|
Gatlin Dan
|
03-24-2005, 02:18 AM
Post subject: Fnord, can you fill me in...
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Wild Bill's Backyard
Posts: 504
|
|
I was reading a post where you were sitting a NL table with Triptanes. You mentioned in there that you used to play NL.
What were the facors that enfluenced you to switch to playing Limit?
I am curious and thought your insight might be valuable to some of the newer members who have been caught up in the NL rage they see on TV.
Maybe this thread should be in a forum where newer NL players would be more likely to see it.
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
lolzzz_321
|
|
NO YOU
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: My ice is polarized
Posts: 2,797
|
|
He's better at pushing small edges hard.
.
|
|
|
|
Demiparadigm
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Party 6 max
Posts: 1,602
|
|
Limit, and to a greater extent, Pot limit, rewards post flop play more than no limit.
Being able to maximize your wins and minimize your losses is key.
A lot of profitable No limit players are what Daniel Negreanu calls "Move In Specialists"
Just pushing all in with a big edge and hoping to win.
(A lot of unprofitable No limit players are ones that push all in with a small edge. This has the effect of causing only hands that are better than yours to call)
Limit requires more analytical skill, and if you have that skill, can be far more profitable than a No Limit game with the same blind structure.
Since it is possible to make as much or more per hour in a limit game, AND it requires a smaller bankroll, since you will have a smaller standard deviation, Limit is very attractive to many professional poker players. (grinders)
No Limit is a lot more attractive to (gamblers).
|
|
To win in poker you only need to be one step ahead of your opponents. Two steps may be detrimental.
|
|
Fnord
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: I'll Do You Like A Truck
Posts: 19,333
|
|
Bad players with lots of money play limit. I also happen to be pretty good at it (although given the last week, one might wonder...)
|
|
|
|
Gatlin Dan
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Wild Bill's Backyard
Posts: 504
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Demiparadigm
Limit, and to a greater extent, Pot limit, rewards post flop play more than no limit.
Being able to maximize your wins and minimize your losses is key.
A lot of profitable No limit players are what Daniel Negreanu calls "Move In Specialists"
Just pushing all in with a big edge and hoping to win.
(A lot of unprofitable No limit players are ones that push all in with a small edge. This has the effect of causing only hands that are better than yours to call)
Limit requires more analytical skill, and if you have that skill, can be far more profitable than a No Limit game with the same blind structure.
Since it is possible to make as much or more per hour in a limit game, AND it requires a smaller bankroll, since you will have a smaller standard deviation, Limit is very attractive to many professional poker players. (grinders)
No Limit is a lot more attractive to (gamblers). |
I'm aware of the differences between the games, I was just wondering why Fnord chose to play limit, if there were certain things that he noticed or happened to him throughout his poker ventures that made him lean toward playing limit.
|
|
|
|
|~|ypermegachi
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: emo-kid
Posts: 3,580
|
|
it's also very hard (probably impossible) to multitable many tables of NL, but it's been done with limit already (heck there was a video of someone playing 20 tables at 2+2)
|
|
|
|
Chicago_Kid
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: People let me tell you about my best friends...
Posts: 1,132
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Demiparadigm
Limit, and to a greater extent, Pot limit, rewards post flop play more than no limit. Being able to maximize your wins and minimize your losses is key.
|
I would have to agree with this rationale.
I actually started with NL, due to my friend's home game structure. When I started in these games, I got worked over big and bad. Then, I gradually improved, but not to the level I desired. I switched to limit because I wanted more analytics that I couldn't really find in NL, because I sensed I had leaks in my game.
Funny thing is that since my studies in limit have advanced, my NL game has improved significantly. Perhaps this is due to this improvement in post-flop play.
NL post-flop play is nebulous relative to limit, so I think it's tough to plug leaks if you don't have sound fundamentals that you can hone in limit.
|
|
"Been gone so long, forgot how to poker"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hypermegachi
it's also very hard (probably impossible) to multitable many tables of NL, but it's been done with limit already (heck there was a video of someone playing 20 tables at 2+2)
|
Holy Moley! Is there a link to this video available?
|
|
|
|
|~|ypermegachi
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: emo-kid
Posts: 3,580
|
|
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...=&fpart=1&vc=1
|
|
|
|
mimmons775
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 92
|
|
i couldnt get the video link to work
|
|
"I guess if there wasnt luck involved id win everyone."
|
|
Grand_MasterB
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 466
|
|
neither could i but i would love to see this
|
|
|
|
Rondavu
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,053
|
|
INTUITIVE-THINKERS: "THE ANALYST" (Limit Hold-Em)
NTs are typically imaginative and analytical, making their decisions with the head more than with the heart. They characteristically value intelligence, competence and formal education, they are continually filling with knowledge and expertise.
They are idea-oriented, and they like theory. They analyze everything.
Their ranks include many academicians and professionals in analytical, technical, investigative or scientific fields, and if they should choose a different career path, there is always a bit of the scientist in the way they approach whatever they do.
They tend to lecture as a natural communication style, and they are critical, more than appreciative.
INTUITIVE-FEELERS: "THE EMPATHIST" (No Limit)
They prefer decisions made by the heart. As a group, they share similar problems, such as tending to make decisions on a personal basis which may run contrary to logic, and they have a tendency to ignore facts and details.
Just my take
|
|
It's not what's inside that counts. Have you seen what's inside?
Internal organs. And they're getting uglier by the minute.
|
|
Chicago_Kid
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: People let me tell you about my best friends...
Posts: 1,132
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rondavu
INTUITIVE-THINKERS: "THE ANALYST" (Limit Hold-Em)
INTUITIVE-FEELERS: "THE EMPATHIST" (No Limit)
|
predominantly, I would agree. I would qualify that talented NL players have BOTH thinker and feeler skills, while limit players can get by without as much feeler. But, NL players sit at different points on the thinker-feeler spectrum.
I did a Jung personality test and came up 88% thinker. Maybe that's why I am liking limit so much.
|
|
"Been gone so long, forgot how to poker"
|
|
gutshot
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: lemonade was a popular drink and it still is
Posts: 608
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mimmons775
i couldnt get the video link to work
|
Dig deeper in the thread. It was mirrored in several places.
|
|
-jay
"i think the biggest leak in my game is using 2nd level thinking against players who can't think on the first level." -Renton
|
|
Chicago_Kid
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: People let me tell you about my best friends...
Posts: 1,132
|
|
Found it on page 2 of the thread...pretty amazing, I have trouble with 6!
|
|
"Been gone so long, forgot how to poker"
|
|
wobbler
|
|
Straight
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 134
|
|
Demiparadigm
Quote:
|
Limit requires more analytical skill, and if you have that skill, can be far more profitable than a No Limit game with the same blind structure.
|
 I thought the consensus was that NL rewards skill more than Limit because it allows good players to force bad players to make bigger mistakes. I think even Sklasky said so in TOP.
Besides, NL has larger pot sizes at the same level of blinds,
Quote:
|
[limit]...requires a smaller bankroll, since you will have a smaller standard deviation
|
Doesn't limit require a larger BR because drawing is cheap, resulting in greater swings?
----
Limit tables could be more profitable if they have more fish with lots of money, though. Bad players might prefer the (false) "safety" of betting limits.
|
|
|
|
Gatlin Dan
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Wild Bill's Backyard
Posts: 504
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wobbler
Demiparadigm
Quote:
|
Limit requires more analytical skill, and if you have that skill, can be far more profitable than a No Limit game with the same blind structure.
|
I thought the consensus was that NL rewards skill more than Limit because it allows good players to force bad players to make bigger mistakes. I think even Sklasky said so in TOP.
Besides, NL has larger pot sizes at the same level of blinds,
Quote:
|
[limit]...requires a smaller bankroll, since you will have a smaller standard deviation
|
Doesn't limit require a larger BR because drawing is cheap, resulting in greater swings?
----
Limit tables could be more profitable if they have more fish with lots of money, though. Bad players might prefer the (false) "safety" of betting limits. |
Question #1. I have not read TOP, but this doesn't sounds like something Sklansky would say. Being a limit specialist, it's really tough to see him saying this, but stranger things have happened.
Question#2. According to 'rilla br management sticky (the last time I read it) he suggests that limit requires the bigger bankroll, but he may have revised his suggestions. I read he had experienced a huge -swing and may have changed his recommendations some.
|
|
|
|
cassette
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 92
|
|
I think that the fact that multi-tabling is so much easier in Limit that this alone will reduce your bankroll variance.
|
|
|
|
|~|ypermegachi
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: emo-kid
Posts: 3,580
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cassette
I think that the fact that multi-tabling is so much easier in Limit that this alone will reduce your bankroll variance.
|
playing more tables doesn't change your variance. it just evens out faster.
|
|
|
|
Rondavu
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,053
|
|
Personally, no limit ring games bore the hell out of me. That's probably because I'm retarded, or because I'm just on a limit hold em bender. Maybe soon I'll catch the no limit bug again.
I just make a crap ton of money pushing the small edged in limit. Prepare yourself for gratuitous earnings quote...
I made 700 bucks this weekend playing limit exclusively at 2/4 and 3/6 tables.
|
|
It's not what's inside that counts. Have you seen what's inside?
Internal organs. And they're getting uglier by the minute.
|
|
cassette
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 92
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hypermegachi
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cassette
I think that the fact that multi-tabling is so much easier in Limit that this alone will reduce your bankroll variance.
|
playing more tables doesn't change your variance. it just evens out faster. |
um.... same thing?
|
|
|
|
|~|ypermegachi
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: emo-kid
Posts: 3,580
|
|
no, if your standard deviation is 15BB/100 it doesn't matter if you play 1 table or 20 tables...if you play the same way it stays at 15BB/100.
playing 15 tables would not lower that to 1BB/100 standard deviation.
|
|
|
|
Chicago_Kid
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: People let me tell you about my best friends...
Posts: 1,132
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hypermegachi
no, if your standard deviation is 15BB/100 it doesn't matter if you play 1 table or 20 tables...if you play the same way it stays at 15BB/100.
playing 15 tables would not lower that to 1BB/100 standard deviation.
|
True. I think the assumption is that IF you play a +EV game, MT'ing will allow you to see an upward trend in a shorter time. The swings will still be there, but rather than happening over several days/weeks (e.g., B&M), you will see them over several hours/days (online MT).
I think another assumption many MT'ers make is that you can play more hands--and only play premium ones--so you might be able to lower your SD. However, this isn't always the case if you are playing games on the cusp of your skill level.
|
|
"Been gone so long, forgot how to poker"
|
|
cassette
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 92
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hypermegachi
no, if your standard deviation is 15BB/100 it doesn't matter if you play 1 table or 20 tables...if you play the same way it stays at 15BB/100.
playing 15 tables would not lower that to 1BB/100 standard deviation.
|
Wouldn't you expect a lower variance over a large number of hands than over a small number of hands? By multitabling, you essentially play 2x the amount of hands which would seem to reduce your variance.
I guess what i mean is I would expect something like this:
Multitabling: ex/ +5, -5, +10, -5, +10, -5, +10...
Single Table: ex/ +10, -10, +20, -10, +20, -10,...
This is the same ultimate variance, but with less "varience" on each session.
Maybe I'm getting my terms mixed up.
*edit*
I think what I mean is that you would have the same varience with smaller swings....
|
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska
05-26-2012, 03:08 PM Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
Linear Mode
