Is Limit Hold 'em Dead?

[Isura]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

10/20 NL is not neary as big as 100/200.

[/ QUOTE ]

then why do they require similar bankrolls?

[/ QUOTE ]

500bb = 50 buyins. I don't think that winning 10/20 players have 50 buyin swings. Bankroll in NL seems to be a lot more about personal comfort level than necessity

[ggbman]

I have played a good amount of both of these games. 100-200 limit plays considerably bigger. However, a few caveats here: Most 100-200 have rolls much bigger than 100k. People might take shots with 500 BB's, but in games with that much variance, i think 150k is the absolute minimum you need to consider it your main game. Tongi lost more than that and then won it back in the same month... 100k is not enough.

Also, i do think you need about 100k for a comfortable 10-20 roll, that game plays extremely aggressivly, and it's been shown over and over that big winners (Samo, HEK, etc...) Have had 30-40 buy in downswings, so 20 buy in ones won't be super rare, and 60k would not be adequate, especially given how most people will be playing after a 20 buy in downswing.

If you want a comparison, i would say 100-200 limit plays right in between 10-20 and 25-50 NL. Also, to answer Nate's orinigal question, i don't think LHE is anywhere near dead. The fact is, the best NL players tend to make more money, the top HSNL guys will have the highest hourlies, but there are more people making $350+/hr at LHE than NL, and that makes them more content and less apt to post.

[AtTheMovies]

poker slowly dying down