NL with a Cap...thoughts?

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
geez louise, some of you have no idea what a cap game is even though you want to sound like you know what you're talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was just trying to get people back on track to what the original poster was asking and wasn't trying to be snarky.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, it just came off a little wrong when I read it- my fault for misinterpreting.

[ QUOTE ]
And if a capped game (by my definition) isn't a NL game by your definition, then NO game that we call NL is truly a NL game because they are all limited by the amount of money that a person has on the table.
In a normal NL game, the cap is equal to the smallest stack (in a 2 player hand).

[/ QUOTE ]

I was going to make the exact same point to some other reply, since table stakes always limit the game to some extent. Of course it would be silly to describe a $5-5000 spread limit game... and of course, the true max limit of any NL or PL game is the second-largest stack on the table, NOT the largest (as you know)

The difference between a "true" no-limit game and a capped game (or capped buy-in game) is the speed at which the game can expand due to increasing stack sizes and larger reloads. Home games should be very, VERY careful how large their games get, if bankrolls are an issue for a majority of players.

I will remember to use the capped terminology only for capped pot sizes (are there different terms for capped rounds vs. capped total pot?) in the future. I will use max buy-in for the "other" capped NL game.

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
A capped bet game is identical to a NL game in terms of betting structure except for the fact that it has a different betting structure.

Can't argue with that line of reasoning.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, it isn't THAT far off. It's an artifical "2nd largest stack" in a sense.

I agree the games are different, but not hugely different from some of the small min/max buy-in range NL games you see (at least initially, before the stacks start growing exponentially).

In fact, a capped buy-in game really protects the big stacks much more than an unlimited game... as you know already. One could say that a capped pot game levels the playing field, as far as taking away the strength of a large bankroll.

As to which is "better", I can't speak to.

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]


Larry,

Capped NL is a game where the bets are capped but a player can bet anything up to the cap at any time. So it's no limit within the capped bets. This is what OP was referring to.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know, it's just not what people may automatically infer if they aren't paying close attention.

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
I've heard the big game at the Bellagio does that kind of thing, but no I think that's stupid.


[/ QUOTE ]

I may have to rethink this statement, given the understanding that you're playing a different game structure. From a home game perspective, it might make sense.

It can be frustrating to see someone win a few hands early and then squat on their stack, knowing they can't get threatened with total ruin on a particular hand.

[Rottersod]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've heard the big game at the Bellagio does that kind of thing, but no I think that's stupid.


[/ QUOTE ]

I may have to rethink this statement, given the understanding that you're playing a different game structure. From a home game perspective, it might make sense.

It can be frustrating to see someone win a few hands early and then squat on their stack, knowing they can't get threatened with total ruin on a particular hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

The capped games I've played there's been a lot of action because everyone knows they can't be busted (assuming they have more than the cap). More people are willing to stay in on draws. High PP shrink in value and should be pushed hard. Limpers get killed. So if you're playing $500 buy in with a $200 cap it's not unusual to see multiway pots with everyone capped.

[chube]

[ QUOTE ]

Okay, it just came off a little wrong when I read it- my fault for misinterpreting.


[/ QUOTE ]

Actually I appologize. Upon rereading, my first post definitely came off harsh. (When I wrote it I had kind of a goofy tone in my mind.)

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
The capped games I've played there's been a lot of action because everyone knows they can't be busted (assuming they have more than the cap). More people are willing to stay in on draws. High PP shrink in value and should be pushed hard. Limpers get killed. So if you're playing $500 buy in with a $200 cap it's not unusual to see multiway pots with everyone capped.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, it ends up playing like a higher spread limit game?

[Rottersod]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The capped games I've played there's been a lot of action because everyone knows they can't be busted (assuming they have more than the cap). More people are willing to stay in on draws. High PP shrink in value and should be pushed hard. Limpers get killed. So if you're playing $500 buy in with a $200 cap it's not unusual to see multiway pots with everyone capped.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, it ends up playing like a higher spread limit game?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure because I've never played spread limit but capped NL plays just like NL except more people stay in. It really is a fun game for a friendly home game atmosphere but I wouldn't play it if offered at a casino. My GF has played it on FTP and I've watched her as she has beaten up her opps with suited and unsuited 2 gappers. That's at lower limits though. But even the pros are playing capped NL on FTP (lots of HH in NVG).

[Jeff76]

[ QUOTE ]
Guess I am wondering why someone wants to play no limit but put limits on it.

[/ QUOTE ]Because bad players losing a lot of money really fast is bad for everyone.

[redfisher]

I think spread limit is your best structure here. It allows you to control losses, but isn't as difficult to manage as a multi-street cap. I've done a PL home game and it was a pain in the butt. The cap is great for online, but you've got to keep track of it. If your home game is full of splash-the-pot drunks like mine, it's just easier to tell them they can't bet more than X on any street.