Limit vs. No Limit

Biggenx · #1 06-26-2005, 05:24 PM

I understand that the long run is shorter for limit, and that No Limit's long run is pretty long.

But is there more money in NL? It seems like there would be, but i've read quit a few posts that seemed to conclude that they are about the same.

Limit may not be quit as exciting, but if the profit is equal to NL, than reduction in up/down swings would seem to make up for it (if your main concern is the money)

any thoughts?

Mariogs379 · #2 06-26-2005, 06:50 PM

the swings in no limit are obviously much greater than in limit. the best no limit player will make far more than the best limit player simply because he can apply the edge he has over his opponents with all his chips instead of simply a big bet on both the turn and river. if you have the feel and reading ability to play NL well, you'll make more money with it but you have to be willing to have more swings than in limit. if you want simply a steady source of income, then i would recommend playing limit.

poker-penguin · #3 06-26-2005, 06:50 PM

There's more money in whichever one you are better at.

jonnyv · #4 06-26-2005, 07:01 PM

I think that both are very profitable and both should be mastered. Game selection is most important whether it is limit or no limit. It really depends on your style of play as to which game is better. There really is no right or wrong answer to this question as its too subjective to answer. I believe most here will tell you to concentrate on limit for now as it will help you in understanding the no limit game. Good luck.

Evan · #5 06-26-2005, 07:10 PM

This post is way off, mostly this part:

[ QUOTE ]
if you want simply a steady source of income, then i would recommend playing limit.

[/ QUOTE ]

sthief09 · #6 06-26-2005, 07:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I understand that the long run is shorter for limit, and that No Limit's long run is pretty long.

[/ QUOTE ]

wrong

sthief09 · #7 06-26-2005, 07:22 PM

ok this is the first post I've ever seen where everything the person wrote was wrong.

Nigel · #8 06-26-2005, 07:25 PM

I was about to say the same thing. The first couple of posters have it totally backwards.

Biggenx · #9 06-26-2005, 07:52 PM

maybe i didn't word that very well.

i'm saying that it takes much longer to see a true BB/100 rate than in limit. right? wrong?

What about the + & -'s of playing shorthand vs. longhand? Does a good SH player make the same or more than a good longhanded player?

Evan · #10 06-26-2005, 08:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
it takes much longer to see a true BB/100 rate than in limit

[/ QUOTE ]
What does this even mean?