Why Do Most People on 2 + 2 play Limit...?

[scotnt73]

i think nl skills come from knowing how to win at limit. ive just recently ventured into the low limit no limit tables and they are a piece of cake. i feel this comes from me becoming a winning limit player first. im not saying this is ALWAYS true but in most cases it is.

[EVIL]

It took several years until the online sites began to spread NL, to the best of my knowledge.

[RydenStoompala]

For me they are different games, almost unrelated. Limit gives me many more games to choose from. I am not a pro so I can take a reasonable bankroll to Vegas and make money without suffering gigantic bankroll swings...playing against some of the savviest players in the game. It's like loving golf and being allowed to play a few holes with Tiger now and then. I can play for extended periods of time on cruise control, enjoying it strictly as a social passtime without fear of a big stack suddenly smacking around everyone at the table. There is much more information available on limit than no limit, so I can improve by association with many types of players and by reading the nearly endless supply of material on limit games. Having said all that I do play live no limit games on occassion and I loved it, but for a couple of hours at most. At a limit game, two hours is a warm up.

[harboral]

I don't know why more people play limit than NL - but the number of games available of limit would indicate that this is very true. In my case, I play about 80% limit and the rest NL because I have spent most of my life playing limit and it is "comfortable".

As far as the swings in bankroll, NL is actually a steadier run than Limit. I can easily go up or down 25BB on each of two $3/6 or $5/10 games I am playing (or $150 - $250) but will only buy-in $100 if I play two $50 buy-in tables at Party/Empire and expect to earn close to the same amount in $ per hour. If I tap-out in both games @ $3/6 I would be down $300 (I buy in for $150 on each), but would only be down $100 in the NL............

[webiggy]

You might try posting this in the zoo. Lorinda is an NL player

[cepstrum]

Hi SirArthur -

Others will disagree with my reasoning, but limit tends to be the dominant game precisely because the advantage that skilled players enjoy is less than what it is in no-limit. In other words, unskilled players can almost never have a winning night at no-limit, and they eventually - sometimes quickly - get tired of getting killed all the time. So they quit. At limit, they can make some nice wins from time to time, convince themselves that they are good, and keep playing and losing over time. Put another way, no-limit tends to kill the goose.

Now, with the recent poker explosion, it seems like there's a limitless supply of geese and we needn't worry about it. But I suspect that no-limit games will dry up again just like they have in the past, though the online sites' limted buyins may slow that down. And whether or not the nl games dry up, there will always be good limit games.

Btw, this phenomenon also plays out in 7-card stud, with the progressive ante structure serving to handicap the best players at the high limits. The huge antes at big stud games diminish the skill gap between experts and fish, and that is exactly what allows these games to survive over time.

Finally, I think the reason you see more strategy posts on limit is simply that there are more cases where there is a real question on what the best play is - for example, when you flop a strong but vulnerable hand in a big pot. In no-limit, this is a very easy spot. You simply bet so much that your opponent is making a terrible mistake by calling. In limit, you don't have this option, so you may have to resort to some fairly esoteric strategies to protect your hand. If you read the mid-stakes board, quite a few posts are related to this topic.

Good luck

cepstrum

[Rolf Slotboom]

[ QUOTE ]
Finally, I think the reason you see more strategy posts on limit is simply that there are more cases where there is a real question on what the best play is - for example, when you flop a strong but vulnerable hand in a big pot. In no-limit, this is a very easy spot. You simply bet so much that your opponent is making a terrible mistake by calling.


[/ QUOTE ] .

Hi Cepstrum,

While your analysis on the higher skill level / tendency to die out of no-limit games seems fairly accurate (and in line with the prominent 2+2 writers), I disagree with the comment of how "very easy" no-limit poker would be. What you say is simply not true. The betting pattern you suggest is NOT the way to maximize your edge, which should be the core of any man's game - whether it's limit or no limit. There is much more to no limit than "simply betting so much that your opponent is making a terrible mistake by calling"; in fact, there is probably not a single good no-limit player who will think along these lines.

Rolf Slotboom
www.acespeaks.cjb.net

[aces_full]

Thanks to the internet offerings of micro-limit and max buy-in NL games, I'm becoming a convert. I'm getting pretty frustrated with Paradise .5/1 limit. In live games up to 4/8 I'm a consistent winner, yet I can't beat Paradise .5/1. Lately I've been getting frustrated with the limit grind. I have started playing multiple tables of micro-NL and I'm killing the game. If I play four tables simultaneously of .01/.02 $2.00 NL, I can make almost what I make from .5/1, and the play at NL is a little more interesting than the rote no fold'em games. What I like about penny NL is the games are populated with fish, but unlike at .5/1 , you can really punish their stupidity. I think micro NL makes them gamble more, because,heck, all-in is only $2. I can push all-in with the nuts, and it's not uncommon to get two or three callers who caught any piece of the board. My best session ever, I ran my $2 buy-in on one table up to $16 in the course of two hours.

The other thing about micro limit NL is that it allows me to outplay my opponents. When I'm winning, I love to play what I call "gambling hands"- limit players refrer to these hands as crap. I look for tables with weak pre-flop play so I can sneak in with Axs, Kxs, low suited connectors, and gap cards. I'll even call three bets cold with these cards, knowing I will dump them if I miss, and bust someone if I hit with them. In micro NL, the equity of these small hands goes through the roof. Time and time again I can get TP/Tk all in against my baby straight or full house built of garbage because no one ever suspects the small cards. I will even chase backdoor and gutshot draws if my opponent doesn't bet heavy enough. I tend to play these games much looser, and I kill them. If I played these hands at .5/1 I would be broke.

In limit, I don't think these types of hands have very much EV at all (I would never dream of limping from UTG with 78s in a limit game) due to the fixed amount of money you can win if you hit with it, the odds are just not there, but in NL where if you flop a monster, you can win 200X or more than your initial bet.

[cepstrum]

Hi Rolf -

Note that I did not say that no-limit is "very easy."

I also did not say that betting so much that your opponents cannot call is correct no-limit strategy in the general case. It obviously isn't.

I was referring to the fact that it is undeniably easier to manipulate the size of the pot to force errors in no-limit than limit. And that the inability to manipulate in limit causes lots of strategic headaches, particularly in big pots. Thus lots of posts in our mid-stakes board.

Thanks for the reply

cepstrum

[SirArthur]

Due to many excellent replies in this thread, It is now much easier for me to see why Limit players are so prevelant.

Thanks to all who replied...