beginners questions

[PartyPaul]

I've been playing SH limit for 1½ month now and I play at $2/$4. Before that I played full ring limit hold'em at microstakes. I have a couple of questions:
<ul type="square">[*]Why do most players not play at crypto? I used to play at party, but I switched to crypto because of their generous bonusses and rakeback. I noticed that unfortunately the games are tighter here and the rake is higher. It seems to me that most 2+2 members play on stars, full tilt or absolute. But I heard that the games are tight on stars and full tilt. These sites offer a rakeback around 30% and absolute has an additional sign up bonus. Would you recommend me to switch to absolute?
[*]Does limit hold'em have a future? Some limit people are complaining that years ago it was much easier to make money in SH limit hold'em, that the game dried up. So why do they still play it? For an expirienced, specialized limit player a switch to no-limit may be difficult (assuming that they keep playing at the same stakes). But for a starter like me, it may be a wise thing to start playing no-limit.
[*]What literature do you recommend? Of course the posts on this forum are useful. But sometimes it's difficult to find the information you need. I'm planning to read Stox' book and watch his videos. But maybe Terry Borers "Limit Hold'em: Winning Short-handed Strategies" is a better start? I studied a PDF about shorthanded play ( http://www.ccs00.com/stuff/shorthanded.pdf ), but I wonder if all the info in here is still valid nowadays?[/list]Any answers or comments are welcome. I will soon post some hands.

[aargh57]

1. I think crypto's not a U.S. site right? That takes away a lot of guys. Also, you kind of answered your own question with the tightness of games and rake. I think that the crypto bonuses have gone down from what they used to be but I'm not sure since I can't do them anymore. Absolute's bonus + rb is good but the games there are tight too. I'd clear the FT and stars bonuses first before I went to crypto.

2. If I was just starting I'd probably learn NL but I want to get into positive territory with limit first.

3. Read through the stickies here and you'll get some good ideas of literature. Stox book is good but if you're just starting I don't know if it'd be too advanced or not. Also, if you're thinking of NL then you're going to want to read different books.

Good luck. I've read that pdf and I think it should still be valid.

[mattnxtc]

Stox's book would not be good for a beginner. Get SSHE read it play full ring for a while, then move to short handed.

[Wolfram]

NL is easier to beat, more profitable for those that do beat it and less swingy.

LHE is more fun.

Take your pick.

[mattnxtc]

If by fun you mean causes suicidal thoughts, and excessive drinking then yes I agree.

[Gurravasa]

I think the guys that whine about their WR gone down the last year should realize that their current WR is probably more correct than the WR when internetpoker was young and a lot of unserious players opened an account and wasted $1K and then never came back. If the competition gets better you just have to get better to...

[Wolfram]

[ QUOTE ]
If by fun you mean causes excessive drinking then yes I agree.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is fun to me.

[PartyPaul]

Aargh, thanks for your reply.

1. You're right. Crypto is not a US site. I think the bonusses are still good. A time ago I did bonusses at stars and FT to get some free books. But at that time I played microlimits full ring.

2. I will try both.

3. At the moment Stox book is too advanced for me. In future it may be useful.

No matter what poker variation I play, as long as I win money, it's fun.

[Wolfram]

[ QUOTE ]
No matter what poker variation I play, as long as I win money, it's fun.

[/ QUOTE ]
(Note: assume 6-max for all games)

Then NL is your game.

The rake is a killer at low stakes lhe. Also, the format of the games limits villains mistakes. And you have to play pretty much picture perfect to generate a decent win-rate (no tilting, no leaks etc).

In microstakes-smallstakes NL you can pretty much avoid any marginal/difficult decisions and still be a winner. And the rake is a much smaller issue. You raise preflop to get it HU and then c-bet the flop and take it down 70% of the time. If you get meet resistance you give up (double barreling only when situation calls for it).

If you flop the nuts then bet/bet/bet and get calling stations to stack of (which is a much bigger mistake than they could ever make in lhe). If you hit TPTK then bet flop, check behind on turn for pot-control and to make your river decision easier (not always maximally EV but usually best for beginners) and then either call a river bet, bet for value (and fold to a big raise) or check behind if the river is scary. And if somebody raises and you have a PP you can almost always call for implied set-odds, and when you hit you often get paid off big-time.


And here's the kicker.

At the moment, a decent win-rate for lhe is 1BB/100. For NL it's around 4-5ptbb/100 (ptbb = 2xbig blind).

You need around 750BB bankroll for lhe (some say more), and 30 buyins for NL (some say less). So NL100 and 2/4 LHE are roughly equivalent (750*4 = 3k, 100*30 = 3k). So your winrate is $4/100 for 2/4 lhe but $8/100 for NL100. On top of that is the fact that NL is much easier to multitable (I play 2-3 tables of LHE and 4-6 tables of NL).

[PartyPaul]

Okay, very useful information, Wolfram. You convinced me to start playing NL. However this doesn't mean I quit limit. I'm going for both. It's nice to have some variation.

Why is it easier to multi-table in NL? In NL you have to enter the amount you bet each time. In limit you only have to click.

I was told that in limit you mainly play your own cards, whereas in NL you mainly play your opponent. In that case you need to pay a lot of attention to your opponents tendencies, how you are perceived and adjust to different stack sizes. Isn't this difficult when 6-tabling?

Do you also have an opinion about Sit 'n Go's?