The future of limit poker

[Thorv]

Great thread. One consideration for those of you who are switching to NL is the B&M rooms. As far as I know, LHE is definitely a whole lot more popular in casinos, and I haven't found a casino yet that offers NL. I've heard there are NL tables in Vegas, though. Does anyone know how the number of NL tables compares to LHE tables in Vegas? Anyway, my point here is that if internet poker does go the way of the dodo for US players, it is important to consider what the casinos are offering for games. (But I suppose if the demand for NL is there...the casinos will accomodate.)

[bobhalford]

[ QUOTE ]
Great thread. One consideration for those of you who are switching to NL is the B&M rooms. As far as I know, LHE is definitely a whole lot more popular in casinos, and I haven't found a casino yet that offers NL. I've heard there are NL tables in Vegas, though. Does anyone know how the number of NL tables compares to LHE tables in Vegas? Anyway, my point here is that if internet poker does go the way of the dodo for US players, it is important to consider what the casinos are offering for games. (But I suppose if the demand for NL is there...the casinos will accomodate.)

[/ QUOTE ]

There's definitely a whole lotta NL games goin on in AC and Vegas. When there used to be underground card rooms in Manhattan, NL was the only game spread.

[poisonxfree]

Yeah the biggest game [albeit still small] at the nearest indian casino around here is now their 3-5 300-500 buy in NL game. They stopped spreading the ridiculously soft 6/12 game for it [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[Blue Lagoon]

Considering B&M rooms, can we consider that the casinos earn more money with FL?

The game is faster, because the players play faster (No Limit: "How much to call? 230? So here it is 100, 50, two 25,....zzzzzzzz)

If Limit Hold'em is faster, the casino makes more money, and should be inclined to offer this kind of games, no?

As a tourist, I will be more inclined to play a game , in which I cannot lose my bankroll in one hand...

[Heisenb3rg]

Im loving the option of playing both.

Why be forced to play one?
SHL is my bread and butter, but im loving SHNL too.

Things I prefer in NL:
1.Way less variance
2.More game selection
3.When you find a fish, wow is it a goldmine
4.More psychological,deep reads can win you so much money
5.More flexibility in winning styles

Things I prefer in limit:
1. More action, NL the action is only on a few hands.
2. The subtleties of the play, little things can make a difference.
3. Less stressful, if you're off your game in NL and make a really bad bluff you can lose tons.
4. More mathematical
5. The fish take longer to go broke, therefore they stay longer.


I don't know which I prefer...
I like playing NL cause I can play a LAG and make money.
Get sick of being a TAG sometimes.
At 100 NL I have a pretty sick winrate over the past 10k hands and my VPIP is ~40%

I love my small pairs, suited connectors and 1 gappers, I get irrirated in limit when I fold these.

[Bullitos]

Great post Heisenberg, exactly how I feel about it.

[fungaimike56]

The 10-20 game I play in has lost probably half its semi-regulars to no-limit in the last year. But, many of the stalwart regulars tried to follow the fish to the no-limit games and returned to 10-20, all of them saying no-limit has no action and is boring. (I should point out that 10-20 limit here routinely goes 5-9 callers preflop and loses no one to raise/reraise preflop--the pots get huge.) So volatility is a bitch and the game stays good but doesn't go til dawn like it used to because the new generation has come to hold-em via tv which is no-limit so thats what they want to play. There are, however, some new players coming from no-limit who say they prefer the action of limit. Go figure. The limit game will carry on, neither dwindling nor growing and, at the least,it would be prudent of me to learn no-limit in case limit disappears but old habits die hard and its still too easy to sit down twice a week at the good old limit game.