Posted Tue May 09, 2006 10:57 am GMT by JRM4833
I've been reading Small Stakes Hold 'Em and it got me thinking recently. When I first started playing online I played $.50/1 or $1/2 limit. The lure of no limit got me and I eventually focused completely on that game, although I played lower stakes to make up for the potential of losing all my money on one hand. With the internet having more dopes than your average real game, I often find myself in the position of facing an all-in bet when I have a good, but not great hand. These hands obviously lead me to swing pretty big one way or the other when I call. I have convinced myself more times than I like that it's some dope on the internet trying desperately to win every last hand no matter what the cost. I've gotten better at reading these people, but it's still the internet and there's no way to be certain of anything. Now, I know none of this is new to people, but I'm just putting my thinking down in writing.
So because of this and my recent reading on limit hold 'em, I'm thinking of switching back, at least 50% of my cash games (I'd still be 100% no limit for tournaments). Now the potential to win huge hands is gone, but it seems that it might be easier to build a steady bankroll by being the better player and figuring out how to pick apart players who call down too often or play too tightly. With the all-in move neutralized, it makes me think that my style of poker might work a little better. When players know they are not facing a potentially huge bet on the turn or river, I'd imagine they're much more willing to chase.
So basically I'm trying to figure out what others prefer and what they've found more profitable. Is my recent thinking on target? I mean I love the excitement of no limit and don't plan on giving it up altogether, but I have to focus on profits because it's not simply a hobby. We're all in it, to an extent, for the money.
And I apologize if this has been discussed ad nauseum in the past, which I'm sure it has, but I couldn't find a thread on it.
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 10:59 am GMT by supafrey
You're gonna get a lot of discussion and useless talks about personal anecdotes (which mean nothing) and then it's going to come down to the simple fact that neither is better. It's just preference. A different game to master. Money's everywhere.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 11:02 am GMT by JRM4833
Wow. Quick response. That's what I thought I might here though. I guess everybody's particular style is slightly better at one or the other. It's just a matter of figuring that out.
And I figured I'd get stories about not being able to win all the money on this hand, or being saved from losing all the money on that hand, etc. That's always going to both ways so I do understand that.
The one thing I left out is that I assume more of the "fish" play in no limit, since it's so popular. Do you think there's a difference in skill of opponents between the two?
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 11:02 am GMT by Jernej Zorec
exactly if u are good player u can make same amont of money at both,
some can pull of 500k in 6 months on 100-200 limit
some pull same amount playing 25-50 NL
only thing that matters if what u feel more comfortable with and what u can play better
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 11:04 am GMT by Jernej Zorec
well u beat me with your post,
as far as fish go u have fish in every game,
if u can do well and observe the players find their tendencies and exploit them, then it doesnt matter what u play
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 11:20 am GMT by supafrey
There's fish in both... significant % of them, definitely. but there are alot more nl players.... so..
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 11:24 am GMT by tame_deuces
For low stakes I would definitively say that as far as I have seen the players in NL have been 'worse' than their FL counterparts. But I haven't played in too many different poker networks.
Playing FL is also definitively a wakeup call for any serious NL hobby player and should almost be a 'mandatory' part of his/her pokerplaying, as FL will give you a much better intuitive 'feel' of how often particular hands are dealt/held than NL.
Also, I think people can play a pretty ok NL game without having too much poker knowledge...FL requires more knowledge, atleast at the first basic levels.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 11:25 am GMT by TxShadow
| supafrey wrote: | | neither is better. It's just preference. A different game to master. Money's everywhere. |
That's really all there is to say about it.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 12:29 pm GMT by BeerWench13
It definitely depends on which you're more knowledgeable on and which you prefer. I don't like FL. It's just not my game. I'm a NL player. I started at FL, but just didn't enjoy it. NL fits my style better.
There are chasers everywhere. It costs you less when they catch on you in FL, but you don't make as much when they don't either. There are pros and cons of both. It's really a decision that only you can make.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 1:08 pm GMT by Soup_dog
I've actually started to play both. I used to dislike FL but lately I have been playing it to work off a bonus. In the course of my play I have really started to enjoy it and made some good money as well.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 1:43 pm GMT by TxShadow
This may fall into Supa's "discussion and useless talks about personal anecdotes", but oh well.
There seems to be an additional psychological "warfare" aspect in NL that doesn't exist in FL. That aspect is one of the main reasons that I don't regularly play NL. It is exciting and I don't mind playing every now and then, but I'm just not as suited for it.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 1:46 pm GMT by BeerWench13
| TxShadow wrote: | | There seems to be an additional psychological "warfare" aspect in NL that doesn't exist in FL. |
This is what draws me more. I love this aspect of NL. Along with the fact that I can actually get people to fold in NL.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 1:48 pm GMT by TxShadow
| BeerWench13 wrote: | | TxShadow wrote: | | There seems to be an additional psychological "warfare" aspect in NL that doesn't exist in FL. |
This is what draws me more. I love this aspect of NL. Along with the fact that I can actually get people to fold in NL. |
I've got a friend that loves that about it too, and he does quite well. I seriously get a little sick to my stomach when I start a session of NL 
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 2:10 pm GMT by Phil14312
| BeerWench13 wrote: | | TxShadow wrote: | | There seems to be an additional psychological "warfare" aspect in NL that doesn't exist in FL. |
This is what draws me more. I love this aspect of NL. Along with the fact that I can actually get people to fold in NL. |
Psychological warfare is most definately part of FL, you just have to look harder to find it.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 2:24 pm GMT by xDiamond_CutteRx
Comes down to personal preference. I agree with Phil that there is still definitely a big psychological warfare component to FL; you just have to look harder to find it, because many of the moves in FL are much more... sophisticated. In NL, brute force can succeed where it couldn't in FL.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 2:51 pm GMT by Dave B
If you arent playing psych war in FL, then you are missing something. When you are luck enough to get a loose player on your right that raises each time he comes in and you always 3 bet him, they tend to start to take it personal. Once they do, you win.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 2:51 pm GMT by supafrey
they'll never get it, guys.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 2:56 pm GMT by BeerWench13
I agree with you guys, there is psychology in any poker game no matter the stakes or the limits. The psychology in FL is so much more subtle than it is in NL. FL is like the guy on the sidewalk tying his shoe, you ignore him, but when he stands up he bumps into you. An hour later you notice your wallet's gone. NL is more like the guy that walks up to you, sticks a gun in your face and says "give me your money."
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 2:58 pm GMT by TxShadow
Hang on a sec:
| TxShadow wrote: |
There seems to be an additional psychological "warfare" aspect in NL that doesn't exist in FL. |
Just for the record, nowhere did I say that there is no psychological aspect to FL.
When I play NL, I can get constantly stressed out and put in situations that I have to make tough decisions all throughout the game.
With FL, I can be just as outclassed and lose just as much money, but the individual situations in which I am put to the test aren't near as stressful.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 3:07 pm GMT by TxShadow
| supafrey wrote: | | You're gonna get a lot of discussion and useless talks about personal anecdotes (which mean nothing) |
Someone give supa a prize. 
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 3:49 pm GMT by tame_deuces
| TxShadow wrote: | | supafrey wrote: | | You're gonna get a lot of discussion and useless talks about personal anecdotes (which mean nothing) |
Someone give supa a prize. |
(Maybe) it is his opinion that those anecdotes are useless. A question was asked and experienced poker players people are answering it with their opinions and views. I don't see too many anecdotes either.
And I for one think the discussion so far has been a good one, take this subject on most other poker forums and you'll have something akin' to a bizarre feud between the FL players and NL players...here it seems we have people who either play both or are willing to understand the variant they 'don't play' from a theoretical viewpoint.
There is also a difference between the games. For example, most I have talked to agree that low stakes NL are generally easier than its FL counterpart. Due the opposition being much softer.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 3:53 pm GMT by TxShadow
| tame_deuces wrote: | | TxShadow wrote: | | supafrey wrote: | | You're gonna get a lot of discussion and useless talks about personal anecdotes (which mean nothing) |
Someone give supa a prize. |
(Maybe) it is his opinion that those anecdotes are useless. A question was asked and experienced poker players people are answering it with their opinions and views. I don't see too many anecdotes either.
And I for one think the discussion so far has been a good one, take this subject on most other poker forums and you'll have something akin' to a bizarre feud between the FL players and NL players...here it seems we have people who either play both or are willing to understand the variant they 'don't play' from a theoretical viewpoint.
There is also a difference between the games. For example, most I have talked to agree that low stakes NL are generally easier than its FL counterpart. Due the opposition being much softer. |
Dude, I agree; I was completely joking. I am enjoying the discussion.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 3:56 pm GMT by tame_deuces
| TxShadow wrote: |
Dude, I agree; I was completely joking. I am enjoying the discussion. |
Yeah, sorry, I meant to put a smiley in there somewhere but forgot it. 
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 9:28 am GMT by JRM4833
Thanks for all the great info guys. I got a lot out of the discussion and it is definitely the kind of stuff I will keep in mind the next time I decide whether the play NL or FL.
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 9:42 am GMT by UrAteUp
I like don't like one over the other but I can say you will find fish at both. I play mainly FL at the Casinos and NL online. I can't say I find an advantage on either but again I play micro levels and you find bad players at either NL or FL when you play micros.
For live FL I think the fish abbound as well. The last time I played was $2/$4 table. I have never witnessed so many players willing to go to the turn hoping for a miracle card.... ...and even when that miracle card was the one that I had that beat them...
|
|
