(LC) No Limit vs. Limit. Which makes you more moeny?

[IbrakeFORrivers]

Which makes you consistently more money?

FOr me, it's NL. It's sort of like driving stick-shift compared to automatic shift. At times i can drive out chasers, at other times, the varying bet amounts allows me complete control.

Overall, I've won more at NL.

However, I am curious about playing Limit at Higher levels.

Esp. since the bonuses. The lower limit NL games just don't cut it to cash in those bonuses.

.....?

[Marquis]

NL is for squares.

[GrunchCan]

[ QUOTE ]
NL is for squares.

[/ QUOTE ]

hahaha

This post was cross-posted in SSNL, too. Its funny how the responses in the SSNL forum are usually like, "limit sucks" and the responses here would be like (I expect) "no-limit sucks".

Edit: oh, to answer the question. My BB/100 is signifigantly higher in NL than in Limit. Moreover, a BB/100 that is considered excellent in Limit (say 3.5-4) is actually very low in NL. Then again, the BB is typically bigger in limit than NL.

So where do I make more dollars? Limit, for now. But I'm still developing as a NL player, only playing the 100 max games so far.

[dethgrind]

[ QUOTE ]
Moreover, a BB/100 that is considered excellent in Limit (say 3.5-4) is actually very low in NL.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting. In general, do people play the same number of tables at once in NL as limit? My guess is that you'd have to play fewer tables at no limit.

[Marquis]

I think if you are incredibly tight, patient, and careful, a good limit player can make more playing NL without really being any good at NL. I tried to prove that but I got incredibly bored in the process.

Edit: I'm talking 25NL vs. .5/1 limit on Party.

[Saint_D]

[ QUOTE ]
Which makes you consistently more money?

FOr me, it's NL. It's sort of like driving stick-shift compared to automatic shift. At times i can drive out chasers, at other times, the varying bet amounts allows me complete control.

Overall, I've won more at NL.

However, I am curious about playing Limit at Higher levels.

Esp. since the bonuses. The lower limit NL games just don't cut it to cash in those bonuses.

.....?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the classic poker answer applies, "It depends." You should probably specialize in whatever game interests you most. I enjoy NL, but Limit endlessly fascinates me.

I have poured a ton of time and effort into my limit game. So for me, limit is easily the best answer.

YMMV.

-D

[GrunchCan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Moreover, a BB/100 that is considered excellent in Limit (say 3.5-4) is actually very low in NL.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting. In general, do people play the same number of tables at once in NL as limit? My guess is that you'd have to play fewer tables at no limit.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know, and I'm probably not a good person to ask, b/c I never usually play more than 2 tables at once anyway. Currently I'm 1-tabling the 100's.

[jrz1972]

I don't play much NL, but my BB/100 in NL is way, way larger than my limit win rate.

The reason I don't like NL is because I don't like the prospect of losing gobs of money on one hand. I understand that limit actually has a higher variance than NL, but NL just feels a lot riskier on a hand-to-hand basis, and I am risk averse. But small-stakes NL is insanely profitable if you play competently.

[droolie]

You forgot to mention all the pussy we limit players get.

[Roadstar]

Given the recent poker boom, I suspect you can make more money at NL (small stakes) as fishes pay much more for their mistakes. Longer term however, limit is probably where you could make more money. In NL, fish/bad players bust out quicker and action will likely dry up quicker. Afterall, how many pot sized bets can you call to hit a miracle card?

With a better balance of luck and skill, limit should maintain a healthier pool of weaker players.

.. dunno when exactly do we get to the "long run" stage tho [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]