Destroying .50/1.00 Limit Table (Fnord)

[Manomanman]

Fnord posted about a month ago the proposition that he could teach anyone how to destoy a .50/1.00 limit table in 24 hours.

I personally believe one can destroy a microlimit table if one is extra/hyper observant of players' tendencies (viz. a limited raise contains less information than an unlimited raise).

My question to Fnord is, is there anything in particular about your strategy that deviates from the Abdul/Izmet/2+2 advice string? (Are there any secrets you have devised deviating from this gameplan?)

I basically see microlimit holdem (fish holdem) as a pot manipulation game (kind of like limit Omaha8, Stud8) where position seems to matter slightly more than it does in fish NL (basically, positional mistakes can be forgiven in NL by horrendous opponent mistakes, whereas in microlimit a single raise in a limped field can horribly wreck a decent hand...perhaps AQo on the button, 5 limpers).

And on the question of skill in limit v. no limit, I definitely think limit requires more skill, HOWEVER, I'd like to tap the issue of SKILL VS. PAYOFF. Simply put, does NL pay a higher skill level more than limit does? (In other words, I believe limit holdem to be a more-forgiving game in the long run to poor players than NL. Perhaps schooling is a phenomenon too powerful for skilled players to overcome?)

P.S. In my mind, I'm envisioning an X and Y axis, where x in the player's skill level (ordinally labeled neophyte = 0, through grand master professional = 8, with 4 being a decent player who has digested a moderate amount of sound strategy) and Y is the player's mean bank roll change in BB/hour units. The graph labeled "Limit" starts at (0,-4), and gets to about (4, 3). So a decent player with a decent strategy can make $3 per hour in baby games with a high level of variance. However, the graph spikes in the upper end and we get (7, 9). The graph labeled "No Limit" starts at (0, -12), and moves to about (4, 12), with (7, infinity) in the upper end.

[Toasty]

I think a good player has less of an edge in limit vs NL. A good player in NL should take the money easier than in a limit game. Bad players don't get punished as much for there mistakes and can chase with incorrect odds for a cheap price.

[Fnord]

My best guess (granted my sample size isn't huge) is that I can beat the Party Limit games at around 2-5BB/100 if the game is sweet enough up to the 2/4 maybe 3/6 level. I just don't have the stomach for the swings 5/10 would bring. In the tougher games (yes, there are tough 2/4 tables) that edge goes away really fast... The big problem there is that the variance is a killer. Even at that win rate I could lose a lot of money over several hours of play. For example, I tried around 1k hands of 1/2 6 max and both AA and KK were money losers (depite this, I still ended up beating the rake by about $20.) Or a better example, I once dropped $50 at the .5/1 game in the span of 1-2 maybe 3 hours.

If you're interested in playing those games though, you really should buy Ed Miller's new 2+2 book. A lot of my strategy is a mix of Miller (via his forum posts), Izmet and Abdul along with my No Limit experience.

[Toasty]

Sounds right on the money Fnord.