| Author |
Message |
|
Posted: Wed, 28 Sep 2005, 4:14am Post subject: How profitable is limit? |
|
|
Two Pair
Joined: 12 Aug 2005
Posts: 45
WPP: 86
|
|
I generally tend to play no limit to a reasonable profit but ive been thinking of switching over to limit hold em.
My maths is fairly strong and i think im good at working out odds.
How profitable is it overall? Hows the variance compared to NL?
How easy is the transition?
Ive been giving it a go on the micro-stakes and ive been pretty much breaking even (only around 2000 hands).
Ive been steadily building my bankroll on $10 NL tables and i'm at the point now i can switch up to $25 or maybe move onto the .50/1 limit tables.
comments welcomed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 28 Sep 2005, 5:38am Post subject: |
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 3554
WPP: 78
Location: emo-kid
|
|
yes, limit can be profitable. yes, limit has more variance. it suits many people better than NL ring/tourney. the only way to find out if you are one of these people is to go and play like you already are.
typical "good" winrates are 2BB/100...whereas if you have 3BB/100 generally you are killing the current level and you should move up. and this pattern keeps going on. standard deviation is usually around 12-18BB depending on shorthanded vs full, aggressive vs passive.
i'd recommend you pick up WLLH or SSH to get a head start. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 28 Sep 2005, 2:45pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 25 Apr 2005
Posts: 1109
WPP: 96
Location: Kokkedal, Denmark
|
|
| What book should one pick up when wanting to learn limit? WLLHE or SSH? What are the differences? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 28 Sep 2005, 2:47pm Post subject: |
|
|
Royal Flush
Joined: 12 Dec 2003
Posts: 16623
WPP: 84
Location: Blowing Zook off his hand with Seven Deuce
|
|
| Limit always has been much more profitable for me. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 28 Sep 2005, 3:33pm Post subject: |
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 3554
WPP: 78
Location: emo-kid
|
|
| Robert wrote: | | What book should one pick up when wanting to learn limit? WLLHE or SSH? What are the differences? |
WLLH gives you the foundations to beat the low limits. SSH gives you the tools to crush low limits. (generally it's recommended to read WLLH, get experience, and then read SSH)
other limit books i've read is HEFAP and Weighing the Odds (King Yao).
HEFAP gives you thought processes to tackle on higher limits against thinking opponents. WTO is probably the most mathematically intense limit book ever written. |
Last edited by |~|ypermegachi on Wed, 28 Sep 2005, 3:34pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 28 Sep 2005, 3:34pm Post subject: |
|
|
Where's the AI button!?
Joined: 12 Jul 2004
Posts: 4545
WPP: 87
Location: TagFish
|
|
| Fnord wrote: | | Limit always has been much more profitable for me. |
Yeah, but the big money is in the MTTs... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 28 Sep 2005, 3:47pm Post subject: |
|
|
Royal Flush
Joined: 12 Dec 2003
Posts: 16623
WPP: 84
Location: Blowing Zook off his hand with Seven Deuce
|
|
| elipsesjeff wrote: |
Yeah, but the big money is in the MTTs... |
...If you have thick roll, play 5 a day and can deal with suck-outs for pots that are for lots of money relative to your roll. Short of that, the luckbox factor is too high for my taste.
Congradulations, you just won over 75% of your coin flips, put a royal suck-out on someone and otherwise played well. Now you're at the final table with:
Soupie
BRSavage
NSXT2
Random Luckbox
LAgg super-luckbox
2 ABC kinda tightish
Random unknown
Payout is top heavy, random seating. Good luck! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 28 Sep 2005, 4:03pm Post subject: |
|
|
Season I
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 2350
WPP: 74
Location: Dallas, TX
|
|
| Fnord wrote: |
Congradulations, you just won over 75% of your coin flips, put a royal suck-out on someone and otherwise played well. Now you're at the final table with:
Soupie
BRSavage
NSXT2
Random Luckbox
LAgg super-luckbox
2 ABC kinda tightish
Random unknown
Payout is top heavy, random seating. Good luck! |
POTD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 28 Sep 2005, 7:26pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 12 Dec 2004
Posts: 1296
WPP: 54
|
|
| Fnord wrote: | | elipsesjeff wrote: |
Yeah, but the big money is in the MTTs... |
...If you have thick roll, play 5 a day and can deal with suck-outs for pots that are for lots of money relative to your roll. Short of that, the luckbox factor is too high for my taste.
Congradulations, you just won over 75% of your coin flips, put a royal suck-out on someone and otherwise played well. Now you're at the final table with:
Soupie
BRSavage
NSXT2
Random Luckbox
LAgg super-luckbox
2 ABC kinda tightish
Random unknown
Payout is top heavy, random seating. Good luck! | beats the lottery  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 28 Sep 2005, 8:22pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 25 Jan 2005
Posts: 1452
WPP: 75
Location: im so asian
|
|
| jmontis wrote: | | Fnord wrote: | | elipsesjeff wrote: |
Yeah, but the big money is in the MTTs... |
...If you have thick roll, play 5 a day and can deal with suck-outs for pots that are for lots of money relative to your roll. Short of that, the luckbox factor is too high for my taste.
Congradulations, you just won over 75% of your coin flips, put a royal suck-out on someone and otherwise played well. Now you're at the final table with:
Soupie
BRSavage
NSXT2
Random Luckbox
LAgg super-luckbox
2 ABC kinda tightish
Random unknown
Payout is top heavy, random seating. Good luck! | beats the lottery |
I love play poka, whether it be limit or nl or mtts, its all good and they are all profitable. Some like one better than the other, and soem are more vocal about it, cough fnord......cough |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 28 Sep 2005, 8:25pm Post subject: |
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 3554
WPP: 78
Location: emo-kid
|
|
| trikflow77 wrote: |
I love play poka, whether it be limit or nl or mtts, its all good and they are all profitable. Some like one better than the other, and soem are more vocal about it, cough fnord......cough |
check the Fnord's history of posts. he used to be hardcore NL. actually...he's probably one of the first of the NL->limit converts on FTR. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 28 Sep 2005, 8:28pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 25 Jan 2005
Posts: 1452
WPP: 75
Location: im so asian
|
|
| hypermegachi wrote: | | trikflow77 wrote: |
I love play poka, whether it be limit or nl or mtts, its all good and they are all profitable. Some like one better than the other, and soem are more vocal about it, cough fnord......cough |
check the Fnord's history of posts. he used to be hardcore NL. actually...he's probably one of the first of the NL->limit converts on FTR. |
Thanks, i didnt know that.......  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 29 Sep 2005, 8:32am Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 25 Apr 2005
Posts: 1109
WPP: 96
Location: Kokkedal, Denmark
|
|
| hypermegachi wrote: | | Robert wrote: | | What book should one pick up when wanting to learn limit? WLLHE or SSH? What are the differences? |
WLLH gives you the foundations to beat the low limits. SSH gives you the tools to crush low limits. (generally it's recommended to read WLLH, get experience, and then read SSH)
other limit books i've read is HEFAP and Weighing the Odds (King Yao).
HEFAP gives you thought processes to tackle on higher limits against thinking opponents. WTO is probably the most mathematically intense limit book ever written. |
What do you consider low limits in this case? And what limit would be optimal to start with when you are a beginning limit player (former NL player) who have just read WLLH (aside from BR considerations)? I ask this because I'm a dedicated NL player who considers converting his ring game from NL to limit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 29 Sep 2005, 10:24am Post subject: |
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 3554
WPP: 78
Location: emo-kid
|
|
| Robert wrote: |
What do you consider low limits in this case? And what limit would be optimal to start with when you are a beginning limit player (former NL player) who have just read WLLH (aside from BR considerations)? I ask this because I'm a dedicated NL player who considers converting his ring game from NL to limit |
party's games up to 2/4. 3/6 is when you need table selection but still have the strategies apply. anything above that is exploiting different kind of leaks not mentioned in SSH or WLLH. stick with the 300BB rule and go from there. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 29 Sep 2005, 2:06pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 25 Apr 2005
Posts: 1109
WPP: 96
Location: Kokkedal, Denmark
|
|
| hypermegachi wrote: | | Robert wrote: |
What do you consider low limits in this case? And what limit would be optimal to start with when you are a beginning limit player (former NL player) who have just read WLLH (aside from BR considerations)? I ask this because I'm a dedicated NL player who considers converting his ring game from NL to limit |
party's games up to 2/4. 3/6 is when you need table selection but still have the strategies apply. anything above that is exploiting different kind of leaks not mentioned in SSH or WLLH. stick with the 300BB rule and go from there. |
So basicly I just read WLLH, go and deposit $300 at a party skin and start to play 0.25/0.5, and just play by the book, and then go read SSH when I feel I have gained some fundamental experience by playing limit following the strategy laid out in WLLH, right?
When do I choose to move up (regarding limits below 3/6)) ? Should I just follow the 300bb rule and move up to the next level when I have 300bb for that level, or should I rather play 10k hands and then move up if I'm running around 1BB/hour or better? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 29 Sep 2005, 4:14pm Post subject: |
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 3554
WPP: 78
Location: emo-kid
|
|
btw, for limit BB is big bet, not big blind...so $300 will roll you for 0.5/1
forcing yourself to play 10k isn't a bad idea, as it will build discipline and allow you to see through some swings of limit
the way i see it, as long as it's within your bankroll and you're totally comfortable you should play at the highest limit that satisfies both. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 29 Sep 2005, 7:23pm Post subject: |
|
|
Where's the AI button!?
Joined: 12 Jul 2004
Posts: 4545
WPP: 87
Location: TagFish
|
|
| Fnord wrote: | | elipsesjeff wrote: |
Yeah, but the big money is in the MTTs... |
...If you have thick roll, play 5 a day and can deal with suck-outs for pots that are for lots of money relative to your roll. Short of that, the luckbox factor is too high for my taste.
Congradulations, you just won over 75% of your coin flips, put a royal suck-out on someone and otherwise played well. Now you're at the final table with:
Soupie
BRSavage
NSXT2
Random Luckbox
LAgg super-luckbox
2 ABC kinda tightish
Random unknown
Payout is top heavy, random seating. Good luck! |
Or, you can quad table playing 2k hands a day just beating the rake waiting for your aces to hold up so you can net, if you're lucky 2 bb/100. The person with the bankroll for 3/6 LHE can play the $10 R+A everynight as well as all the other freezeouts and such. The ROI is higher, the hourly rate is higher, and its not like the players above are so god like of poker that they can't be beaten. When, in fact, even one final table will double your Bankroll.
Who cares about the luckbox factor when the money is so much greater. Its like the whole many small pots or one large pot argument....If the large pot outweights the small pots then why wouldn't you go for the big one?
Also, the future of the game looks to be heading that way, how else can you explain Stars having such a large turnout EVERY night for their rebuy? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 29 Sep 2005, 7:32pm Post subject: |
|
|
Royal Flush
Joined: 12 Dec 2003
Posts: 16623
WPP: 84
Location: Blowing Zook off his hand with Seven Deuce
|
|
| elipsesjeff wrote: | | The ROI is higher, the hourly rate is higher |
The hourly rate problem is interesting and I'm not certain it is higher. If it wasn't for the $%*&^ silly rake ring games would be far more profitable. The rake the MTT grinders are paying is silly. It's not uncommon for them to be playing rake-free or even in a juiced pool as many poker sites see MTTs as a promotional tool. The low rake and masses of lottery-mentality players is really feeding the MTT gravy train.
The biggest issue I have is that at 9PM or 1AM at night I just can't fire up rebuy madness, pick a seat and beat-up on the fishies for an hour or two. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 29 Sep 2005, 8:02pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 12 Dec 2004
Posts: 1296
WPP: 54
|
|
| Rebuys and guarantees are the MTTs to play. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 30 Sep 2005, 8:50am Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 25 Apr 2005
Posts: 1109
WPP: 96
Location: Kokkedal, Denmark
|
|
| hypermegachi wrote: | btw, for limit BB is big bet, not big blind...so $300 will roll you for 0.5/1
forcing yourself to play 10k isn't a bad idea, as it will build discipline and allow you to see through some swings of limit
the way i see it, as long as it's within your bankroll and you're totally comfortable you should play at the highest limit that satisfies both. | '
Ok, I will get myself WLLH, read it, and try out 0.5/1 with a $300 roll at party then - if I like it, I'm gonna switch my ring game entirely to limit.
Thx for all the advice hyper, I really appreciate it! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 30 Sep 2005, 4:24pm Post subject: |
|
|
Two Pair
Joined: 12 Aug 2005
Posts: 45
WPP: 86
|
|
I just picked up a copy of Texas Hold em for advanced players (Sklansky) cause i found a cheap copy
This a good book? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 30 Sep 2005, 4:42pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Posts: 633
WPP: 174
Location: Location: Location
|
|
| nomore wrote: | | Texas Hold em for advanced players |
aka HEFAP
I hear it's good for $5/$10 and up, but SSH is more applicable to lower limits. Reading it won't hurt you though, as long as you understand it was meant for higher limits against better players. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 30 Sep 2005, 5:25pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 1184
WPP: 56
|
|
| It's good... for playing against non-fishy players |
|
|
|
|
| < |
