Which form of poker is the most mathematical?

[SuitedKingAce]

Hello all,

After months of lurking, I decided to create an account. I started playing poker about 1 year ago, and have been playing online limit hold'em, mostly $0.5/$1 and $1/$2, exclusively.

The reason why I like (small stakes) limit hold'em so much is because it is very mathematical: it is not that hard to be a winning player on these levels with a good understanding of pot odds and board-reading skills. Having reads on players will improve your game (I almost never rely on reads, to be honest), but it is not needed to be a winning player, in my opinion.

A few weeks ago, I started reading the HOH series. It surprised me that his approach is very mathematical. I like it! This comes to my question: which form of poker (limit hold'em or sit-and-gos) is the most mathematical? Why?

I thank you for your discussion.

[Kmon]

bump. Most of my experience is in nlhe, bj, and 5 card draw. Out of those nlhe is top, once you understand bj chart, if your counting it's not really equations just a fast tempo of following the cards.

NLHE is very mathematical because if you put the time in you can have a good idea of the probability of what can beat you and what you have beat. Or even what the other players are have.

I'm interested also in an answer.

[BomberMase]

I firmly believe limit poker to be the most mathematical in terms of how important math is to making the "correct" play. In limit it's all about expressed and implied odds with a little bit of what you're putting your opponent on.

NL does have a lot of math, but all that math you do may end up being completely meaningless due to a misread of your opponent's cards, or by bet size.

You can win at limit by making good mathmatical decisions time after time and firing away with those good hands. However, as many pros will say, to win at NL it's all about making a good call/fold in that one tough decision pot.

You win at limit by playing the odds, you win at No limit by playing the players.

[Kmon]

good post bomber

[darkcore]

[ QUOTE ]

The reason why I like (small stakes) limit hold'em so much is because it is very mathematical: it is not that hard to be a winning player on these levels with a good understanding of pot odds and board-reading skills.

[/ QUOTE ]

if this is what you are looking for, buy sklanksy on poker and give razz a try.

[SuitedKingAce]

[ QUOTE ]
I firmly believe limit poker to be the most mathematical in terms of how important math is to making the "correct" play. In limit it's all about expressed and implied odds with a little bit of what you're putting your opponent on.

NL does have a lot of math, but all that math you do may end up being completely meaningless due to a misread of your opponent's cards, or by bet size.

You can win at limit by making good mathmatical decisions time after time and firing away with those good hands. However, as many pros will say, to win at NL it's all about making a good call/fold in that one tough decision pot.

You win at limit by playing the odds, you win at No limit by playing the players.

[/ QUOTE ]Thanks for your reply. I tend to agree with you, but, and this is the reason of my question, I was a little bit surprised of how mathematical Harrington's approach for sit-and-go's is.

[IsaacAsimov]

I think mathematics in LHE and NLHE is equaly important, but I do feel that a mathematical edge can exploit weaker players more in LHE than in NLHE. Vice versa a deeper understanding of the game (from a less mathematical perspective)can be used to exploit bad NLHE players. It is close though I think.
The main reason why I think this way though, is that you can make more precise calculations about the further progression of a hand in LHE than you can in NLHE.

[thirddan]

stud hi/lo no qualifier...i think ds said in some book (maybe super system) that a strong player should win like 80% of his sessions or something like that...