Limit or NL?

[ripthejacker]

I have a question that i'm sure you guys could help me with. I'm a poor college student iwth a $500 bankroll. my question is, which one would be the better alternative?

.5/1 to 1/2 LHE w/ no rake. at most i would mostly be 2-tabling because of limited game slection but there would be times where i could get 3 or even 4 tables (during peak hours.)

or

.10/.20 - .25/.50 NL w/ rake, but I would be able to play four tables consistantly.

in the long run, which would be better? any feedback is appreciated.

[KKbluff]

Assuming your skills are equal in both games the limit game would long run show more net profit.

[Jeoke]

Do whatever one you will enjoy more. If you get good you will make money at both of them.

How long have you been playing poker? If you just started I dont suggest 4 tabling and I suggest you look into bonuses.

[Sodami]

Just a tanget: I have no clue concerning bonuses. Can anyone explain them at all?

[chadplusplus]

[ QUOTE ]
Assuming your skills are equal in both games the limit game would long run show more net profit.

[/ QUOTE ]

Limit shows more profit? In limit, everyone's goal is around 2-3 BB/100, which would correlate to 4-6 PTBB/100 (I think). The goal for the NL guys is about 10 PTBB/100.

Maybe my math is wrong, but according to that, the per level-per hand win rate is higher in SSNL than SS limit. (And my own records confirm this for me, at least. But, I am a much better NL player than limit.)

On the other hand, it'd be pretty freaking hard to 8 (or more) table NL, I'm up to 5, and that's pretty demanding when you have to start adjusting bet sizes. (Damn it PS, add a "Bet Pot" button.)

Of course, if you don't know what you're doing, you'll lose your whole roll in NL before you even realize what happened.

[SocalHoldEem]

No a limit player make 2-3 PTBB/100...a PTBB is double the big blind, which is equal to a big bet in limit, which is what we like to make 3 of.

Skill in both games just about follows the amount of money being wagered though, so its unimportant. The skill in a 3/5 blind NL game is much much much higher then a 3/5 blind limit game. In a NL blind with a PTBB of 4 theres good players...in 2/4 limit there are not.

[Masquerade]

Well doesn't it depend on how good you are at Limit v NL?

[Woolygimp]

No-Limit is more profitable than limit, but also more difficult.
I have about 2.5BB/100 at 5/10 full limit, and about 8PTBB/100 at 1/2 no limit.

So obviously your BB/100 is higher in NL. Starting Out, read HFAP and play limit... You need experience to play NL.

[chadplusplus]

Oh yeah, 1 PTBB = 2x big blind = limit big bet. I knew that, I'm just retarded sometimes.

But I still think a player's hourly monetary rate is better at $25NL (.10/.25) than at .25/.50 limit by merely playing a very TAG ABC game. The whole "bleed the fish vs. breaking the fish" scenario. (And less frustrating)

But the OP included the "limit with no rake" vs. "nl with rake". I guess the rake accounts for about 1-1.5 BB/100 in limit, so without a rake, your maximum expected win rate increases to about 3-3.5 BB/100 which may equalize the win rates between the games.

What I want to know is where OP is playing limit with no rake?

[Hume]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess the rake accounts for about 1-1.5 BB/100 in limit, so without a rake, your maximum expected win rate increases to about 3-3.5 BB/100 which may equalize the win rates between the games.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's more like 2BB+/100 at low limits. Without rake a sustainable winrate would easily be 4BB+/100.

[ QUOTE ]
What I want to know is where OP is playing limit with no rake?

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]