elkang 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Drivel, not dribble.Elkang...you've really taken a nasty turn the last few weeks. I'm impressed.er... I meant dribble as in small amount. Yeah, that's the ticket. Either that or I am an idiot. Probably more of the 2nd - but I'm multitabling and IMing too...Also, I'm not being mean. I'm just trying to have better content on these boards and feel I have the right to bash some people. I'm still nice to newbies as long as they are not your generic "I'm Ashton Kutcher awesome!!" types. I love poker and FCP has helped my game (and bankroll) immensely. There are 60 million players out there... I'd like to see the core group here do much better than most of them. Link to post Share on other sites
DKE_XP120 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 The win rate between limit and no limit are the same there.... "chief"You're wrong. i'm rightyou're talking about dick measuring contest? I never mentioned anything about balls to play one game or another, I talked about skill.I shouldn't have assumed. However, if you think it is more skillfull to play with a more secure money flow, it boggles me how that is more skillfullone of the most important concepts of being a winning player is bankroll management. Link to post Share on other sites
TheIceman05 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Risk Vs. Reward! We have a winner!!!! The win rate between limit and no limit are the same there.... "chief"You're wrong.you're talking about dick measuring contest? I never mentioned anything about balls to play one game or another' date=' I talked about skill.[/b']I shouldn't have assumed. However' date=' if you think it is more skillfull to play with a more secure money flow, it boggles me how that is more skillfull...?[/quote']What are you even trying to say? Nothing you're saying makes any sense. I'd like you argue with you, but I can't even pin your opinion down. Make an argument so I can respond. Logical, please.Ice Link to post Share on other sites
NickTheKid 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 i'm rightNope, good effort though.one of the most important concepts of being a winning player is bankroll management. That doesn't happen in NL? Link to post Share on other sites
swtballa 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Author Share Posted May 25, 2005 you can win more money at a 1/2 NL table than you can at a 1/2 Limit table....the payoff is bigger in NL Link to post Share on other sites
TheIceman05 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 you can win more money at a 1/2 NL table than you can at a 1/2 Limit table....the payoff is bigger in NLThat's because a) the stakes are different...We'll move to be once you understand (a)Ice Link to post Share on other sites
NickTheKid 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Iceman, this is my argument.No-Limit and Limit are just as mathematical, just as long-term, just as scientific. But No-Limit takes more risk than limit, making it a better reward, pretty standard. Link to post Share on other sites
DKE_XP120 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 you can win more money at a 1/2 NL table than you can at a 1/2 Limit table....the payoff is bigger in NLso are the losses... you can win more money at a 1/2 NL table than you can at a 1/2 Limit table....the payoff is bigger in NLThat's because a) the stakes are different...We'll move to be once you understand (a)Ice Link to post Share on other sites
NickTheKid 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 you can win more money at a 1/2 NL table than you can at a 1/2 Limit table....the payoff is bigger in NLso are the losses...Thank you, for proving my point! What did I just say? Risk Vs. Reward? Wow this must be a new language I can't decode yet. Link to post Share on other sites
DKE_XP120 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 you can win more money at a 1/2 NL table than you can at a 1/2 Limit table....the payoff is bigger in NLso are the losses...**thats right, quoting myself instead of editing.**making the sustainable win rate the same (though the stakes are different as Iceman said) Link to post Share on other sites
Chiggleslap 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Im only 20 yrs old but I have been playing no limit for some time now, like 6-7 years. I started out small like .25/.50 blinds NL but now I am playin 5/10 and sometimes 10/20 NL, I know you guys dont care at all about that though.My question is, why do people play limit? To those who do, are you scared to play no limit because you can lose all your money? To many swings? I have played it before and it is just a drawing game, obviously there is skill but no nearly as much as in NL. Sorry if it sounds like Im knockin holdem, because Im not, Im just curious why people play it instead of NL.thankssamdude, you are knocking Limit. You have much to learn young Padawn. I'll be honest, I really doubt that you've been playing NL as long as you claim. Only since hole cams has NL blown up, in fact up until recently, the tournament of preference was Limit. No, I'm not scared og Big swings, I just don't like them. I play limit because its hard to be a winning player. You need good discipline in Limit, I personally find it harder and more skillfull than NL. I also love it when NL guys sit down at a Limit table and whinre about not being able to protect their hands, I just take your money. Limit is a good mental excercise for me, and I love limitI have played Limit hold em at the smaller blind levels and it does seem like a card catching contest to me. There is simply very little incentive for your opponent to fold when he only has to call a $6 bet on the turn to see his river draw card hit. And when I played, it seemed like 5-7 players were seeing a flop as opposed to the more typical 3-4 in NL. Its just easier to protect a hand in NL.To me it seems like you're saying people chase to much. Why on earth would you not want that? I just don't get it. I'd rather make my determined bet and have people draw to catch up with me than bet whatever the "i'm protecting my hand bet" is and they have to fold cause my bet was to big.THANK YOU.I simply cannot comprehend it when people are UPSET that their opponent is paying the incorrect price for their draw. Link to post Share on other sites
MilesZS 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 "I hate you guys. I hate you guys so much." Link to post Share on other sites
Suited_Up 2 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 you can win more money at a 1/2 NL table than you can at a 1/2 Limit table....the payoff is bigger in NLso are the losses...Thank you, for proving my point! What did I just say? Risk Vs. Reward? Wow this must be a new language I can't decode yet.But what point are you trying to make? That NL is harder? or better? or what? So there is more risk/reward? What is your point though? Link to post Share on other sites
NickTheKid 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Read a little, you might find it. Link to post Share on other sites
DKE_XP120 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Read a little, you might find it.nope.... he wont***EDIT***I take that back, that was a mean spirited jab, you have a point. though I do disagree Link to post Share on other sites
TheIceman05 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Iceman, this is my argument.No-Limit and Limit are just as mathematical, just as long-term, just as scientific. But No-Limit takes more risk than limit, making it a better reward, pretty standard.Why is NL more risky? What does that even mean? The way I see it, there's absolutely no inherent "risk" in NL vs. Limit. And I'm interested to see your responseIce Link to post Share on other sites
Suited_Up 2 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Read a little, you might find it.I did that earlier, and I don't feel like reading all the stupid posts again. Just enlighten me. Link to post Share on other sites
NickTheKid 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Read a little, you might find it.nope.... he wontWell I better just copy it over again, here ya go kiddo!this is my argument.No-Limit and Limit are just as mathematical, just as long-term, just as scientific. But No-Limit takes more risk than limit, making it a better reward, pretty standard.This is so text-book I don't see how this can even be classified as an opinion, but here we are. Link to post Share on other sites
MilesZS 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Read a little, you might find it.I did that earlier, and I don't feel like reading all the stupid posts again. Just enlighten me.Kurt, there is no enlightenment to be found in this thread. Just run. Run away. Run far away and never look back. Someone derail this trash train. Link to post Share on other sites
TheIceman05 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Read a little, you might find it.nope.... he wontWell I better just copy it over again, here ya go kiddo!this is my argument.No-Limit and Limit are just as mathematical, just as long-term, just as scientific. But No-Limit takes more risk than limit, making it a better reward, pretty standard.This is so text-book I don't see how this can even be classified as an opinion, but here we are. What does that mean? If there's just as much math and long-term positive expectation involved, where does this mysterious "risk" come from? Or are you referring to "volatility," which refers to the standard and expectable swings of play? Link to post Share on other sites
NickTheKid 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Iceman, this is my argument.No-Limit and Limit are just as mathematical, just as long-term, just as scientific. But No-Limit takes more risk than limit, making it a better reward, pretty standard.Why is NL more risky? What does that even mean? The way I see it, there's absolutely no inherent "risk" in NL vs. Limit. And I'm interested to see your responseIceSo.. putting more money on a bet is not as risky as putting a much smaller ammount on a bet?Risk in poker: The amount of money you can lose.Reward in poker: The amount of money you can win.Bigger bets in NL, Bigger payout, bigger busts.Case end point. Link to post Share on other sites
DKE_XP120 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 yeah I edited my post on saying he wont find your point. I added that was a mean comment to make.Though just as the reward is bigger, so is the losses you suffer, same win rate, though as pointed out, 1/2 nl and 1/2 limit are completely different stakes Link to post Share on other sites
Suited_Up 2 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Iceman, this is my argument.No-Limit and Limit are just as mathematical, just as long-term, just as scientific. But No-Limit takes more risk than limit, making it a better reward, pretty standard.Why is NL more risky? What does that even mean? The way I see it, there's absolutely no inherent "risk" in NL vs. Limit. And I'm interested to see your responseIceUnless you play too far above your BR. But that's dumbIt all comes down to BB/100... and if you're playing good limit, you are at about what? 4BB/100 or so? I don't know exactly....And if you're playing good NL... you are at like... 5-6BB/100... Not a big difference. It all evens out. Especially when you consider than BB means 2 different things in each game. If you are playing 1-2NL and make 6BB/100 that is $12/100If you play with the same blinds in limit... that's a 2/4 game. Meaning if you are at 4BB/100... you're making $16/100. Think about it. Is the BB/100 that much higher in NL to make it so much more lucrative? They both even out. Link to post Share on other sites
NickTheKid 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 That is why it's RISK VS REWARD. I don't even think this can be classified as a fucking arguement!EDIT: A much more stable NL player would be much more profitable than an equally stable Limit player. Link to post Share on other sites
akishore 0 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 these arguments get sickening.i'm not saying that limit necessarily takes more skill than NL (though i believe it), but to argue that limit is a joke since "you can't protect your hand" and "you get 5 callers since the bets mean nothing" and "people draw out on you all the time", and to assume from those (false) premises the conclusion that "limit is a card-catching game" is massively disgusting.but then again, it's the reason the games are crushable for over 4 BB/100.just one thing:i wonder why the big game at the bellagio is almost all limit games?(maybe they like to gamble at card-catching contests?)aseem Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now