An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

I couldn't agree more with at least 7-8 of these ten points.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/poker...ory?id=2128589

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

Wow. He's good.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

[ QUOTE ]
I couldn't agree more with at least 7-8 of these ten points.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/poker...ory?id=2128589

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously limit poker is just gambling because you cannot "put a guy to a decision for his chips" as the author says. The author should have fit in great at that foxwoods 2/4 table, he is a moron who managed to get espn.com to publish his poorly disguised bad beat post as an article on a somewhat reputable website.

I love what televised poker has done for the game but I hate what it has done to the game at the same time.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

Seven or eight of those reasons are why the game is great.

Peter Newman sucks at poker. Two of his ten points are about how they were calling with anything and nothing, then he bets with 6-hi and complains that his WPT-style bluff didn't work.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

[ QUOTE ]
Seven or eight of those reasons are why the game is great.

Peter Newman sucks at poker. Two of his ten points are about how they were calling with anything and nothing, then he bets with 6-hi and complains that his WPT-style bluff didn't work.

[/ QUOTE ]
Don't forget how he complained that no one would fold, then he cold-called after the guy told him what he had and he was at best drawing to 4 outs, at worst drawing to 4 outs for half the pot.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

I have noticed that people feel one of two ways about low-limit poker:

1. They love playing in it because the players do call against the odds, etc., leading to what should mathematically work out to more winning sessions fro better players.

2. They hate low-limit because they get fed up with too many players calling down with junk and seemingly consistently drawing out on solid hands, defeating what mathematically should be profitable poker.

I know that reason number 1 actually makes statistical sense, but it sure does seem that in the experience of many, including myself, number 2 happens often enough to make people disgusted.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Seven or eight of those reasons are why the game is great.

Peter Newman sucks at poker. Two of his ten points are about how they were calling with anything and nothing, then he bets with 6-hi and complains that his WPT-style bluff didn't work.

[/ QUOTE ]
Don't forget how he complained that no one would fold, then he cold-called after the guy told him what he had and he was at best drawing to 4 outs, at worst drawing to 4 outs for half the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

It was more of his comments about people at the table and less of his comments about actual play that I agreed with.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

I agree. But you can't tell me that there aren't any tools playing 1-2 and 2-5 NL.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

That guy is an idiot.

He thinks far too much of himself and for all his talk about position, etc., he still played 65 suited in EP!!!

On the bright side, lots of wannabes will read his article and try to play limits higher than they should to avoid the $2/4 game [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

I think his flaw can be summed up in these three sentences

"I consider myself a no-limit, tournament-style specialist and was hesitant to play in a limit cash game."

"The best play in poker is to put the other players at a decision for their chips. It almost seemed like this play was taken away because of the nature of the limit game."

Funniest line so far
 

I've only read to #8, but this is so freakin' humorous in its irony I just can't contain myself:

[ QUOTE ]
These players have seen poker on television, but don't understand the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, right... they don't understand the game as well as some goober ESPN writer who just discovered revelations like,

[ QUOTE ]
The best play in poker is to put the other players at a decision for their chips. It almost seemed like this play was taken away because of the nature of the limit game.

[/ QUOTE ]

No kidding? You mean, you can't just push them off a hand for another $4? Why, that's so... so.... so LIMITING! That's why it's called LIMIT poker, Einstein.

I would think a great student of the game like Mr. Newmann would understand that poker requires adjustments, and one of those is moving from a big-bet game to a limit game. But no, there's Mr. Bigshot-WPT-Is-About-to-Come-Calling, trying to set people all-in with his two yellow chips with pictures of foxes on them. Good luck, Bozo. And keep bringing your friends from ESPN down -- send a few to the $4/8 game too.

Thanks for sharing this.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

Your #'s 1 & 2 go hand in hand. #2 will make money long time by people trying to draw out when they statistically shouldn't. They'll hit some times, but lose $$ most times.

The largest problem with $2-4 is the rake that eats up a larger portion of the pots.


I have noticed that people feel one of two ways about low-limit poker:

1. They love playing in it because the players do call against the odds, etc., leading to what should mathematically work out to more winning sessions fro better players.

2. They hate low-limit because they get fed up with too many players calling down with junk and seemingly consistently drawing out on solid hands, defeating what mathematically should be profitable poker.

I know that reason number 1 actually makes statistical sense, but it sure does seem that in the experience of many, including myself, number 2 happens often enough to make people disgusted.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

Most people would agree with statement #2. Not so coincidently, most people really, really suck at poker.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

The odds will tell you that with lots of people chasing and calling, you will lose more hands that you might win against more schooled opponents, but that you will win more $$$ when you do win.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

[ QUOTE ]
The river was an 8. He bet and I max raised him, trying to get him out of the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, this is a 2/4 game, right? So his "max raise" of $4 is way more powerful than a "min raise" of, oh, say, $4.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

[ QUOTE ]
The largest problem with $2-4 is the rake that eats up a larger portion of the pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps, but all it takes is one more caller preflop and on the flop to pay the rake. ( I wrote this argument up at http://poker.wikicities.com/index.ph...Low-limit_rake but I need to add a clarifying sentence or two.)

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M?
 

You really think so?

The guy's a moron. How they let people like this write an article and pay them for it is beyond me. I guess, in a way, it's good that he isn't writing anything worthwhile there-by educating anyone with his article.

Top 10 reasons and none include the rake. Instead he echos the sentiments of many players I see that can't beat a LL game simply because they don't understand the game nearly as much as they think they do.

Sounds like a typical, arrogant, n/l tourney wannabe.

b

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M?
 

Right, that's the point -- his animosity toward the fish is primarily because they show him up for being a fish himself.

Moreover, I'd love to play at this guy's table for no-limit too. I'll just sit on my $40 until I get a great hand, and then he'll raise to push me off it, and.... oh, wait, you can't raise someone out of the pot if they're all-in preflop!

That seems to be the foundation of his strategy. Just keep raising until you bully someone out of the pot. That doesn't mean he knows NL; it probably means he's closer to the typical Foxwoods $1-2 NL sucker than he realizes. Awesome. Bring lots of money, pal.

An excellent example of wannabe-pro whining
 

Since many others, including Mr Broadway, ripped into this author so well, I won't add to it

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

that is some funniness...all of these thoughts have come through my head at some point at the table

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

Nice beastiality avatar

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

While he does point out some of the idiocy in the game, he doesn't realize any of his own. Bad job by him.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

The article is interesting on two points, first because it presents such a materially accurate portrayal of low limit hold em. The other interesting factor is the guy's negative opinion/attitude towards these factors, which is what makes it hillarious.

Trying to bluff in a 2/4 game is as ridiculous as wearing sunglasses and a hood. He has no concept of EV what so ever. He's very typical of someone who has played a alot of NL and plays an OK game and plays limit and hates it because he doesn't understand it.

Example, you get AK in NL you will win the hand TONS of the time, you raise big preflop and eithe rtake it down there or isoalte 1-2 people. You can easily bet a raggedy flop and take it down right there.

In other words good preflop hands win alot more of the time in NL because you can bet them big preflop. Since NL has many fewer players seeing the flop, the better cards do much better in terms of % wins.

Welcome to limit, particularly LOW limit, you still raise with your AK but you might have 5 callers. When the board comes 6 9 T odds are SOMEBODY has paired up and you are now behind, you go down to the river and get all pissy when a 8To takes down the pot and the only thin you think is "This game is gay, if it were NL I would have bet enough preflop to make him fold his crappy 8To" and then you go punch up a little article for ESPN and all the other NL drones out there.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Right, that's the point -- his animosity toward the fish is primarily because they show him up for being a fish himself.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow… great statement wraps up the OP and the article all in one, impressive!

He is a little story…

There is a dealer I know in a local card room that plays mostly NL in that room because the limit games are too small. He keeps asking me why I am willing to play pink chip or 10/20 games, when everyone calls down to the river. He will only play limit if the game is 40/80 or greater because “there are no chasers in my game”. More than once I have begged him to sit down and play with us, one time he actually obliged but ran away in less than 30 mins out of frustration… suffice to say he played every hand and lost his entire buy in, thereby justifying in his head why low limit poker is bad. If I was rolled for 40/80 I’d personally pay for his trip to AC with me because I’m pretty sure I’d have a positive expected value even with the additional expenses incurred from his room, he is my dream opponent.

I guess it’s hard to see that the true fish is actually within.


TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

I'm sorry I won't see Mr. Newmann at the $2-4 tables at FWs anymore...

My favorite part was the very end...

"Peter Newmann is the poker researcher at ESPN. If you have a good story to tell, he'd love to hear it. He can be reached at peter.d.newmann@espn.com "

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M?
 

Heh, yeah, if anything his post illustrates *why* people can beat this game despite the rake.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

After scanning the responses in this thread, I'm surprised no one raised (or seemingly raised - in case I missed it)the obvious issue - limit poker - particuarly loose low limit games - is a different game than NL. Tight limit games are different than loose games. The differences in these games are the values of the starting hands. Drawing speculative hands like suited and one gapped connectors and mid pairs go up in value, while made high pairs go down in value. Regardless, having an overlay and paying attention to position and pot size are huge contributors to ensuring that you are getting +EV.

Making adjustments to your game and hand reading are extremely important to having success in these games. Bluffing bad players is always -EV.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

Hopefully Miller, Sklansky, and Malmuth will talk this guy into helping them with a new version of SSH soon. He would revolutionize the game.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

Didn't know ESPN was now publishing bad beat posts.

Re: An excellent assessment of low-limit B&M
 

Nothing is funnier than a bad player complaining about how all the other players in limit are so bad that he cannot beat them.