Skill in Limit vs NL

[tizim]

I read in a recent post that Mason Malmuth wrote in his Poker Essays or something that while skilled NL players have greater edges over their opponents, it takes more skill to become an expert limit player.

I've always thought that NL takes more skill, since there are more options in it with different bet sizes. Anyone care to elaborate?

[Mens Rea]

I don't really play that much limit anymore, but my comment would be that it takes a different type of skill for each game. Limit, in my opinion, requires mainly mathmatical skill, whereas no-limit requires more intuitive skill. I can understand why people would say that it is tougher to become an expert at limit. It is much more difficult for to be a "natural" limit player, while some personality types tend to give some new players an edge at no-limit, at least for a while.

[ianlippert]

I'm mostly a limit player, while I play NL casually with friends I wont sit down and play 6 hours straight of NL. I just reread super system, and I think the thing that seperates limit from NL is the implied odds you get in NL. If you play a NL style as suggested by brunson, NL is much more about playing your opponents stack whereas limit is more about playing the pot. Pot odds are much more important in limit (hence the more mathematical nature). Theres an example in super system where brunson called a raise and caller with 54s, 'got lucky', and busted both guys out. This is a play you would never make in limit, but because the raise was a small percentage of his stack a gamble could pay off big time if his opponents were willing to go all in.

I think the main thing about NL is that it isnt a game that is supposed to be played by bad players, at short stacked low limit tables. Its a high stakes game thats meant to be played by professionals. I find limit is still interesting at the lower limits, where NL is just wait around for a good hand and get paid off. I'd love to eventually play high stakes NL.

[OrangeKing]

I could probably turn a new player into a marginal winner at low-buyin (say - a $1/$2 $100 cap game in a B&M) NL in a couple hours - there's no way I could do that in limit. It's a lot harder to press your edges, use deception, or protect your hands in limit; these skills take a long time to learn and master.

Beyond just being a mediocre winner though, NL isn't easy either. Becoming an expert in either game is very hard.

[Alex/Mugaaz]

By definition NL is a harder game than limit, there is no debate.

That doesn't mean limit games are easier to beat. In fact I think the opposite is true. There are many more good limit players than NL players. Not to mention that most people who play poker online becuase they saw it on TV play at the NL tables.

[thomastem]

[ QUOTE ]
I just reread super system, and I think the thing that seperates limit from NL is the implied odds you get in NL.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree 100%

[fimbulwinter]

there are more mistakes to be made in NL and those mistakes are more costly. real NL requires more innate intelligence, experience and intuition to truly "beat". BS capped buyin games with small stacks are much easier than limit for the simple fact that you don't play the hard streets (turn/river) like you do in real, deep stacked NL.

That said, limit takes the patience of a saint and a good amount of mathmatical horsepower. also, limit is much kinder to the fishes and so is probably a "better" game long term for both the fish and the sharks.

fim

[Guruman]

[ QUOTE ]
By definition NL is a harder game than limit, there is no debate.

That doesn't mean limit games are easier to beat. In fact I think the opposite is true.

[/ QUOTE ] I think you're contradicting yourself there. If game A is harder to beat than game B, then the game B cannot be harder to beat than game A. I can draw you a chart. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

That said, I agree 100% with Malmuth's thought that good NL players have greater edges over their opponents, and that it takes more skill to become an expert limit player.

The reason is that non-thinking NL players can make huge mistakes on any street and it can cost them their whole bankroll.

If in NL: player A is 20% better than player B, then player A is going to be a big favorite to eventually induce one mistake that would cost player B his whole stack. If player B really sucks though, then player A doesn't have to be much of a player himself to be very profitable against this guy.

It is much harder to gain an edge on a player in limit for a few of reasons:

1)you can't always protect a hand on the flop. Sometimes a pot will be built big enough pre-flop that a flop bet will not be enough to protect your hand. If you hold JJ and see a ten high flop on a two-flushed board, you may not be able to protect it. This is never an issue in NL, since you can just bet out about 2/3 of the pot and watch the drawing hands drop like flies.

2)you have to beat more people at once. The VP$IP of a good player in NL is typically lower than that of an equally good limit player. This is because there are some marginal NL hands that are not marginal limit hands from early and middle position. The net result of this is that limit flops tend to have more people involved than comprable NL flops. If you have three people in on the turn in a NL game, then someone is about to lose his stack.

3)hand reading is much more difficult. Because a wider range of hands are playable, and because every bet is the same size, a person's hand isnt as easily read as it is in NL.

4)bluffing is more difficult. Once a pot reaches a certain size, it is more difficult to fold a player out with a pure bluff because you cannot control the odds that they would be drawing to. A NL player can use his chipstack to move people out of pots that they could contend for in a limit game.

5)folding postflop is also more difficult. You only risk calling in limit, and can do things like call down with two pair to see a showdown as cheaply as possible. This move doesn't exist in NL, because someone can push enough to force a re-raise/fold decision.

6)there are more actions per hand than in NL. Every action you make gives away a little bit of information about your hand. To win a big NL pot, you just have to push or call a push with a great hand. One move, turn the cards, scoop the pot. To win a big limit pot, you often have to bet/reraise/call - then bet/call/call - then check/re-raise/cap - then bet/re-raise/call. That's a lot of moves to make, and your opponent(s) have to be making mistakes on quite a few of them in order for this line to be a winner.

[Spaded]

For people like myself who have decently high IQs but hate thinking about math, NL is the way to go because you use more intuition. I hate having to calculate odds every hand to decide and execute my next move. I'd rather just play the game. Eventually I'll have to use more and more math as I move up in limits, but it shouldn't be a problem.

[Aytumious]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
By definition NL is a harder game than limit, there is no debate.

That doesn't mean limit games are easier to beat. In fact I think the opposite is true.

[/ QUOTE ] I think you're contradicting yourself there. If game A is harder to beat than game B, then the game B cannot be harder to beat than game A. I can draw you a chart. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

He didn't contradict himself since in the very next sentence he states that the reason he thinks beating NL games is easier is because that is where most of the current "I watched the WPT I'm a poker god" fish are playing. And I won't draw you a chart.