Limit or No Limit

Hello, I was just looking for people's opinions on what they like better, No-limit hold em or Limit Hold emand just some thought on them. I have been playing a lot of limit holdem lately and it seems to be a better fit for me. I talk about it on my blog
and I was just looking for some feedback and opinions. Thanks

I preffer No Limit because the emotion and tension are hight, but I play better limit hold'em, maybe sometimes I am very agressive and lost some hands.

I prefer no limit and envy those with the discipline to play limit well

No limit is much better than limit cuz it requires actual skill. Whether it be mathematical calculations or reading people. Limit is a crap game cuz 9 times outta 10, no matter what the tard you're against has, he will call the minimum bet cuz that's all you can bet. You could have that retard dominated, like down to 1 out after the flop, and since you can't push him off that 1 outer, cuz he is a retard, he will hit on the river. Retards will thrive at limit cuz you can't go completely broke on one hand, as they very well should for being idiots.

I prefer No Limit because you have a greater ability to influence your opponents pot odds. If you simply raise enough to where it does not make mathematical sense for your opponent to raise you can increase your long term winnings. Harrington talks about this in Harrington on Hold 'em, Vol 1.

I do like both forms, I am just switching between the two and trying different strategies. I do agree that limit is full of donks that call no matter what.

when i play holdem in the casino, i like to play 3/6 limit.. i can stay up there for a few hours, get to know the table and usually come out a few hundred ahead.. but online i prefer playing NL... i get to see a lot of hands, and i have time to be patient and wait for a good starting hand...

I have been playing Limit, both online and in my local casino, for the last year. I also mixed in a few No Limit tournaments. Recently, I did well playing No Limit cash games on a weekend trip to another casino, where nobody plays Limit. Based on these experiences, it seems to me that Limit is much more of a science than No Limit. With Limit, selecting starting hands, calculating outs and pot odds are the most important basic skills. On the other hand, No Limit is much more of an art than a science. Sure, all the basic skills are necessary, but reading opponents and putting opponents on hands become much more important, as do implied odds. Becoming a good No Limit player requires mastering more of the intangibles.

I am no good at limit. I can't handle the marginal hands drawing with relatively easy decisions to make on all three streets. The ability to shove is half the fun of poker imo.

I like NL better. It lets me do more with pot odds and such.

So one outers have a better chance in limit? I am confused...I would love to play opponents not willing to be pushed off of one outers

I actually like both.In limit you can call down hands you normally couldn't in no-limit and often win these hands.In no-limit the over pair to the board or big pp preflop allins can crush you something fierce(I know).I still say play your cards and the rest will fall into place.

for me, i think that limit is better to start playing poker with....granted you have less influence on a person, but when you're just learning, it's better that you play limit and cut your losses, rather than go all in on a hand without thinking of all the other outs. As you play longer, you start to see the other options which will make you better at no limit. Also, because you have been forced to hold yourself at certain limits, you aren't as tempted to go all in on a crap hand that has a lower probability of winning...but that's my view on it

I'm just saying limit lets people who have no business even playing have a chance to win. Cuz unless the limits are really high, noone can go broke from any single hand if they just cold call till they hit their 10/1 hand.

but thats the way it is with any idiotic player. if they got one out in no limit, they'll still push for it...as far as i can tell anyways

lol, i'm with this guy. I can't stand limit, and I really don't know how to play it properly. they're totally different beasts!

it's just that you gotta know that your top pair or low end straight might not cut it....it basically makes you read and control yourself more.

No limit as well. It is rather annoying loosing from a lucky player at the river.... Even if the lucky one is me!

i prefer limit cash games, because i am a chicken that does not like risking loosing everything on luck, but i play no limit mtt and sngs.

I prefer holden no limit because is more fast , more emoticion ,
more agressive , but i played both.

I do poorly at limit and seem to piss my chips away really quickly being the donk calling station rather than being careful about what hands I get involved in as with NL. Also harder to push people off a hand in limit as others have stated.

I imagine as I get more experience I may come to enjoy limit more. And other games besides hold em too, lol.

Here's a better way to look at it, IMNSVHO ... If said retard is calling for his one outer or 10/1 shot, sure, he will donk it out every 1 out of 10 times. He is sadly complacent and misled by the fact that, as you say, he will not go broke on any one hand. But eventually, he will look down at his stack after those 10 hands wondering where half his chips went.

The beauty of limit is that many small mistakes by calling stations will, in the longrun, add up for your benefit. Think of it this way, if you had bet 4x or all-in, all the 'folds' are money you won't see.

Have to agree with all of this. I'd only add that while opponents are more difficult to read in limit, it's still important, and you'll get far more opportunities to do so, as you'll see a lot more showdowns while it's cheap to do so. And to continue on the 'longrun' idea, munkie, they're simply 2 different games, requiring different mindsets going in. Just as you're not going to make them fold, they cannot make you fold when the situation is reversed. Since it's harder to pull people off their hands, you cannot make many stupid mistakes. With limit you are not simply calculating your own outs and pot odds, but the same for your opponents to call should a flush and/or str8 draw flop to threaten your trips.

absolutly no limit. limit is too boring...in no limit you can win more money(or lose more) but is much fun and tenision is more higher

I, like some of you, prefer NoLimit HE, but play better on Limit HE.
The stress, the stack management are more interesting in No Limit as it is the success key ...
For comparison, the stack management is more basic in Limit HE ...

I think it is better for beginning poker cash games to start with Limit ... It makes you being more prudent ... and that becomes better to play no limit as it allows you to manage, bulff, etc. ==> And in the case you lost some money, you have more chance to have it back quickly playing on NoLimit

I prefer no limit anything, i seem to notice even more people playin any2 cards in limit and its makes it harder to read em

Any true student of the game plays both. Maybe not equally, but each has its own style that can help with the other.

playing solid hands in Limit hold'em is far easier to win than in NL. Thats just my opinion. I play NL almost exclusively, but you can beat limit by just playing TAG, and pressing any advantage you might have

Of course, the best way to win quickly if NL Holdem, but it is also a quick way to lose quickly also

When I'm a little bit tired, I only play limit holdem (cash games) ... Else, I try to switch from NL to Limit, etc. so that the game is more diversified...

Limit demands you make perfect decisions almost all the time to make a profit. Granted, there's less risk of losing big on any one hand, but you don't win as big in any one hand either. So one perfect hand can't make up for several poorly played ones.

No limit, on the other hand, is a lot more forgiving. You can make small mistakes then catch one good hand, double up and finish ahead.

Which is why I play NL. I'll play limit stud games, but they're a very different beast.

Stud games, in my mind, have to be limit, because at least for me too much can happen. Say in razz, i've gotten, as stated in the razzment thread, A234 to start and finished off with KQJ, in stud hi/lo, i've gotten AA23JQ9, and won nothing, when i could have went all in on the start. If it were nolimit, as i've seen some stud games, then people will go in on 4th street without even a good starting hand and force you to try your luck to hit a straight, flush, or boat. I just find that aspect of it too risky for stud games. And you're right about limit, but that's what makes it, in my mind, harder than no limit, because you can start with a great hand like AA, and end up screwed over, so you gotta kno when to let it go. Therefore, i think that limit is better for people who just started playing poker because it will hopefully teach them dicipline and teach them when to let go of good starting hands.

Hey! ya i have my ups and downs!
I think you can make more money in NL but of course also lose more!
So what ever your comfortorable with is really the best course of action

good point, but what you're comfortable in isn't always what's best for you. there's this kid i know who always plays no limit cash games with us, and he's most comfortable there, but always ends up walking away empty handed or borrowing money from about 3 people...and then walking away empty handed. He's a beginner, which is why i believe that limit games are better for people just starting out.

I prefer No Limit because I don't like how many draws are called in limit. I also find my self donking in limit so both things combined, it is a losing situation.

I was always one of the people who advocated limit to starting players, at least for a short time, just to get an idea of the "luck of the draw" so to speak. So much of NLHE is focused on preflop action, I think it can take a newcomer a long time to become comfortable taking a hand to the river. But, I hadn't really played Limit poker since I started, so I was beginning to feel like a hypocrite.

Fast-forward to now, and I'm playing Limit HORSE almost exclusively, and loving it. Yes, it's a different beast entirely from NLHE, and it took me several weeks (months?) of break-even before I started to turn a profit. But there's a great satisfaction from outplaying someone in Limit poker; whether it be getting that one extra bet out of them, or even that rare occasion when pulling off a stone-cold bluff. And the sheer variety of the HORSE game adds a lot of complexity.

Although I admit that I don't expect Limit HORSE to be as profitable as NLHE, it never feels like a "grind." Of course, I tend to get distracted easily, so this time next month I might be playing Badugi exclusively.

How about something completlly differnet. Pot Limit!