Jump to content

why play limit holdem


Recommended Posts

That is why it's RISK VS REWARD. I don't even think this can be classified as a censored arguement!EDIT: A much more stable NL player would be much more profitable than an equally stable Limit player.
you're leaving me confused... kurt sums it up above... read his post, please
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 198
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

That is why it's RISK VS REWARD. I don't even think this can be classified as a censored arguement!EDIT: A much more stable NL player would be much more profitable than an equally stable Limit player.
What do you have to back that up?
Link to post
Share on other sites
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
So.. 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.
See, that's just silly. You can lose more money in one hand of a NL game, but you can win more, too. If you're ahead against bad players, short-term "risk" is just "volatility." I.E., swings. There are more downswings in NL poker, just as there are more gigantic upswings. Over the long run, if the games are the same in terms of expected win-rate and long-term value, then this "risk" you point out is just a statistical deviation during the short term from long-term expectations. Doesn't mean NL requires more skill. Yes, to maximize profits you should put ALL your money in the pot on a coinflip if there's even a single dollar already in the pot. But most NL players would rather trade this chip for a lower volatility. In fact, in NL games you can usually AVOID conflict, get your money in when you're an overwhelming favorite, and still come out ahead, whereas in limit games you have to absolutely pound and repound the tiniest of edges. Ice
Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, what have I been saying? I've said it takes more BALLS, more RISK. Not more skill. I agree, this skill arguement is bogus.

Link to post
Share on other sites
i'm not saying that limit necessarily takes more skill than NL (though i believe it)
Why does it take more skill?
You have to recognize more complex situations. You can't nutpeddle in a limit game and show a profit like you can in a NL game. Limit games require you to recognize small statistical edges, and find all your profit in a very narrow gap. Ice
Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way, what have I been saying? I've said it takes more BALLS, more RISK. Not more skill. I agree, this skill arguement is bogus.
Okay, but you're wrong either way.Ice
Link to post
Share on other sites
i'm not saying that limit necessarily takes more skill than NL (though i believe it)
Why does it take more skill?
You have to recognize more complex situations. You can't nutpeddle in a limit game and show a profit like you can in a NL game. Limit games require you to recognize small statistical edges, and find all your profit in a very narrow gap. Ice
Uh, I'm sorry but I think you need to exploit a whole lot more edges in a NL game, what are you saying?
Link to post
Share on other sites
i'm not saying that limit necessarily takes more skill than NL (though i believe it)
Why does it take more skill?
please, i don't want to get into this argument.i am a huge NL HE player as well as a limit HE player. i consider both to be extremely skillful and artistic games to master, and they both require tremendous amounts of skill to be be able to play well.i personally just find it much harder to consistently win at limit than at NL.aseem
Link to post
Share on other sites
i'm not saying that limit necessarily takes more skill than NL (though i believe it)
Why does it take more skill?
You have to recognize more complex situations. You can't nutpeddle in a limit game and show a profit like you can in a NL game. Limit games require you to recognize small statistical edges, and find all your profit in a very narrow gap. Ice
Uh, I'm sorry but I think you need to exploit a whole lot more edges in a NL game, what are you saying?
stop argueing now then
Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way, what have I been saying? I've said it takes more BALLS, more RISK. Not more skill. I agree, this skill arguement is bogus.
Read what Ice said though... It takes more risk in one hand... it's a short term thing. That doesn't equal more money in the long term. You can make huge bets on one hand, so what? When you track your play and see how you've done long term after 50k hands... you won't see any more profit than a limit player who slowly grinded upwards, while you went up and down every day until you came out ahead. Risk is just short term.
Link to post
Share on other sites
i'm not saying that limit necessarily takes more skill than NL (though i believe it)
Why does it take more skill?
If you read, he says he's not saying that. Don't ask questions about stuff no one said.Case end point.That's not even a correct phrase. In fact it made no sense. A phrase commonly used to precede an example is 'case in point...'Yeah that's right, I'm here to criticize the use of the english language.
Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way, what have I been saying? I've said it takes more BALLS, more RISK. Not more skill. I agree, this skill arguement is bogus.
how can you make a statment like that and ever acuse someone of getting in a dick measuring contest?
Link to post
Share on other sites
Case end point.That's not even a correct phrase. In fact it made no sense. A phrase commonly used to precede an example is 'case in point...'
I like saying it though :club:
Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way, what have I been saying? I've said it takes more BALLS, more RISK. Not more skill. I agree, this skill arguement is bogus.
Read what Ice said though... It takes more risk in one hand... it's a short term thing. That doesn't equal more money in the long term. You can make huge bets on one hand, so what? When you track your play and see how you've done long term after 50k hands... you won't see any more profit than a limit player who slowly grinded upwards, while you went up and down every day until you came out ahead. Risk is just short term.
(someone please re-quote to emphasize kurt's excellent post.)aseem
Link to post
Share on other sites
i'm not saying that limit necessarily takes more skill than NL (though i believe it)
Why does it take more skill?
You have to recognize more complex situations. You can't nutpeddle in a limit game and show a profit like you can in a NL game. Limit games require you to recognize small statistical edges, and find all your profit in a very narrow gap. Ice
Uh, I'm sorry but I think you need to exploit a whole lot more edges in a NL game, what are you saying?
(shrug) You're wrong. Most limit profit is made in the very small margins. Since you can only bet 1 unit, you have to make MORE POSTIIVE DECISIONS in a limit game. If you're ahead by 6 percent, it would be easy to call and not risk a cap, but 3 betting is the right move. And if you don't do it, this might be the difference between being a longterm winner and a loser.In NL, you can get yourself into situations that are so immensely profitable (KK vs AK, QQ vs JJ, AK vs AQ), that you can be a profitable player by dealing only with these hands. I know a lot of NL players that show a regular profit, and couldn't play after the flop if their lives depended on it. They show strong hand selection, play aggressively and well before the flop, and get the money in before they're put to the test. They can sacrifice LOTS AND LOTS of small edges, and still be winners when they take advantage of the rare HUGE edgesIce
Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way, what have I been saying? I've said it takes more BALLS, more RISK. Not more skill. I agree, this skill arguement is bogus.
Read what Ice said though... It takes more risk in one hand... it's a short term thing. That doesn't equal more money in the long term. You can make huge bets on one hand, so what? When you track your play and see how you've done long term after 50k hands... you won't see any more profit than a limit player who slowly grinded upwards, while you went up and down every day until you came out ahead. Risk is just short term.
(someone please re-quote to emphasize kurt's excellent post.)aseem
Gladly! :club:
Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way, what have I been saying? I've said it takes more BALLS, more RISK. Not more skill. I agree, this skill arguement is bogus.
how can you make a statment like that and ever acuse someone of getting in a dick measuring contest?
You disagree? Oh well. I didn't try to get in a dick measuring contest with the "balls" statement, pun not intended :club:
Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way, what have I been saying? I've said it takes more BALLS, more RISK. Not more skill. I agree, this skill arguement is bogus.
Read what Ice said though... It takes more risk in one hand... it's a short term thing. That doesn't equal more money in the long term. You can make huge bets on one hand, so what? When you track your play and see how you've done long term after 50k hands... you won't see any more profit than a limit player who slowly grinded upwards, while you went up and down every day until you came out ahead. Risk is just short term.
(someone please re-quote to emphasize kurt's excellent post.)aseem
Gladly! :)
S hit bi tches! It was my point first!Holla!
Link to post
Share on other sites
In NL, you can get yourself into situations that are so immensely profitable (KK vs AK, QQ vs JJ, AK vs AQ), that you can be a profitable player by dealing only with these hands. I know a lot of NL players that show a regular profit, and couldn't play after the flop if their lives depended on it. They show strong hand selection, play aggressively and well before the flop, and get the money in before they're put to the test. They can sacrifice LOTS AND LOTS of small edges, and still be winners when they take advantage of the rare HUGE edgesIce
I just quoted that cause I really like that point.
Link to post
Share on other sites
i'm not saying that limit necessarily takes more skill than NL (though i believe it)
Why does it take more skill?
You have to recognize more complex situations. You can't nutpeddle in a limit game and show a profit like you can in a NL game. Limit games require you to recognize small statistical edges, and find all your profit in a very narrow gap. Ice
Uh, I'm sorry but I think you need to exploit a whole lot more edges in a NL game, what are you saying?
(shrug) You're wrong. Most limit profit is made in the very small margins. Since you can only bet 1 unit, you have to make MORE POSTIIVE DECISIONS in a limit game. If you're ahead by 6 percent, it would be easy to call and not risk a cap, but 3 betting is the right move. And if you don't do it, this might be the difference between being a longterm winner and a loser.In NL, you can get yourself into situations that are so immensely profitable (KK vs AK, QQ vs JJ, AK vs AQ), that you can be a profitable player by dealing only with these hands. I know a lot of NL players that show a regular profit, and couldn't play after the flop if their lives depended on it. They show strong hand selection, play aggressively and well before the flop, and get the money in before they're put to the test. They can sacrifice LOTS AND LOTS of small edges, and still be winners when they take advantage of the rare HUGE edgesIce
Because you know some people who can't play post-flop for crap doesn't mean it's true.
Link to post
Share on other sites
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
Unless 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.
for you aseem
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe that this thread even got started. There's absolutely not reason to attempt to compare limit to no limit in terms of which is more difficult to be skilled at. Don't bother.Regardless of which game requires more skill (which is ridiculous to attempt to determine, since there are different skills involved these games that are more important in one than in the other), I must note that my NL game has improved significantly since logging in hundreds of hours at the limit tables...I think a lot of the skills learned in one game can be applied to the other, and although some skills may be more important to success in one game than in the other, ANY skill that can be developed in EITHER game will give you an advantage at whatever table you happen to be playing at.I think it's ridiculous that this LIMIT VS. NO LIMIT war has started. You guys are all idiots.And to those who claim NL to be the better game because it offers a higher rewards needs to step into the real world where people have limited bankrolls."I owe rent, alimony, child support... My kids eat."- Joey Knish from Rounders

Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way, what have I been saying? I've said it takes more BALLS, more RISK. Not more skill. I agree, this skill arguement is bogus.
Read what Ice said though... It takes more risk in one hand... it's a short term thing. That doesn't equal more money in the long term. You can make huge bets on one hand, so what? When you track your play and see how you've done long term after 50k hands... you won't see any more profit than a limit player who slowly grinded upwards, while you went up and down every day until you came out ahead. Risk is just short term.
(someone please re-quote to emphasize kurt's excellent post.)aseem
Gladly! :D
S hit bi tches! It was my point first!Holla!
lmao! my bad... :club: aseem
Link to post
Share on other sites
Because you know some people who can't play post-flop for crap doesn't mean it's true.
Is there a reason you didn't respond to any of the real substantive arguments I made? I think there is. It is because you are wrong, and are just dogmatically repeating what you happen to think might be true. Or what you want to be true.I'm all in.Ice
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...