View Single Post
  #8  
Old 11-22-2005, 01:38 PM
AKQJ10 AKQJ10 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 184
Default Re: Does it have to be Limit?

This question comes up from time to time, and each time I try to push ahead with documenting the arguments for both sides so that we're not retreading the same ground.

I think http://poker.wikicities.com/wiki/No-..._disadvantages is the latest we have so far, but I could swear I broke that out into a limit-vs-no-limit page. But apparently not.

In one sentence, I agree with 4_2_it and Overdrive below, with one caveat. If you decide you're in love with Crazy Pineapple, five-card draw, badougi (which I don't consider to be poker strictly speaking), or similar, you're going to have a hard time finding much good reading material. That was actually why I started with limit -- my very first poker book by Carson was 95% limit, and at the time there was no logical NL equivalent to Jones' WLLH to be my second poker book. But nowadays you have Miller followed by Harrington and then possibly soon the Future Sklansky-Miller NLHE book, so there's plenty to read.
Reply With Quote