Which way to go - Limit vrs No Limit ?

[trx32]

I'm a newer player (< 1 year) and Limit
is getting kinda boring.
I play online at 25-50cent tables...


Does the group generally think that NL
would be a better way to go in the long
run for entertainment/profit/excitement?


I'm starting to think it might....

thanks,

trx32

[qqqxxxyyyzzz2000]

On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 18:14:00 -0500, trx32 <me@here.com> wrote:

>
>
>I'm a newer player (< 1 year) and Limit
>is getting kinda boring.
>I play online at 25-50cent tables...
>
>
>Does the group generally think that NL
>would be a better way to go in the long
>run for entertainment/profit/excitement?
>
>
>I'm starting to think it might....
>
>thanks,
>
>trx32

NL has moments that are more exciting than limit but fewer of them.
At the same time the periods of boredom are much longer.

[Iceman]

"Does the group generally think that NL would be a better way to go in
the long run for entertainment/profit/excitement?"

For the casual player, there is a lot more money in small NL games than
in small limit games.

When you are talking higher stakes, it depends on what good games are
available to you as well as your personal strengths as a player. Some
cardrooms don't have NL or only have small NL, and many other cardrooms
have high-stakes NL games that mostly attract much tougher players than
similar-size limit games, and that have very few weak players. As a
result, there are a lot of pros who only play limit poker, but those
expert NL players who do have profitable high-stakes games to play in
can make a fortune.

Entertainment and excitement depend on your personal preferences. If
excitement is what you're looking for, you might prefer SNGs or
6-handed ring games to 10-handed ring games, and you might want to try
games other than holdem. I personally find NL ring games boring,
especially in B&M play where you can go more than an hour without
playing a hand - "hours of boredom, seconds of terror" is pretty
accurate.

[DennisP]

Iceman wrote:
> "Does the group generally think that NL would be a better way to go in
> the long run for entertainment/profit/excitement?"
>
> For the casual player, there is a lot more money in small NL games than
> in small limit games.
>

I strongly disagree with this statement. I think there is much more
money to be made in small stakes limit poker. The small stakes players
are much worse at folding when they should be and calling way too
often. In addition, single mistakes can be less costly.

I played NL for months and made some, but nothing much. Read Small
Stakes Hold 'em and played limit and have crushed the games. I never
play NL ring games any more.

[DennisP]

75 hands per hour? Where do you play?

I've found it much easier to make conistent money at limit. My guess
is it has to do with winning large pots, as you mention. In NL I'd
consistently win small pots, lose a large pot, then sit even.

Obviously different people are better at different types of games.
But, I've found limit to have as many or more fish and have more
consistent winnings.

Iceman wrote:
> >> For the casual player, there is a lot more money in small NL games than
> >> in small limit games.
>
> > I strongly disagree with this statement. I think there is much more
> > money to be made in small stakes limit poker. The small stakes
> > players are much worse at folding when they should be and calling
> > way too often. In addition, single mistakes can be less costly.
>
> But your opponent's mistakes are also much less costly in limit, and as
> a result your edges over them are much smaller. Also, the rake is much
> more of a factor in limit holdem than in no-limit. No-limit has many
> tiny pots with minimal rake and a few large pots that rake the cap,
> while limit games tend to rake the cap or close to the cap on most
> hands even at fairly low limits. If the rake in a 2-4 limit game
> averages $2 per hand, that's $150 per hour per table. To overcome that
> for more than a tiny amount, you need to be a strong player facing very
> weak opposition. Granted, there are lots of awful players in
> low-stakes limit holdem online. But one reason there are so many is
> that as long as they have some basic idea what to do they won't lose
> that quickly in limit holdem. When there are many fish in a limit
> game, the pots can get so large that it makes many of their loose calls
> correct.

[trx32]

Thanks for the info!!


trx32