OT: Friends don't let friends play limit

[Frond]

I have given some thought to this lately as well.

The ones who bash limit are obviously still trying to play a NLHE style when they play limit; Taking their AA all the way, pumping it all they way with 6 other players in no matter what the board reads, they then complain that "this sucks, I can't win with AA in limit, I get chased down & sucked out on every time". They haven't yet distinguised the two beasts.

I hear you CJ that it sucks when NL players dismiss limit as a just a luck type of game or not real poker. They typically have only played NLHE and nothing else. IF they did they would know that poker games with a limit format ar the norm.

As for NLHE dying out and Limit getting stronger, I kind of think that NLHE won't die out. It may get a bit less popular but I think it will be around to stay. I can see Limit getting more popular but not replacing NLHE as the main game. A lot of it may deopend on the media coverage of the games in the following few years to come.

I am having a home game tomorrow night and I may for the first time introduce LHE to my non Limit playing buddies just for kicks.

[TripleH68]

I think the most important part of this discussion is:

Are the limit games becoming tougher because they are full of average to above average 'dinosaurs' and smart tags?

It seems to me the real 'action' players would be eaten up in a no-limit game. I have never played no-limit cash games so maybe somebody can help me out here. How does an aggressive player with stats like VP$IP of 30-35 in limit play usually fare/adapt at NL?

[Harv72b]

As long as the televised games feature no limit, the fish will want to play no limit. It also appeals more to the gambl000r in them...the same mentality that leads a person to sit in front of a slot machine for hours hoping to hit that one big jackpot keeps a person in a NL game hoping to drag that one big pot. Limit just doesn't have that same appeal for the gambler. It does, however, have more appeal for the tourist on a budget, who'd prefer to limit his losses rather than take a shot at a huge win.

Sadly, the poker gods have seen fit to give me a mindset that is much better suited for limit, and so that's what I play. I enjoy it, and I don't think it's going to die out, but I definitely don't think it's going to become the game of choice any time soon. Unless the WSOP changes the main event over to a limit format.

[PorkchopDJG]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway some people are suited better for NL, some are not. I ll stick with limit.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. I actually think it might be hard to be really good at both of these since they are so different. When I try to play No Limit I find myself fighting against my limit knowledge and instincs and I have not been that successful. I think limit will always be my bread and butter type main game.

[Cactus Jack]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the most important part of this discussion is:

Are the limit games becoming tougher because they are full of average to above average 'dinosaurs' and smart tags?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, at least not at the low limit games in Vegas. If anything, you're likely to find more better players at an average NL table than an average limit table. One of the reasons I started playing my low limit Tour was to see if the adage was true: "you can't beat the low limit games." I did, consistently, and am doing okay still at 4/8, despite my recent bad run. There simply are very few good players at low limits, and almost no TAGs at all. Some tight/weak, but mostly loose/passives.

What makes me think that no limit games might be starting to hurt is lower pot sizes, and lower stack sizes I'm seeing at the NL tables around my limit games while I'm waiting. The caps are going up, which isn't going to do the games any good, but few buy in for the full amount, leaving them even more vulnerable to good players with full stacks. The good players don't have large enough stacks to attack, so they aren't making as much. It's a cycle I think that will continue on a downward trend. Watch the size of pots. Those are the giveaway.

I don't buy the "not enough gamble" argument, as I don't believe poker itself has inherently enough gamble in it for real gamblers. They play every hand in bj, so folding hands sucks to them. Even in NL, or even esp when you consider how fast you will go broke in NL playing every hand.

It's all good, however. They go broke playing no limit, but want to keep playing, so they come over to the limit tables. They eventually will find their way into my game. I'll be waiting for them.

I'm very good at tournament poker. I'm improving at fixed limit. I'm damned good at SNGs, but my ring NL game has always been poor and never has gotten better. I just don't have that ability, so I'm sticking to limits. Better to eat many small meals than go hungry when unable to eat the elephant at one sitting.

CJ

[James.]

obviously things are headed to the happy medium of pot limit.

[Bob T.]

Ok, I predict that limit holdem will be alive and well in Minnesota for a long time.

(State law limits the maximum bet to $60, so all the games here are either limit, or spreadlimit)

[Cactus Jack]

lol

Last night at the RR, I scoped the NL tables. For a game that's said to be thriving, I was amazed. The pots were very small on the 1/2s and the stack sizes were miniscule. Considering that the goal of NL is stacking your opponent for larger sums, there wasn't much on any of the tables to play for. Most were buying in for $100.

The thing to look at is pot size. This was the first thing to show up as Internet poker started to lose momentum, then seeing the games tighten up. Most saw the VP$iP going down, but missed the first part. Fewer people were throwing a lot of money into pots. Then fewer players seeing the pot.

Limit games aren't anywhere near as tight and the pots are often as big or bigger. Given that a winning rate at 1/2NL is about the same as a good 4/8 player or a mediocre 8/16 player can make per hour, and why bother?

Shhh. Maybe the good NL players will be the last to get it.

[The DaveR]

[ QUOTE ]
This is the big one. Barry pointed out that every good gambling game in the house gives the sucker an appearance of a good chance of winning. They win just often enough to encourage them to come back. Limit gives them a chance of winning enough times to encourage them to play. No limit doesn't. They can't win often enough to overcome the disaster of losing their entire stack.


[/ QUOTE ]

Given that hands are less correlated in Stud than HE doesn't this point to Stud being the better game for casual gamboolers?

[D.L.M.]

limit sucks fat balls. and the game is very easy to master,i can put up with 300bb downswings that last a long time. Lost 2k at 1/2lmit and quit limit forever. Now i play 1/2 Nl and am a balla! [censored] limit [censored] it right in its [censored] ass.