Quick Theory Question...

[coltrane]

Does NL Hold'em start to more resemble Limit Hold'em as the stacks get smaller in relation to the blinds?

i.e. - an NL table where stacks are 50xBB's resembles Limit Hold'em more than a table with 100xBB stacks....


It seems though, at a certain stack/blind ratio point, NL Hold'em even "surpasses" its Limit counterpart....

i.e. - we think of NL as being a game of implied odds compared to Limit....but, it seems if stacks are small enough relative to blinds, you might say NL can offer less implied odds than Limit because of the ability to raise any amount of your stack before the flop.....

[fourgapper]

[ QUOTE ]
i.e. - we think of NL as being a game of implied odds compared to Limit....but, it seems if stacks are small enough relative to blinds, you might say NL can offer less implied odds than Limit because of the ability to raise any amount of your stack before the flop.....

[/ QUOTE ]

isn't this true regardless of the blinds? I can always go all-in and give my opponents no implied odds...

(I'm working with the definition of implied odds of being calculated with the amount my opponents can take from me beyond the current amount I have in the pot when they make their hand.)

4gapper

[schwza]

yes, i suppose, but that's really not what the OP is asking.

i would frame the question like this: in a given game, you could rank the hands you would like to be dealt while you're on the big blind. in deep NL, Axs and small PP will be higher than they are in both shallow NL and in limit. that's pretty ho-hum.

at uber-short NL (say you have 2 bb's and in your in the big blind), a7o starts to look pretty good, whereas in limit (with a reasonable stack) you'd prefer 76s. my question would be: what's the deepest stack-depth where you rank a "pair-building" hand like KQo rank higher in NL than in limit. remember these are just ordinal rankings 1-169.

[coltrane]

[ QUOTE ]
what's the deepest stack-depth where you rank a "pair-building" hand like KQo rank higher in NL than in limit.

[/ QUOTE ]

good phrasing here....that's one of the things I'm getting at.....I don't play much Limit HE, so perhaps you guys can clarify what the "play" is say, UTG with a hand like AQo...in Limit, do you generally fold, call, or raise?.....

if the reason not to raise AQo UTG is because it's -EV due to the fact that often enough somebody behind you will have a dominating starting hand, then that's one thing....but if the reason not to raise is because on those times when someone does have a dominating hand, it can cost you a lot of money (re: reverse implied odds), then that doesn't really apply here....

at a certain stack size relative to the blinds, doesn't it become correct EV-wise in NL (even more so than limit) to raise any two high-cards in any position and play for top pair?......and if so, what is that stack size?....and also, what is the bottom rung of hands to be able to successfully do that with?....and if we were charting it on a graph, at a certain stack/blind point the trend would reverse (i.e. - compare the EV on the whole of raising AQo UTG with 30xBB's vs. with 300xBB's - quite a difference I assume, so at what xBB does that "change-over" start occurring?)......

sorry about the confusing nature of my questions, I wasn't quite sober when I posted the original thread and now I'm trying to decipher where my train of thought was going....