL games are that he's playing in. More of the "serious" players are playing NL these days which leaves a smaller pool of limit players but the average ability of that smaller pool is less than the average ability of the pool of NL players at games that are roughly the same size.

This thread really turned around...thanks for the feedback

[shamhawks 0]

This thread really turned around...thanks for the feedback

I agree and feel better for starting the so called "worst thread ever on this site" Even though I didn't come across what i wanted, You guys sorted it out and I got a good feeling on the subject...Thanks

[Zach6668 513]

I agree and feel better for starting the so called "worst thread ever on this site" Even though I didn't come across what i wanted, You guys sorted it out and I got a good feeling on the subject...Thanks

Like I said before, the topic was not the problem.

[mhoward29 0]

it is a function of game size more than anything else. the 3/6 NLHE is probably about 6 or 7 times bigger than the 3/6 LHE game.

The two games arent even comparable as far as 3/6 LHE and NL

[mhoward29 0]

As an example Mark (NoSup4U) and I play games that are roughly equivalent in size. He plays from 2/4 to 5/10 NL with the occasional shot at higher while I play 10/20 to 25/50 limit with the occasional shot at 50/100. He posted his 2007 results in the challenge thread and we both made about the same amount of money from poker in 2007.

Link?

[freak2304 0]

Link?

http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-foru....php?act=Search

[mhoward29 0]

http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-foru....php?act=Search

Link that isnt from a retard?

[freak2304 0]

Link that isnt from a retard?

What? Use the search, for christ's sake.

[Cappy37 0]

Link that isnt from a retard?

Not from a retardit's on one of the pages of that thread. You are welcome in advance.

[mhoward29 0]

Not from a retardit's on one of the pages of that thread. You are welcome in advance.

thanks

[Actuary 3]

I'm thinking about concentrating on limit for about a month and come up with my own conclussion

yeah, that should do it

[ROACHBABY 0]

yeah, that should do it

Your other avatar seemed to fit ur screenname better.

[Actuary 3]

Your other avatar seemed to fit ur screenname better.

which Avatar?I've had quite a few

[ROACHBABY 0]

which Avatar?I've had quite a few

I'm not sure exactly who it was, but it looked like an erie Christopher Walken character.

[navybuttons 15]

I'm not sure exactly who it was, but it looked like an erie Christopher Walken character.

beyonce?