Limit vs. No Limit

[Mano]

I have been playing at an online site and I have been playing in $1/$2, $2/$4 and $3/$6 limit games as well as .25/.50 $50 max buyin and .50/$1 $100 max buyin NL games.

I was wondering what level of limit games you would expect the NL games to be comparable to as far as bankroll requirements, hourly rate and variance. It seems to me that the NL games, especially the smaller one, actually require less bankroll, and I have experienced less variance, than some of these limit games. I have not really played enough to make any statistically meaningfull conclusions, so I thought I would see what you guys think. Thanks.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

I think you hit the nail on the head. In the no limit games, the blinds are small, so you aren't forced to play that many hands if you don't want to. Also, if you play no limit well, you won't get busted very often. Say you do get busted and lose your whole $50. Well it's easy to lose that much playing 2-4 and 3-6 anyway. So as long as you play NL well, you should be fine even with a bankroll that's around the same as that needed for 2-4.

al

[Ray Zee]

in a very general sense all poker games are just a fight over the antes or blinds. so they should be relatively comparable to the blind structure. no limit pots gets bigger because most players over play their hands. it is more of a function of the kind of people in the game than the blinds really. but in no limit if they are loose and aggressive the pots can take off out of wack.

[JackAce]

The O.25/0.5 NL game might require less of a br than the 3/6 fixed limit one but hardly less than the 1/2 one I think.

Personally I prefer potlimit games. Makes me just as much money as NL but with fewer swings.