Why Play Limit

[chiefs2 0]

Obviously the pots are bigger in NL and therefore you can make more money so why should I be trying to switch to LHE. On the other hand too you cant blow your stack in LHE like in NL but still there are some upscale sessions in NL. I would just like to hear some opinons on making money, variance (swings), andther positives/disadvantes between the two.

[The Nuts 0]

The variance in NL is higher than in Limit. If you're good at Limit, you can easily minimize your losses and maximize your gains when compared to NL Hold'em since in NL, you can lose your entire stack at any given time when in Limit, you can't. It's the best way to build your bankroll and as they say "grind it out". If you have a huge bankroll as it is and can spare a good amount of money, no limit may be more enjoyable. But despite me being fairly good at NLHE, I have very few winning sessions. In Limit, I'd say that 75% of my session result in some sort of profit.To make an analogy: In boxing, you can throw jabs and power punches. In Limit Hold'em, you throw jabs and then set up for a major power punch. In No Limit, you stand toe-to-toe and fight with power punches only. It's more aggressive, but could cost you a lot since you leave yourself open for more counter punches.I also find Limit to be more enjoyable. No Limit becomes boring after a while and it seems that every time I enter a game everybody just keeps pushing all in on just about every hand.

[Zach6668 513]

Are you sure the variance is smaller in Limit?

[doubleatrain 0]

Are you sure the variance is smaller in Limit?

What he said.

[The Nuts 0]

Are you sure the variance is smaller in Limit?

For me, it is. I do lose in Limit, but my losses are lower than my wins (in terms of money lost during the sessions). In No Limit, I tend to have about even in terms of winning and losing sessions (NL tournaments compensates for that). However, my wins are low and my losses are larger.Probably exaggerated the 75% number I mentioned earlier. At minimum 50%, though more around 60 - 65%. Apologies on that.

[hotbacon 0]

variance is relative to the game/bankrollNL without a doubt has more variance in games with the same blinds as in limit.Limit by its nature tends to reward expert play more, because you're constantly forced to try to squeeze every penny of EV on every street. It's not as simple as "bigger pots in NL omg"

[CobaltBlue 662]

Nuts, your experience is quite different from most players. For me, variance is much bigger in LHE than NLHE at comparable stakes. I can win or lose several grand in a session playing something like 20/40 LHE, whereas I have a hard time winning or losing more than a few buy-ins at 3/6 NLHE. (Both levels require around $12k bankrolls.)I've heard good players talk quite often about NL winning percentages (when it comes to sessions) reasonably being above 75%, while 60% is a more realistic figure in Limit.So basically, if you like to gamble and like action, Limit is a more appealing game. NL is more consistent, but it can be more boring.

[Abbaddabba 0]

variance is relative to the game/bankroll

var(X) = E((X-u)^2)Or in other words, the average gap between an actual value and the expected value. To my understanding, it's generally lower in no limit than in limit.

[screech 0]

Are you sure the variance is smaller in Limit?

It is.And to answer chiefs question, real men embrace variance.Also, NL is a lot more boring than limit, but it's also a lot easier to win money at.

[fckthis 0]

More money in limit he. Way more. More bad players play limit, and it honestly requires more skill. You have to squeeze every edge as hard as possible, all the time. With less bluffing ability, you have to pick your spots correctly, your players correctly and so on. Limit is also more geared to players with a higher understanding of mathematics, where as NL, can be mastered by just using one's pyschological edge.

[Actuary 3]

playing style can make NL more or less variance than Limit.I would not say more bad players play Limit.there are so many bad players playing both, who knows.I will say Limit takes more brains, NL takes more guts.i speak out of my ass

[Jeff 0]

No limit holdem offers more tools for a skilled player to use against an unskilled one (you can make a lot of money off them). That means that the difference between a top no limit player and a new no limit player is much greater then that of a new limit player and a top limit one. There are many reasons for this but a few include the ability to bet a varying amount at any point to either freeze your opponents drawing hand or completely bust him out in one shot or just to bluff him off his hand. Notice how you can make a big mistake in a limit game and you are out a few extra bets. If you make that same mistake in a no limit game your stack is gone.

[Loismustdie 0]

playing style can make NL more or less variance than Limit.I would not say more bad players play Limit.there are so many bad players playing both, who knows.I will say Limit takes more brains, NL takes more guts.i speak out of my ass

I am a good NL player, yet I hear that becoming great at Limit will make me that much better, so I will switch for awhile and see if I can't make myself better. I have noticed that there are seemingly worse players at limit, especially short handed. I don't know if that will be consistent but we will see.

[lvpro 0]

It's a different skill set entirely.In limit, you need to be able to play every street well, and you need to be able to read your opponents, to try and gain that extra bet on the end, or avoid losing that extra bet on the end.

[DougieG 0]

I feel Jeff is off base saying that there are more tools to use in NL as a skilled player versus a new player. Having started playing NL and having some success I recently switched to limit and found that there are many more nuances to limit than there are to NL. Sure in NL you can bet any amount in order to 'freeze or bluff' an opponent, but you can also miss a bet on the turn attempting a slow play, and still make up for it on the river. In limit the edges are smaller, the payouts smaller per successful move on your new player, therefore the edge that an experienced LHE player has over a new player is more valuable.I could be wrong as this is simply my immediate gut reaction but for what it's worth, that's my opinion.

[nomad_monad 0]

In limit the edges are smaller, the payouts smaller per successful move on your new player, therefore the edge that an experienced LHE player has over a new player is more valuable.

It might be more valuable in terms of effort, but in terms of monetary expectation, I don't think so, and it's precisely because of the reason you state. Since the edges and payouts are smaller, the good player has to have the opportunity to exercise them many times against a weaker one in order to turn a significant profit. In NL, the good player needs to exercise his edge only once in order to gain the weaker player's stack. Added to this, the weaker player has just as many opportunities to make mistakes in NLHE compared to LHE, but the cost of those mistakes is substantially higher in NLHE.

[aim786 0]

Limit = teaches you the fundamentals of the game wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy better than NL does.

[antistuff 0]

It might be more valuable in terms of effort, but in terms of monetary expectation, I don't think so, and it's precisely because of the reason you state. Since the edges and payouts are smaller, the good player has to have the opportunity to exercise them many times against a weaker one in order to turn a significant profit. In NL, the good player needs to exercise his edge only once in order to gain the weaker player's stack. Added to this, the weaker player has just as many opportunities to make mistakes in NLHE compared to LHE, but the cost of those mistakes is substantially higher in NLHE.

which is exactly the beauty of limit. i think its easier for a bad player to realize he has no chance in nl but in limit his losses will just seem like bad luck. you ever sat down in a limit game where you were a dog? do you know what it was that made you a dog?

[roadhawg 0]

i think the reason it seems there are worse players in limit is because people dont feel like it is much more to call and are getting great pot odds. i always hear people say after they made a horrible call "what? it was only ONE more bet, what if he was bluffing?". thats the great thing about playing limit (IMO) because people like that pay off so often because they feel that it is only one more bet. so if you play it right you can make a ton of money in limit.

[checkymcfold 0]

if you're playing a NL game that is bad enough that you're beating it for the most money by set-peddling, then limit at the same bankroll level will have SIGNIFICANTLY more variance.if you're playing a higher limit NL game where the money's really flying around and you're pushing a lot of draws to get action on your made hands, then you'll probably experience similar variance at NL and limit, possibly higher at NL for similar bankrolls. i forget my 5/10 NL numbers exactly (oh, the days of having a real bankroll), but they were often very, very crazy swings. we're talking 4-5k in less than an hour each direction, but i played pretty crazy, pushing nearly every draw and nearly every hand i was pretty sure i was ahead. but of course, it's not necessary to play like that, so your results may vary.regardless, i think that limit is very important to learn at least reasonably well somewhat early in your poker career because it will in time make the math behind poker become entirely second nature to you. that means that you won't have to worry about thinking through the math-related decisions in games where reads and bluffs become more important. in NL games, it's very easy to win a lot of money all at once based on others making huge mistakes without worrying about the smaller ones you might be making, but in limit that's not the case. your smaller mistakes will become clearer to you in limit and you'll be forced to fix them if you want to sustain a winning trajectory.

[A_Bullets_A 0]

I've played a lot of Limit and a lot of No Limit. I don't really know which I'm better at. I like to play both a lot. If you're talking about a 5/10 Limit game and a NL game with 5/10 blinds then of course the NL game will have much bigger pots. In games of comparable stakes though, I've had a lot more variance playing the Limit games. Sure you can lose your whole stack in one hand of NL, but you should have the best of it most of the time you go all in so you'll be doubling up more than you'll be busting when your whole stack is on the line. In limit, on the other hand, you'll be drawing more and getting rivered more because of more players calling you down. This is why I think I've experienced much more variance in Limit games than I have in NL games even though I've been winning at both.

[kkot 0]

people like that pay off so often because they feel that it is only one more bet.

This was easily my biggest leak, until last week when I actually started counting how many bets I was losing. Hopefully i don't fall into that again.