What would be the best limit to start at?
 

I am a NL Hold 'Em player with basically no experience with stud except for about 100 hands I played the other day at .04/.08 just to try it out. I have a $4000 roll on PokerStars, but I don't think that diving right into the $5/$10 games would be the best way to start learning 7CS. What level of stakes do you think would be the best compromise between hourly rate and learning curve for a competent SSNL Hold 'Em player?

Re: What would be the best limit to start at?
 

I'd probably choose a limit where it wouldn't tilt you to lose 50-100bb. Not that I'm saying you'll lose it, but you should feel free to lose while you're learning, if possible. Maybe 1/2? That might not be enough to even be interesting for you, not sure. 2/4 is the sweet spot, rake wise, on FTP (smallest avg rake/100 hands). That's the real problem with the smallest stakes.

Re: What would be the best limit to start at?
 

Honestly It may be grueling for you, but .25/.50 is forgivng and has a good learning curve. I'm pretty sure poker stars has a .5 ante .10 bring in. If you're not afraid to lose in order to learn .50/1 isn't too bad, more solid.

Re: What would be the best limit to start at?
 

I think the answer is really whatever you are comfortable with. And by comfortable, I mean comfortable losing while you practice up.

Given that you have a pretty good roll and may know some applicable basic poker theory, I would start at at least 1/2, otherwise you are probably going to learn some bad habits if you intend to move up (though maybe .5/1 on stars, though I havent played it in years). Once you get out of playing for change there is some semblance of a game that doesn't always have 6+ players to 4th every hand. If you have the time, maybe you want to read up before playing at all.

Re: What would be the best limit to start at?
 

Forget about stud and play 3/6 razz there. The low antes mean the "tight is right" basic strategy will work well, the games run often and usually with multiple tables going (tho I'd recommend not playing more than 2 at a time), and they are charmin, pure charmin.

Good Luck!

Re: What would be the best limit to start at?
 

I'd go with 1-2

Re: What would be the best limit to start at?
 

Razz is a blast, but wouldn't it be better to start with stud8 at first? The high and low seems to keep my variance down a good bit.

Re: What would be the best limit to start at?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Razz is a blast, but wouldn't it be better to start with stud8 at first? The high and low seems to keep my variance down a good bit.

[/ QUOTE ]
Split pot games do have lower variance than their Hi only cousins, but razz naturally has lower variance than omaha, HE, or stud. On top of that if you stay out of marginal situations that usually need to go to showdown to get paid off (like marginal bring-in defense), and forgo thin value-only bets, you can reduce the variance in razz substantially. You may even improve your game and develop more than one gear [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: What would be the best limit to start at?
 

Great now you tell me how to lower variance in razz. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I started with stud8 to build my bankrole, but would much rather have learned razz first.

Re: What would be the best limit to start at?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Split pot games do have lower variance than their Hi only cousins, but razz naturally has lower variance than omaha, HE, or stud.

[/ QUOTE ] Can you say why, please? I read (it's in my early notes - and don't know from where)that Razz is higher variance - I thought it was because so many times you end up having to go to the river when you have a better draw. But if what you say is true, and I imagine it is, then if I knew why it could really help my game.