Re: NL v. limit
That should read, "of which he will have little against a superior opponent."
The real issue here is that it's sexy and exciting to be good at reading an opponent's hand, making fancy players and getting him to call with a worse hand or lay down a better hand. It is not sexy and exciting to have a better understanding of probability than your opponents and to crush them over time by repeatedly pushing edges. Everyone who watches poker on TV and just gets started wants to be the sexy hand-reader, because guys like Moneymaker say they don't read poker books, they just use pure guts and instinct.
Missing from this discussion is the point that in NL, a bad player can reduce a better player's edge on later streets by pushing all-in, whereas in limit games one has to learn how to develop a solid post-flop game, which I think a lot of inexperienced players who watch on TV are inherently uncomfortable with.
No one has also pointed out the fact that at high limits, limit HE is a vastly different game than it is at the lower limits. Sure, that decision to call on the river is only one BB, but when that BB is equal to $200, the decision suddenly carries a lot more weight. At these and higher limits, Limit HE is very much about hand reading and outplaying your opponents. Think about it -- if NL were the true test of a player's ability, why are all of the Big Game players all playing limit??
|