|
|
#11
06-28-2006, 01:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Is Limit Hold \'em Dead?
[ QUOTE ]
I have a hypothesis that the most substantial posts are usually made by people on "message board tilt", because they are either running bad and are trying to build their confidence up by sounding smart, or running good and think they're invincible, even against educated opponents. [/ QUOTE ] Pure f'ing genius. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [ QUOTE ] But every day I don't see it here, I'm happy. [/ QUOTE ] There are LHE concepts that 2+2 completely misses? Or do you just mean the level of detail isn't sufficient to get a forum reader very far? 
|
|
#12
06-28-2006, 02:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Is Limit Hold \'em Dead?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I have a hypothesis that the most substantial posts are usually made by people on "message board tilt", because they are either running bad and are trying to build their confidence up by sounding smart, or running good and think they're invincible, even against educated opponents. [/ QUOTE ] Pure f'ing genius. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [ QUOTE ] But every day I don't see it here, I'm happy. [/ QUOTE ] There are LHE concepts that 2+2 completely misses? Or do you just mean the level of detail isn't sufficient to get a forum reader very far? [/ QUOTE ] (Because hand-reading is so important) Keeping in mind that lots of people on this forum are better poker players than me... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] There is probably minorish situational stuff that 2+2 outright misses, but this is something that the better players here keep to themselves, not me. I'd love to see that stuff on here, but I'm not holding my breath. I think there's enough information on these boards for anyone to use. It's just not available as a cohesive whole in a digestable form, I guess that's for the individual to figure out. Half of it could be solved by rewriting HEPFAP (hope I got the acronym right) but why bother? I think some people here see the overlying concepts but obfuscate the issue by saying what to do in this situation, that situation, etc. The rest is just squeezing an edge here or there. But there's lots of that to do too. Anyway I haven't put my money where my mouth is because I don't play high enough yet.
|
|
#13
06-28-2006, 02:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Is Limit Hold \'em Dead?
[ QUOTE ]
There are LHE concepts that 2+2 completely misses? [/ QUOTE ] Try and find anything that would help your play from SB and BB...GL
|
|
#17
06-28-2006, 08:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Is Limit Hold \'em Dead?
I just started reading Ed's and David's NL book. I have also read LGB.
Intriguing stuff. I can't believe that Mason used to claim that limit poker was more complicated than NL. Well, maybe "complicated" was not the word he used but his general gist was that Limit required more skill than No limit. I just don't see it that way albeit I have yet to play a single NL hand in a cash game. All I know is that I am spending a lot of time digesting the material in Ed's book. The stuff is hard. BTW, I see that your name is in the book. Nice. A question for you though: I have often read that NL has less variance. That seems counterintuitive. I mean, one poorly played hand could see you get stacked. One stroke of bad luck could do the same. I would have thought that variance would be greater in NL. What am I missing? (and I ask that seriously because I know I am missing something - maybe it's the definition of variance...lol).
|
|
#18
06-28-2006, 09:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Is Limit Hold \'em Dead?
The winrates in NL are significantly higher which results in lower variance. Basically the fish are going to make significantly more huge mistakes than you are which is going to drive your winrate up.
|
|
#19
06-28-2006, 09:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Is Limit Hold \'em Dead?
Overall bankroll fluctaions are a function of both standard deviation AND winrate.
Say at limit you win at a rate of 2BB/100 and your standard deviation is 18BB/100, the ratio is 9:1. But an expert at no limit can win at a significantly higher rate, say 6-8ptBB/100 (probably not at higher limits), with a standard that is say only twice as high of 36BB/100. Now the ratio of deviation to winrate is 6-5:1. While my math may not be correctly utilized, basically it boils down to the fact that while the standard deviation is greater at no limit, your win rate is even greater still, so the overall bankroll vairance is lower.
|
|
#20
06-28-2006, 09:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Is Limit Hold \'em Dead?
[ QUOTE ]
Intriguing stuff. I can't believe that Mason used to claim that limit poker was more complicated than NL. Well, maybe "complicated" was not the word he used but his general gist was that Limit required more skill than No limit. [/ QUOTE ] Here's my take on it: When playing against the clueless, NL is simpler than limit. When playing against winning players and losing players who make life difficult on you, no limit is more complicated than limit.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
