|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
You Should Play NL (Seriously)
In NL, you can't play even breakeven poker unless you can read the opponent. In limit, you can still be quite +EV without reading well. If you could read better, you'd play even more +EV.
This is kind of like saying that you can be moderately +EV without being terribly good at late-position and blinds play. You'd be more successful if you were better at it, but you won't go broke if you're not. The fix for the later problem is to play 1/2 6m type games a lot. When I used to tell people this, I got a lot of strange looks and "meh" responses. Now everybody is doing it, and I can tell from the posts that the quality of play has increased. Now I'm going to tell you that you should play the 25NL games, too. Just like playing 1/2 6m hard both emotionally and on your bankroll at first, starting out at 25NL will be hard too. But it will teach you things that 50k hands in limit won't. Reading your opponent. Knowing when to get away from a bad position. The effect of implied odds (and reverse implied odds) on strategy. These are things that effect your +EV in limit, but not as much as other things do, so they are deemphasized. NL is like boot camp for these skills. So, everybody should play 25NL. That is all. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: You Should Play NL (Serously)
I played a little NL50 6max couple weeks ago, its just too boring for me, might give it another run sooner or later
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: You Should Play NL (Serously)
I was actually thinking of dedicating my next ~250 posts solely to SSNL, as I find it embarassing that I can make like couple hundred playing 3/6 limit online, but lose in $20 home games -_-.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: You Should Play NL (Seriously)
I'm finding myself stacking off too often when I play NL, any thoughts? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: You Should Play NL (Seriously)
[ QUOTE ]
I'm finding myself stacking off too often when I play NL, any thoughts? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Overplaying hands that are strong in limit? That was the first major hurdle I came to, and I'm still crawling over it. Spend time in SSNL. They got good posters there. I'm not one of them. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: You Should Play NL (Seriously)
names man, we need poster names.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: You Should Play NL (Seriously)
[ QUOTE ]
names man, we need poster names. [/ QUOTE ] |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: You Should Play NL (Seriously)
Here's some posters who's posts I make it a point to read. I'm new to the forum, so this list is in flux. Lots of people are missing I'm sure. Alphabetical order:
BobboFitos, Fimbulwinter, soah, swolfe, TheWorstPlayer The list is short, I know. But they are there a lot. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: You Should Play NL (Seriously)
Meh, you can make money at NL25/NL50 just from playing tight and jamming hard with your strong hands, and farming for sets. The play is obscenely bad.
My biggest problem with no-limit cash games is the lack of quality reading material out there. SSHE is treated like the Bible in ML and SS here, but there is no equiliviant text for SSNL. Then again, there is no solid material on shorthanded play (unless you want to count HUSH), but that did not stop me (or lots of other people) from going anyway. Huh. (The play at .5/1 6-max on Party is abysmal, but that only lines up with what I said about NL25.) -K |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: You Should Play NL (Seriously)
For me, that bible has been HOH, especially volume 1 for cash games. True, it's target is tournament play. But it's for early-stages tourney play, which AFAICT is exactly like cash game play. HOH v.1 is required reading. Also required is this.
|
|
|