limit or no limit

[PhishForChips 0]

I would love to hear DN's take on this discussion as I have heard most pro's say that the toughest game is NL and that the best players all play NL.

[Smasharoo 0]

I have heard most pro's say that the toughest game is NL and that the best players all play NL.Never heard one say that, ever.Can you link a quote to one, please?Oh wait, are these imaginary pros that you play in your imaginary games with? Did you have them over for a tea party or something?"That's right, big pink Bunny, imaginary Daniel says that NL is the tougher game...tee hee! More cake?"

[TheIceman05 0]

I would love to hear DN's take on this discussion as I have heard most pro's say that the toughest game is NL and that the best players all play NL.

Don't all the best players, the players who eat up the big game, play games like:2-7 triple drawStudStud/8OmahaOmaha/8etcetcetc?What percentage do you think they play no limit?Also, aren't most of the really big hold'em games limit games? Why am I even asking; of course they are. I don't know what this means, but the best players end up playing a hell of a lot more Limit hold'em in cash games than they do No Limit.Ice

[ahosang 0]

I play mainly Pot-limit hold'em. 8)Limit scares me. NL bores me.

[Airabus 0]

I have heard most pro's say that the toughest game is NL and that the best players all play NL.Never heard one say that, ever.Can you link a quote to one, please?Oh wait, are these imaginary pros that you play in your imaginary games with?  Did you have them over for a tea party or something?"That's right, big pink Bunny, imaginary Daniel says that NL is the tougher game...tee hee!  More cake?"

I just shot coke out of my nose. ThanksMan that carbonation hurts.

[r18 0]

Re- OP question: I find it more difficult to switch between omaha and hold em than I do switching between limit and no limit.Re- the limit vs no limit debate: the fact that main event at wsop is no limit should say something.

[TheIceman05 0]

I play mainly Pot-limit hold'em.   8)Limit scares me. NL bores me.

I hope you meant that the way you typed it... Because I was scared (beep)less of LIMIT too when I first started playing. Figured I was only person waaay more afraid of limit poker than no limit.Ice

[TheIceman05 0]

Re- OP question:  I find it more difficult to switch between omaha and hold em than I do switching between limit and no limit.Re- the limit vs no limit debate:  the fact that main event at wsop is no limit should say something.

No Limit is more "exciting," and the variance is higher, so it helps to neutralize the advantage of the much more skillful player. That's what it says.Ice

[KDawgCometh 2]

DNs best game is LimitHE, and he likes to play a wide variety of games. you need to be good at more then one gae to be a good player

[rog 0]

The challenge in NL is to not make that huge mistake in marginal situations, where as in limit you are afforded that luxory.

No, you are not afforded that. This is where you're thinking is wrong. The little things are the difference between being a winning limit player and being a losing limit player. Play 10k hands of limit and see what the impact is of calling "just one more bet". In NL you can afford to fold all marginal situations because you can make a LOT when your edge is bigger so you dont have to risk marginal situations. Limit is a game of fine edges, small leaks and close decisions. Before I argue this any further, how many hands of limit do you have under your belt? Do you know what you are talking about?I play NL tourneys and Limit ring games right now. I've played some NL ring games, and one limit tourney (never again).

[woutoR 0]

I like limit atm I first want to become good at limit poker and build a br then study nl-tourneys and hope to become also good at those and vary between them.

[Airabus 0]

The challenge in NL is to not make that huge mistake in marginal situations, where as in limit you are afforded that luxory.

No, you are not afforded that. This is where you're thinking is wrong. The little things are the difference between being a winning limit player and being a losing limit player. Play 10k hands of limit and see what the impact is of calling "just one more bet". In NL you can afford to fold all marginal situations because you can make a LOT when your edge is bigger so you dont have to risk marginal situations. Limit is a game of fine edges, small leaks and close decisions. Before I argue this any further, how many hands of limit do you have under your belt? Do you know what you are talking about?I play NL tourneys and Limit ring games right now. I've played some NL ring games, and one limit tourney (never again).

I think the bolded text is the hardest thing for people to learn and understand. I laydown 2 sets last night. One to a 4 card flush on the board and the other to a 4 card straight. You could make an arguement that these were 2 bad decision, but that is what make limit so tough.

[kdogg 0]

It's easier to multi-table with limit.

[justblaze 0]

It's easier to multi-table with limit.

not if you're doing it properly. you play so many less hands (at least you should be) in NL that you almost NEED to multi table. And in response to Phishnchips: LOL.

[r18 0]

Re- OP question:  I find it more difficult to switch between omaha and hold em than I do switching between limit and no limit.Re- the limit vs no limit debate:  the fact that main event at wsop is no limit should say something.

No Limit is more "exciting," and the variance is higher, so it helps to neutralize the advantage of the much more skillful player. That's what it says.

I disagree. No Limit is the game that Doyle and his gang of Texans most wanted to play cause they could kill at it. The "cadillac of poker." I don't think he suggested it to "neutralize" his advantange. I think it's the exact opposite. Novices were scared of his big no limit raises. They didn't want to bet back unless they held the nuts. (at least until he wrote SS1.)I do agree that the no limit preflop all in move can help neutralize a more skillful player. In that regard I think pot limit is the most creative game of all cause it takes away the big preflop raise and thus forces inferior players to play post flop.

[justblaze 0]

Re- OP question:  I find it more difficult to switch between omaha and hold em than I do switching between limit and no limit.Re- the limit vs no limit debate:  the fact that main event at wsop is no limit should say something.

No Limit is more "exciting," and the variance is higher, so it helps to neutralize the advantage of the much more skillful player. That's what it says.

I disagree. No Limit is the game that Doyle and his gang of Texans most wanted to play cause they could kill at it. The "cadillac of poker." I don't think he suggested it to "neutralize" his advantange. I think it's the exact opposite. Novices were scared of his big no limit raises. They didn't want to bet back unless they held the nuts. (at least until he wrote SS1.)I do agree that the no limit preflop all in move can help neutralize a more skillful player. In that regard I think pot limit is the most creative game of all cause it takes away the big preflop raise and thus forces inferior players to play post flop.

you're blending cash game theory with tournament theory.

[bigkg 0]

I would love to hear DN's take on this discussion as I have heard most pro's say that the toughest game is NL and that the best players all play NL.

That is so untrue in so many ways. Way to make things up in order for you to sound smart after you realized how wrong you are. I have actually heard that limit stud is the hardest, which seems reasonable. Yes, the best players do play NL, along with every other variation of poker. I can almost gaurantee that about 75% of pros(if not more) think limit is harder.

[justblaze 0]

I would love to hear DN's take on this discussion as I have heard most pro's say that the toughest game is NL and that the best players all play NL.

That is so untrue in so many ways. Way to make things up in order for you to sound smart after you realized how wrong you are. I have actually heard that limit stud is the hardest, which seems reasonable. Yes, the best players do play NL, along with every other variation of poker. I can almost gaurantee that about 75% of pros(if not more) think limit is harder.

limit stud is generally acknowledged to be a game in which there skill provides an overwhelming influence in terms of results (as compared to luck).

[Blackchipper 0]

after losing a few deposits, i realized i can't play NL online.w/ NL, u can lose your entire stack on a hand. i need more info in order to risk that much. i need to actually see the players.to me, that makes a world of difference.so i am trying to resist any and all temptations to play NL online, and i am sticking to limit. so far i am up.NL online i am way down.NL live i am way up.haven't tried limit live yet, but starting to seriously consider a trip to rama soon.

everything you said is what i wanted to say. on the dot.

[Nikki_N 17]

UB: no limit (micro sized blinds)Live: limitI practice both on UB, but play mostly NL there. I really like heads up no limit SNGs.Nikki

[MrNiceGuy 0]

I usually play NLHE tournaments and limit ring games, but sometimes I switch those up.I really gotten into stud lately and really enjoy it, so far I've only played limit.I would say no limit is more complex, simply because in limit your options are check/bet/raise/call/fold, in NL you have all of those options plus you have to choose your bet size, so there are no obviously completely correct decisions (other than check and/or fold, of courses); a simple example, you hold the nuts on the river and are last to act, obviously you bet or raise, but you need to decide how much.In terms of making a set amount of profit off of significantly weaker players, that's obviously harder to do in limit than in NL.Most of the time, you get more information in limit before you have to make crucial decisions, so there is more opportunity to try to read players' betting, glean information, and determine the best course of action. In NL, there is more guesswork, largely based on preflop odds. I would say that better postflop play is required to play limit effectively.When I started playing online several months ago, I liked NL and hated limit, but now I enjoy them both.I haven't really experimented with it yet (outside of Omaha), but I believe PL is probably the style that requires the most skill to play well.

[suckerfish 0]

No limit is like riding your Harley 100 mph naked.Limit is like riding your Schwinn uphill with a crash helmet.

[StackOSociety 0]

Why the love affair with limit? Poker is about money, and people seem to readily agree that no limit is the easy way to make money... Why don't more people play NL holdem as their cash game instead of limit? I know about the big game... but none of us play in that! So why isn't everybody mopping up in NL, or is their more money to be made playing limit once you get ahold of it and can play higher limits? For example 5-10 limit isn't that crazy but 5-10 NL is pretty hard core. The rates can be somewhat similar so I can see if you can handle the 5-10 limit game you could play there if you could avg 2xbb an hour that's a respectable amount of money for your time. How many bbs or comparable units can a NL player expect to make at the same blinds?? Or is it simply a ROI per hour, say 10-15%?

[Kaz 0]

DN has talked about this sometime ago in a cardplayer article or journal or something. He said that NL doesn't show the true skill of the player because you can have a good preflop strategy and bet high enough that you don't really have to make many decisions postflop. He goes on to say the the most difficult is the Pot Limit due to the fact that not only do you need to play well preflop but you will need to be able to negotiate postflop play as well.How does limit fit in? Since in limit most of the time you will have to showdown you will need to have a good understanding of postflop play as well as preflop. This would put it right between NL and PL with PL being the most difficult.

[john kane 0]

i play both limit and no limit regularly. i play no limit when i feel on top of my game and limit when i dont. why? limit is far easier. i sit there, i know almost exactly what i should be doing. what hands to be raising with preflop, when to slowplay, whento check raise etc. its all pretty basic. i am a winning limit player at usually 2-4 or 3-6. yes, i have some bad days, but everyone does - the joys of variance.limit, especially ring games, you are simply following a set of guidlines set out in the books we've all should of read - what to raise prelfop, what to put you opponents on, taking very careful note of waht other players are capable of.no limit has to do all which limit requires yet much more. you have to learn the other players betting styles far greater than in limit - not knowing whether the player is willing to bluff with a pot size bet can cost you a lot of bucks, not knowing whether a player will raise you in limit on the river only with the nuts will cost you....1 big bet.i find it amazing anyone could struggle at limit (except for dealing with the variance). all you have to do is learn the odds. know how many outs you have, the corresponding implied pot odds, know roughly what percentage that your opponent could be bluffing etc, and by the end of the month you really should be up a fair amount.no limit by contrast is a game which you can simply apply the set of rules outlined in the many poker books we all buy. yes, we are lead down the right path in no limit via books, but its a game where you have to constantly be studying the opponents, knowing one mistake could cost you a lot of good small steals you have made.in no limit you have to apply many of the same rules in limit but yet the importance of playing the opponents rather than the cards is so much greater. you can outplay far your opponents far more frequently in no limit than you can in limit. this isnt becuase no limit is easier, its becuase only a tiny fraction of players can frequently outplay other players. to be a consistently winning no limit player you have to apply far more skills and experience than playing at a limit table, where you can follow the rules, and to be a great limit player make the difficult decisions in a few hands of raise and fold. and to finish, in a poker book i read a while back, it said about a professional limit player who had cut a hole in his trousers so he could 'play with himself' during the game, implying he was so confident with his game that he didnt really need to concentrate. plus in poker nation, bellin describes his drug addiciton while playing just to keep himself occupied while playing, again implying he knew exactly his plays of when to check, raise,fold and call. in my opinion, limit (at the mid and low levels) is a game that can be mastered, no limit you are always learning, no matter what the stakes.