Terms & Conditions

Internet Magazine

Non–US new players
Get five 2+2 books


Order Books
Book Translations
Forum Login
 
 
Expand All   Collapse All

 Two Plus Two 
2+2 Magazine Forum
Special Sklansky Forum
2+2 Pokercast
About the Forums

 General Poker Discussion 
Beginners Questions
Books and Publications
Televised Poker
News, Views, and Gossip
Brick and Mortar
Home Poker
Beats, Brags, and Variance
Poker Theory
Poker Legislation

 Coaching/Training 
StoxPoker
DeucesCracked

 German Forums 
Poker Allgemein
Strategie: Holdem NL cash
Strategie: Sonstige
Internet/Online
BBV
Small Talk
German Poker News

 French Forums 
Forum francophone
Strategie
BBV (French)

 Limit Texas Hold'em 
High Stakes Limit
Medium Stakes Limit
Small Stakes Limit
Micro Stakes Limit
Mid-High Short-handed
Small Stakes Shorthanded
Limit––>NL

 PL/NL Texas Hold'em 
High Stakes
Medium Stakes
Small Stakes
Micro Stakes
Small-High Full Ring
Micro Full Ring

 Tournament Poker 
Small Stakes MTT
High Stakes MTT
MTT Community
STT Strategy
Tournament Circuit

 Other Poker 
Omaha/8
Omaha High
Stud
Heads Up Poker
Other Poker Games

 General Gambling 
Probability
Psychology
Sports Betting
Other Gambling Games
Entertainment Betting

 Internet Gambling 
Internet Gambling
Internet Bonuses
Affiliates/RakeBack
Software

 2+2 Communities 
Other Other Topics
The Lounge: Discussion+Review
El Diablo's General Discussion
BBV4Life

 Other Topics 
Golf
Sporting Events
Politics
Business, Finance, and Investing
Travel
Science, Math, and Philosophy
Health and Fitness
Student Life
Puzzles and Other Games
Video Games
Laughs or Links!
Computer Technical Help
Sponsored Support Forums
RakebackNetwork
RakeReduction.com
Other Links
Books
Authors
Abbreviations
Calendar
Order Books
Books by Others
Favorite Links
Feedback
Advertising Information
Home
Posting Hints
Privacy Notice
Forum Archives

The 2+2 Forums

Before using this Forum, please refer to the Terms and Conditions (Last modified: 2/26/2006)

Be sure to read the   Two Plus Two Internet Magazine

This is an archive. The main forums are here

These forums are read only.


 
UBB.threads™ Groupee, Inc.

PL/NL Texas Hold'em >> Small Stakes

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | >> (show all)
Schizo
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 12/19/04
Posts: 2266
Loc: Aimlessly walking around
Limit concepts that are terrible for NL
      #4391307 - 01/09/06 07:48 AM

So I'm thinking about switching over to NL. What are the common concepts that limit players (that aren't idiots) misapply to the NL game?

May be a tough question, but hopefully this will turn into a decent thread.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ChipStorm
Village FR Nit


Reged: 10/11/04
Posts: 2584
Loc: Poker For Dogs
Re: Limit concepts that are terrible for NL [Re: Schizo]
      #4391370 - 01/09/06 08:09 AM

I've only played a little limit, but the hand posts I see here from limit players very frequently display a neglect to price others out of their draws.

Limit players with made hands seem to often make modest bets into sizable pots, thinking that's the way to get called and win their opponents' money. (I'm thinking mostly of flop bets.) But in NL, they're really making the mistake of giving the opponent proper odds to draw out on them.

The proper play, of course, is to bet large enough so that you price out draws -- at least 1/2 pot or more -- so that an opponent who calls is actually making a mistake.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ticks
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 06/07/05
Posts: 2076
Loc: In the Red
Re: Limit concepts that are terrible for NL [Re: ChipStorm]
      #4391383 - 01/09/06 08:15 AM

Draw less

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
avfletch
veteran


Reged: 10/23/05
Posts: 1491
Re: Limit concepts that are terrible for NL [Re: ticks]
      #4391429 - 01/09/06 08:31 AM

Don't overestimate implied odds. When I first discovered no limit and the concept of implied odds I played like a loon, drawing to anything because, "There's implied odds". Then the flush hit and I shoved chips in the middle and got confused as to why no one ever paid me off.

Secondly, don't make big bet plays against donks. When you make a nice large bet expecting him to fold his marginal holding and you get called, don't think "HOW CAN YOU CALL THAT!?!?", think, "WHY ON EARTH DID I BET INTO THE CALLING MACHINE".


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
BukNaked36
veteran


Reged: 11/17/05
Posts: 1419
Re: Limit concepts that are terrible for NL [Re: avfletch]
      #4391473 - 01/09/06 08:45 AM

Quote:


Secondly, don't make big bet plays against donks. When you make a nice large bet expecting him to fold his marginal holding and you get called, don't think "HOW CAN YOU CALL THAT!?!?", think, "WHY ON EARTH DID I BET INTO THE CALLING MACHINE".




Amen. Very well stated. First thing to do at a table for me is figure out who the calling stations are.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Dan Bitel
Carpal \'Tunnel


Reged: 05/26/05
Posts: 11164
Loc: Bork! Bork! Bork!
Re: Limit concepts that are terrible for NL [Re: BukNaked36]
      #4391495 - 01/09/06 08:51 AM

Don't overvalue TPTK

Don't underestimate implied odds...esp with low PPs in full ring


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
daveymck
Carpal \'Tunnel


Reged: 11/06/03
Posts: 4987
Loc: UK
Re: Limit concepts that are terrible for NL [Re: Dan Bitel]
      #4391815 - 01/09/06 10:03 AM

I have just had a failed attempt at transferring from limit cash to NL, I did jump in too high $200 NL but had reasons for wanting to do that, and had previoulsy won over 13,000 hands at the lower limits, but I have learned a lot in losing to apply to the lower limits I am moving down to.

The main things to think about for the transfer are;

Stats are important but you need to back them up with reads at NL, I could play 3-4 tables of Limit using only the stats at NL without experience this is a mistake and will cost you more than the 1-2bb an hour multitabling limit would cost.

Linked to above I think hand reading becomes more important than at Limit.

TPTK and overpairs are still decent hands but they are dangerous and should be played with caution, I found these were the sort of hands that I made the most mistakes and lost most on, mainly overvalueing and getting the pot too big.

Position is much more important, the more I have played and read the more I am starting to understand this.

Cold calling isnt as bad in NL as in limit and in fact it is a necessity.

Picking up small pots is nice but its how you play the big pots that makes you a winner at this game. My big failing was playing the large pots badly, I was able to play smaller pots well imho.

Think about bet sizes, what are you looking to achieve, price people out? encourage a call? get the pot to a level to go all in next street etc.

Know when to fold, probably a problem again I had, many times in limit not folding for 1 more bet isnt that big a mistake in NL it may well cost you your stack.

Look for the bad players and look to play many pots against them, against any seemingly good solid players be more cautious, adjust for the player again in lower limit you tend to play the table to get big pots you dont really want to do this in NL.

Theres probably more, I think the main thing is when making the adjustment is too think more, my limit play tended to be autopilot abc poker, abc poker will work at NL as well I think but initially its a slightly different alphabet.

I would recommend finding the retro I and retro II posts there is a lot of good info in those threads as well as things to get you thinking, they from the time when El D and a few others were more regular posters.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
quarkncover
SSNL Grand Nagus


Reged: 05/01/05
Posts: 3210
Loc: Quark's Bar
Re: Limit concepts that are terrible for NL [Re: daveymck]
      #4392860 - 01/09/06 12:26 PM

Retro Posts

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
cbloom
Carpal \'Tunnel


Reged: 07/20/03
Posts: 8940
Loc: communist
Re: Limit concepts that are terrible for NL [Re: quarkncover]
      #4393611 - 01/09/06 01:50 PM

I'm still working on making the transition from limit to no limit. Some of the biggest things I've run into :

1. Just because you probably have the best hand doesn't mean you should bet (this is worst OOP). Generally in limit against loose/nutty players I would just go bet/bet/bet with hands that are probably best, but in NL if you're betting pot suddenly your whole stack is in the middle on a weak hand.

2. Don't pay off people who hit their draws. In limit you charge the flush draw, and then when the guy raises the river, you call if he'll ever bluff there since it's just one more bet. In NL that river raise might be your stack, and you've given him implied odds. This is aka "don't give your opponents implied odds by paying off when they hit".

3. Position! As previously mentioned, this is crucial.

4. People have hands a lot more. It actually seems there's a lot less bluffing and semibluffing, and if someone bets big they usually have it.

5. Calling raises preflop is more often correct, mainly with pairs. The whole pairs/sets play is pretty unique to NL. You don't need a lot of people in the pot for odds, because just one opponent can give you the implied odds.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
-Skeme-
Carpal \'Tunnel


Reged: 12/11/04
Posts: 7121
Loc: China (167 AVG)
Re: Limit concepts that are terrible for NL [Re: cbloom]
      #4393621 - 01/09/06 01:52 PM

Turning into a calling station during a WA/WB situation.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | >> (show all)



Extra information
0 registered and 50 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Isura, orange, ajmargarine, 4_2_it, Matt Flynn, Sunny Mehta, Mike Haven 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 8087

Rate this topic

Jump to

contact us 2+2 Publishing

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5


Message Boards and Forums Directory

Pages provided by ConJelCo