No Limit Full Time

[DonkSlayer 1]

What puts people on "edge" when playing NL:Their stack means something to them. Limit would be worse if everyone's "stack" meant something to them.Suckouts hit harder.Individual hand decisions mean more in terms of $$$.Why NL is awesome (although I appreciate all games and play most of em):Buyins vs. bb's Variance. I can fold if I want to, and limit calls for a lot more call-downs than NL.Tells. People give off a lot more because betting is not controlled.Control. I can utilize the betting structure to bully, entice, or otherwise manipulate my opponents' actions. Oh, that guy's a station? Let's see if he is when he has to commit 120 bb's on a flop.

[Steamed Rice 0]

good post. you just have to be sick in the head to play NL fulll time. nothing more to it.

QFT

[GambleToWin 0]

This is a very interesting thread. As for me, I like playing both limit and no limit. I find myself playing more limit cash games online, b/c I like how limit reduces the luck factor and there seem to be a lot of nl players that are donks in limit.

[Dratj 0]

Not sure where you are playing, but that was not the case at these games. I really do not like playing when I am covered by anyone, but I was covered by 2-4 people at all times with up to 25K in front of them.

I've only played up to 5 5nl in vegas and a big stack at that game was about 1.5K, so 300 bb's.I've played 5 10 nl near my home here at Fallview Niagara and 3k was a big stack as the max buy in was 1K. Generally speaking, for live and online, most buy ins are usually 100bb. 300bb is pretty big. I know Wynn has unlimited buy ins but I don't see the point in sitting with 2500bb's in any nl game. Why? If I have 25K, I'm going to play a limit with bigger blinds something like 100 200 nl and sit with a little over 100 bb's. What I'm saying is that it does not sound normal for everyone to be sitting with 2500bb's in a nl game. I mean, look at the big game that DN plays in. They cap the losses at 100k per pot and by extension I'm sure that they are not playing blinds of $20- $40.

[No_Neck 0]

I've only played up to 5 5nl in vegas and a big stack at that game was about 1.5K, so 300 bb's.I've played 5 10 nl near my home here at Fallview Niagara and 3k was a big stack as the max buy in was 1K. Generally speaking, for live and online, most buy ins are usually 100bb. 300bb is pretty big. I know Wynn has unlimited buy ins but I don't see the point in sitting with 2500bb's in any nl game. Why? If I have 25K, I'm going to play a limit with bigger blinds something like 100 200 nl and sit with a little over 100 bb's. What I'm saying is that it does not sound normal for everyone to be sitting with 2500bb's in a nl game. I mean, look at the big game that DN plays in. They cap the losses at 100k per pot and by extension I'm sure that they are not playing blinds of $20- $40.

If you are playing the style Shiznat plays though you want to see lots of flops cheap and hope to bust someone. If you are playing 300 bucks to see every flop your 25K will drop a lot faster than if you are playing 20 bucks to see a flop in a 5-5 game. Deepstacks for Shiznat is the key to that style, you have to get paid off big when you hit your hand.

[Dratj 0]

If you are playing the style Shiznat plays though you want to see lots of flops cheap and hope to bust someone. If you are playing 300 bucks to see every flop your 25K will drop a lot faster than if you are playing 20 bucks to see a flop in a 5-5 game. Deepstacks for Shiznat is the key to that style, you have to get paid off big when you hit your hand.

Who is Shiznat? Anyways, I agree that with deepstack poker, you have more implied odds and thus you can almost see everyflop hoping to takes someone's entire stack. However, are you seriously saying that sitting with 25 K in a 5 10 nl game is normal? I can see 3k, maybe even 5k but 25 k seems ridiculous. I'm not saying it doesn't happen but I can't see it being the norm. I think that 300bb's is already pretty deep stacked, 800 bb's would be very deep like in the WPT tourneys where you start with 25 25 blinds with 20K. Anything over that is just crazy. How many guys do you know that say play 1 2 nl and buy in for 5k? I'm going to assume the answer is close to zero.

[No_Neck 0]

The guy with the hustler av

[mtdesmoines 3]

The thing I can't get around playing NL live is the ridiculous time charge. At the casinos near me it's $8/30 mins. I know you can claim the rake is higher than that, but you're only paying rake on the pots you win - you're paying time to sit there and fold. Also the NL games near me have way low caps to the buy-in. The 2/5 game has a $200 cap. It's a shovefest that can barely be called poker.

Rake at my local casino is $3 max per pot in 1/2 NL. 30+ hands per hour. 10 players. (30*3=90)/10=9 hr. per player. Please don't go off on me about the math. My point is that the $8 per hour per player is higher than rake for me. Your rake may differ.

This is a very interesting thread. As for me, I like playing both limit and no limit. I find myself playing more limit cash games online, b/c I like how limit reduces the luck factor and there seem to be a lot of nl players that are donks in limit.

Tourneys / CASH NL and CASH Limit. are as different as Stud / Omaha / Hold Em and Razz.

Also the NL games near me have way low caps to the buy-in. The 2/5 game has a $200 cap. It's a shovefest that can barely be called poker.

We have a $100 cap on the 1/2 NL game. Someone told me that they were at a place where you could buy in for 75% of the big stack - no matter what the big stack was. It would be cool if every game spread like that.

[James D 0]

I understand what you're saying... But, also 70/30 is different then 60/40 or 65/35.Again the idiots are most likely going to loose everything regardless. I'd rather have them crushed when I stick my stack in there instead of gambling it up with them. My style of play is how you avoid the amount of "swings" that everyone speaks of.

Just skipped through this thread.... and saw this.If you're talking about 'idiots', then I assume you mean loose/weak. Therefore, if you bet enough to not give them the correct pot odds to call ... and they still call, then regardless of whether they hit, it was the correct play.That's the only way to get paid with chasers/fish... Why let them in cheap? There is no reason I can think of.

[Shizant 0]

If you are playing the style Shiznat plays though you want to see lots of flops cheap and hope to bust someone. If you are playing 300 bucks to see every flop your 25K will drop a lot faster than if you are playing 20 bucks to see a flop in a 5-5 game. Deepstacks for Shiznat is the key to that style, you have to get paid off big when you hit your hand.

Although I do believe that big stacks are the optimum way to play NL it is not a requirement. My style of play is actually more conservitive then you think. Again I try to conserve my chips to get invloved with the idiots/fish at the right time rather then risk them at other times in the session. When I'm at the table I think of myself as a sniper waiting for that one head shot to clean out the idiot. I don't go in firing away with an uzi. I conserve and slowly build my stack up for that one pot.

[HoosierAlum 0]

I actually think limit is MUCH more stressful due to the beats you are constantly taking/giving out. I made the switch to NL quite some time ago because I like being able to book a win a large % of my sessions, where in limit this really isnt possible.

[TheCinciKid 0]

I understand what you're saying... But, also 70/30 is different then 60/40 or 65/35.Again the idiots are most likely going to loose everything regardless. I'd rather have them crushed when I stick my stack in there instead of gambling it up with them. My style of play is how you avoid the amount of "swings" that everyone speaks of.I posted my opinions as a different way to approach the NL cash games. If you guys are winning players with the way you play then there is no need to follow my advice. But, if you are looking to make to move from limit to NL and avoid the swings I'd suggest just slowing down a little bit. Wait for the right spot to pick off the fish/idiots. I didn't make these posts to start an argument and I really don't feel like getting into one.Thank you....lol.... I like it.

I'm getting to this discussion wayyy late and I suck at NL cash games, but the discussion you've been having with antistuff hit me as interesting here. Isn't the point of NL supposed to be that you can give people bad odds to draw against you? If someone has a flush draw in limit there is really no way to protect your hand as they're going to be getting the correct odds almost no matter what you do. In NL by contrast, if you make a pot-sized bet someone with a flush draw will be getting incorrect odds to make their draw on the next street. Unless of course, they're all-in on the flop. Anyway, feel free to explain to me why I'm wrong, but that's always been my understanding of one of the "advantages" of NL over limit.

[Shizant 0]

Just skipped through this thread.... and saw this.If you're talking about 'idiots', then I assume you mean loose/weak. Therefore, if you bet enough to not give them the correct pot odds to call ... and they still call, then regardless of whether they hit, it was the correct play.That's the only way to get paid with chasers/fish... Why let them in cheap? There is no reason I can think of.

Your comment is not completely true with NL. You can have a 55% to 45% edge but that doesn't necessarily mean that you have to risk your entire stack on that edge...

[kkcountry 0]

I actually think limit is MUCH more stressful due to the beats you are constantly taking/giving out.

QFT

[James D 0]

Your comment is not completely true with NL. You can have a 55% to 45% edge but that doesn't necessarily mean that you have to risk your entire stack on that edge...

Where did I say that?I said that if you give somebody incorrect odss to call, to hit their draw, that regardless of the outcome (i.e - whether they hit), it's the correct play.

[Shizant 0]

I'm getting to this discussion wayyy late and I suck at NL cash games, but the discussion you've been having with antistuff hit me as interesting here. Isn't the point of NL supposed to be that you can give people bad odds to draw against you? If someone has a flush draw in limit there is really no way to protect your hand as they're going to be getting the correct odds almost no matter what you do. In NL by contrast, if you make a pot-sized bet someone with a flush draw will be getting incorrect odds to make their draw on the next street. Unless of course, they're all-in on the flop. Anyway, feel free to explain to me why I'm wrong, but that's always been my understanding of one of the "advantages" of NL over limit.

I'm not saying that you should never protect against draws. What I'm saying is to not put too much money on vulnerable hands such as TP/TK or bottom 2 pair or other vulnerable situations. Keep pots small unless you have a monster. Use your chips not so much to try to "protect" your hand but rather to get paid when you hit a monster...Anyways I gotta go... Driving to Commerce to play in their even tonight.

[NicksDad1970 0]

At a 5 10 nl, game, 3k is a big stack. If you can handle 5k swings, you can play 5 10 nl.

I see 3k stacks at the 1-2 NL games in Tunica.

[James D 0]

I'm not saying that you should never protect against draws. What I'm saying is to not put too much money on vulnerable hands such as TP/TK or bottom 2 pair or other vulnerable situations. Keep pots small unless you have a monster. Use your chips not so much to try to "protect" your hand but rather to get paid when you hit a monster...Anyways I gotta go... Driving to Commerce to play in their even tonight.

You sound like such a tight/weak player.. You need to be more tight/aggressive.How exactly are you gonna 'keep pots small'? What does that mean? Just fold to any pressure unless you have the nuts?Justifying giving loose players the correct odds to call is beyond me. And if they see you as playing like this, then you're not gonna get any action anyway, when you hit this 'monster' hand you keep talking about.And by this time I also doubt that you would have 'built your stack slowly', as you said.Maybe stick to limit. Didn't you think that with the whole concept of NL, that it would be more aggressive? I'm amazed that you were surprised by this.

[Dratj 0]

I see 3k stacks at the 1-2 NL games in Tunica.

1) Is that the average?2) Would you say that is normal for that Casino?3) Is the buy in unlimited?

[cmak3687 0]

i totally agree with shizant. if you make too large a bet with a marginal hand like one pair or bottom 2, your going to pot commit yourself on the river when the flush card comes off or the straight card. Another reason for keeping the pots small is to protect yourself from the very good nl players at your table. If you make a pot size bet, and your opponent calls, and now a scare card comes off on the turn, and your opponent fires out a big bet, its very hard to call. If you keep the pots small, you dont get bluffed as much, and if you do get bluffed, its usually for an amount your willing to call. and for those of you that think this is a donkey way of playing, a lot of accomplished pros play this way. People like gavin smith, phil hellmuth, daniel, theres a pretty long list of players who play small ball. keep the pots small when you have a marginal hand, play a big pot with a monster.

[David_Nicoson 1]

How many guys do you know that say play 1 2 nl and buy in for 5k? I'm going to assume the answer is close to zero.

That happens all the time at Binions. I don't generally put that much in play unless I have a specific target player I want to cover.

The thing I can't get around playing NL live is the ridiculous time charge. At the casinos near me it's $8/30 mins. I know you can claim the rake is higher than that, but you're only paying rake on the pots you win - you're paying time to sit there and fold. Also the NL games near me have way low caps to the buy-in. The 2/5 game has a $200 cap. It's a shovefest that can barely be called poker.

QFT. Those are awful.

good post. you just have to be sick in the head to play NL fulll time. nothing more to it.

For some reason, this makes me feel proud.

[Trail Boss Mitch 0]

What I think is funny: watch a NL player/loser with a few chips left sit down at a Limit table and try to be aggressive/bully. Some NL players think Limit players are weak, scared, and easy to intimidate. It's almost like some NL players feel that playing Limit is below them.The fun begins when they lose all of their remaining chips to a Limit player who knows the difference...knows that NL and Limit are two different games. I hate arrogance at any table, but especially the arrogance of a young online NL player who plays Limit live for the first time and acts like a bully. Arrogance and aggression can be lethal to a bankroll.

[Dratj 0]

That happens all the time at Binions. I don't generally put that much in play unless I have a specific target player I want to cover.

5k at a 1 2 nl game? Seems crazy to me. I've played at some of the casinos on the strip and that amount seems abnormal to me.

[David_Nicoson 1]

5k at a 1 2 nl game? Seems crazy to me. I've played at some of the casinos on the strip and that amount seems abnormal to me.

It is unusual. But doesn't a "no-limit" game with a maximum buy-in seem like a contradiction in terms? "There's no limit on what you can bet . . . up to $200."

[dna4ever 2]

It is unusual. But doesn't a "no-limit" game with a maximum buy-in seem like a contradiction in terms? "There's no limit on what you can bet . . . up to $200."

STOP IT RIGHT NOW