Wheres the REAL MONEY at?

[Dirtydutch 8]

If you compare blind wise, there is more money in No Limit.You can make far more money at the same level of blinds in No Limit than in Limit per hour.

(bf)Fresh out look,

[allinbluff35 0]

If you compare blind wise, there is more money in No Limit.You can make far more money at the same level of blinds in No Limit than in Limit per hour.

a 1/2 LHE BR is smaller than a 1/2 NLHE BR that's why you can't compare the two at the same level

[Jordan 1]

Seems that more people like limit at this forum. Maybe not, I dunno. Maybe they are the only ones that post in these type forums.I play both NL/limit/tournies.My main area now is no limit. I don't have time for limit (seriously) or I would be playing that game.I personally get bored playing limit. I also get bored playing no limit. I personally think if you are a bad player, you are a bad player and will lose at either game.Good players, well, a winning player can kill the no limit games by strictly playing JJ - AA and AKs and so on...beating up the fish. A good no limit player doesn't limit himself to those hands because there is great value in other weak hands when the times are right.I won't say much on limit cause I don't feel qualified. I do play 3/6 limit, but not too often right now. I've had great days playing limit, and also sore days playing liimt where I can't seem to dodge any draws, or hit any myself. I personally could play 5/10 limit because I have the bankroll for it, but honestly I don't feel my limit game to be up to snuff yet for it. I'd probably would want to get in at least 10 more winning sessions at 3/6 till I moved up.This may be pointless.- Jordan

[wildo 0]

I eat babies

Touche.

. . . tu chez . . . It's French

you're an idiot. learn french.

Fine maybe I am an idiot.BUTYou're also an idiot, learn to read an entire thread before posting.

[Smasharoo 0]

go play 1/2 NL or higher and then say that its just ****ing stupidHaha, right becausse /12 NL is *hard*OMFG, you people wonder why we laugh you, too.

[zimmer4141 0]

I must personally say that I prefer NL cash games to limit cash games. Those people who can grind it out for hours on end at limit games, I have the utmost respect for you. I prefer NL because I find it is easier to take advantage of the fish. It is much more lucrative in my opinion because you can win a lot of money on one hand. Also, I like that you can bluff more, and that you can bet enough to prevent the idiots from chasing draws. Just my .02.

[fluxer 0]

There is almost always a "correct" move in limit while there is not always a "correct" move in no limit. I suppose that's why limit is boring. (Sure.)Oh yeah, and an excellent poker player will win more at no limit than limit if he is equally skilled at both. That does not take into account multi-tabling.To say the real men play limit is ridiculous... it takes a lot more heart to be very successful at no limit. The money will go to the better players a lot faster with no limit, period.I play both limit and no limit.

[ElToasto 0]

No, I obliterate NL.  It's just boring as hell.  Most good limit players laugh about NL.  Its like training wheels for the real game.

Man, if I were that good, i'd be a billionaire. Just goes to show, the reason Smash can't buy his own country right now is because he enjoys a challenge much more than money. Dude, get real. Why punish a bad player with 5 big bets at a time when you could easily get him for 20 big bets? I think a real poker player should go where the money is, and if you are really good at NL ring games, that is where you should be. Now before you flame me, I am also a limit player because that is what I am best at. If I had the stomach and skill for NL, I believe I would be living the good life right now.BTW, how do you post with a quote? Sorry for the computer illiteracy.

[MikeR 0]

Also you're overlay is gnerally less so you're getting closer to even money when you win, etc.

Yup.

[oreogod 0]

but i know a guy who is very good at limit but chooses to play NL because he is finding it a lot more profitable and don't reply saying its because he isnt good at limit its just his NL win rate is hugeI know a guy who censored sheep.

god damnit i always get that....i get it im from new zealand therefore i censored sheep

was that supposed to be about you? i didn't take it about you. although now i will, sheep censored

Sheep ****ers are coming out of the ****ing woodwork.

[oreogod 0]

----------Thread JACK--------------------Did anyone here see that MTV show "Clone high"?maybe not as good as "3 south", but still funny.

Haha. Have to post this, it doesnt reflect on you in anyway.

[oreogod 0]

Limit is way less profitable then NL cash games. You cant get people off of draws especially in low limit ring games. Any idiot that tells you that limit is more profitable than NL, either is joking or cant play to begin with. That said, if your a fish you will lose less money @ low limit poker.... BTW, play 5-10 NL and then go play 5-10 limit poker and that will tell you where the money is being made and lost....

Well said, by a man who doesnt know what the hell hes talking about. Well either that, or just sucks at limit poker.Im going with both.PS Ive been away a few days, Im catching up. Hence the multi posts.

[oreogod 0]

If you suck, NL tournamnets.If you suck slightly less, NL cash games.If you're good Limit cash games.

Word.

[steve7stud 0]

If you suck, NL tournamnets.If you suck slightly less, NL cash games.If you're good Limit cash games.

I'm really tired right now, but I disagree with these three statements. I hope that I remember to address them at some point.It's hard to tell when when Smash is joking or being serious. In this case, I think he is being serious though. And obviously I have a different opinion.

[Smasharoo 0]

It's hard to tell when when Smash is joking or being serious. In this case, I think he is being serious though. And obviously I have a different opinion.Your opinion is based on average level of play unrelatted to to the original posters question.I assume.

[steve7stud 0]

It's hard to tell when when Smash is joking or being serious. In this case, I think he is being serious though. And obviously I have a different opinion.Your opinion is based on average level of play unrelatted to to the original posters question.I assume.

My opinion was based on poker players in general. I thought that's what your response was as well. If it's specific to the internet, there's no sense in arguing. You spend far more time playing online then I do. But, when you made the three categories, it sounded like it was about the poker population in general.

[Dirtydutch 8]

I hope this thread never dies.

[avsfan 0]

Where is the real money at? What is more profitable in the long run?

Could you define what you mean by REAL MONEY! I think that term makes this thread confusing.

[Landon_McFly 0]

I've skipped through most of this thread so forgive me if someone else has already pointed this out. I would also like to be corrected by someone if I'm wrong.It seems that at the higher limits, more people play Limit than NL. Obviously that has to mean something. I lurk the 100-200 table at pokerroom, and see people checkraising my whole bankroll on one hand. THATS SICK.I don't really see the same consistant players playing the high limit NL tables. It's just gamblers who are trying to hit it big once.Take it for what it's worth.Just my 2 pennies.

[Dirtydutch 8]

I've skipped through most of this thread Read it, it's funny.

[steve7stud 0]

I've skipped through most of this thread so forgive me if someone else has already pointed this out. I would also like to be corrected by someone if I'm wrong.It seems that at the higher limits, more people play Limit than NL.  Obviously that has to mean something.  I lurk the 100-200 table at pokerroom, and see people checkraising my whole bankroll on one hand.  THATS SICK.I don't really see the same consistant players playing the high limit NL tables.  It's just gamblers who are trying to hit it big once.Take it for what it's worth.Just my 2 pennies.

Well if that is the case. There could be a HUGE argument made for playing in NL cash games. For obvious reasons.

[steve7stud 0]

For the original poster and everyone else reading this, I'm going to give you my take on where the money is. This could end up being long, I'm not sure yet. If it is, sorry about that. But hopefully, you will find it useful.I want to preface this whole thing by saying that the money is where ever you feel that you have the BIGGEST edge, Whether it be in tournaments, live games, or the internet. There is no quick fix.Lets talk about no limit hold em for a second. The game is tremendously popular right now. And with all the media telling people that any two cards can win, some players really believe that. There is so much dead money in no limit right now, it's shocking. In the 80's and 90's all of the games dried up. Because the cream rose to the top, and all the bad players went bust. Now EVERYONE wants to play the game. Take advantage of that. I generally will play a 10-20 or 20-40 no limit live games. And there is no maximum buy in. So, obviously there is money in the game. As far as these internet sites, that cap your buy in. I'm sure if you multi-table, or have a TRUE understanding of the game. You can do quite well there.Limit hold em and other limit games: stud, stud hi lo, omaha 8, etc. Plenty of money there as well. At the same time, games like stud and omaha will typically have people who know how to play the game. That is due to the lack of popularity. If that is the case, make sure that you are better than "most" or "some" of your opponents. Limit Hold Em is a game where everyone thinks that they are an expert. You can obviously get away with making more mistakes in a limit game then you can in a no limit game, for obvious reasons. At the same time, there are good limit games and bad limit games. As you move up in limits, you will find that the style of play changes drastically. In a live game, Ace King is much stronger in 100-200 vs. 4-8. You will be up against less people, and often times, Ace high will be the best hand. I don't want to go into too much detail and or analysis here. Tournaments. Yes there is some luck involved. But if you look at John Juanda, he must be the luckiest man alive. Because he cashes ALL the time, year in and year out. Some players have natural abilities that lend themselves better to playing in tournys. PLENTY of money to be made there if you know what you're doing, and if you understand the nature of tournament poker. It's more complex then one might think. Online tournaments are the same way. One of my best friends "Gank" is quite successful at online tournys. That is where he does best. He understands the game, he knows how to exploit his edge, and he is a winning player.I would probably have to sit down and write about 30 pages to talk about the differences between games, limits, venues, etc, to truly cover this subject matter. I know that this wasn't as thorough as I would like it to be. But I hope it helps. Good Luck.

[Scott3705 0]

I refuse to contribute to the constant flame war on this forum about how NL players are nothing but donks and limit players are a bunch of pussies... but to the original question and those endorsing limit as the most profitable game...How can the most profitable game not be the game that has the most novice plyers (NL)?

[brando 0]

I refuse to contribute to the constant flame war on this forum about how NL players are nothing but donks and limit players are a bunch of pussies... but to the original question and those endorsing limit as the most profitable game...How can the most profitable game not be the game that has the most novice plyers (NL)?

For now you're probably right, but thinking long term I'd have to say limit is the way to go.

[custom36 4]

How can the most profitable game not be the game that has the most novice plyers (NL)?

Because limit has the most bad players.