cash game:no limit or limit for a beginner?

I'm just starting playing poker and to build a little bankroll,what is it best?

I've read limit is less risky.It's more a question of odds.No limit is probably more fun.

think the best for begginer is limit because there you cant loose as much in a round as in no limit
you play autmomaticually more defense

Yes. In Limit, your mistakes cost less which makes it a great way to learn and practice the basics of hold'em.

yup, have to agree with the last post, mistakes cost more, even low stakes. the reason most pros play NL instead of limit is because they can get a lot more value out of their good hands. its one thing to call a bet on the end when you know it's only going to be $1, or $5, but when there's a chance it could be $50, what do you do... so limit is way better to start with in my opinion.

To learn texas hold-em, limit will do just that, limit your loses and also your potential for gains. However, IMHO, they are different games in play and require different approaches. Limit is more of a DRAW game, whereas no limit can be a draw, read, tactical/strategy or shear luck game. Limit-less risk than no-limit. Take your time and learn both. You have all your life.
Peace,
FLOW

No limit is way more fun. Limit is another game as well, so if you plan on start playing NL later, start playing it now instead and skip Limit.

Im going to say NL

I tried limit when I first started because I assumed that I would have less to loose.

TBH at micro stakes there really isnt that much difference in losses between the two

EXCEPT

there is no fold equity in limit and a lot of really bad players play micro limit as they feel its safer.

The result of this, I found, was that players played EVEN LOOSER than they did in NL. Coupled with the fixed limits, it meant that players in late position were mathmatically correct to call with any two cards provided there were 4 limpers.

Im sure limit isnt played like this at low / medium limits but at micro stakes there isnt really any point.

So NL is the way forward!!!

If you havnt.. get a decent book .. say HOH cash games!!! there is a thread just started and we will be discussing this book in the near future.

Harrington on Cash Games Discussion Thread

I would ask santa really nicely for that and just play freeroll tables and play money. Dont be looking to in any way learn poker from doing that.. instead use it for a couple of weeks to drill into you your preflop starting hands and get an understanding of position on the table.

That way you can join in on the discussion and use then concentrate on post flop play and concepts which are the really interesting aspects of the game.

By the way.. welcome to the forum.. there a re a lot of good people here with a lot of good advice.

It really depends on how comfortable you feel with poker. I understand that you're a beginner, but have you played at all before? Have you read any books, or at least followed a bunch of threads on this forum? If you think you understand some of the basic parts of poker, from pot odds to the importance of being in position, then you should probably play NL. If your really don't understand what you're doing, I would advise starting on limit, as it will enable you to play more hands and develop your game faster.

I would start with limit... Especially at the low limits. It has less variance, and sure, the idiots there play very very loose, but if you wait for good cards and strong hands, you can make a nice profit at these tables. When you have the nuts, bet the hell out of it, cause they WILL call you down!

Looking back I would of started with freerolls and learned something about the game. I started to play nlhe and had no clue what i was doing. That was a mistake. I should of played at least limit hold em but I wanted to be a badass and well, lets just say that didn't work. I would recommend starting with limit, and as it was stated when you get that monster people WILL call you.

this might be the worst advice I have ever seen. learn the game slowly and build a roll slowly, don't just jump in headfirst, unless you want to force yourself to reverting to freerolls and your 1% chance of making some money.

A couple of points about NL that I don't think have been addressed:

- There are loads more resources to help you improve your NL game. Nine out of ten poker books will focus purely on NL, and it's by far the most popular topic of discussion online. Here alone there are dozens of players who are very good at the game and more than willing to share their knowledge.

With limit hold 'em it's a different matter. There just aren't as many resources (especially cheap and readily available ones) around to help you improve your game.

- I've always thought the loss-reducing aspect of playing limit was overrated. Yes, you can lose your whole stack in a single hand playing NL. But you can be bled to death and lose the same amount of money just as surely if you're making mistakes in LHE. Proper bankroll management needs to be practiced in either game.

- Action probably isn't an issue in either game (particularly online) but if you want the game with the most action and the most fish it'll invariably be NL.

So as to which you should play... really, it's up to you. They're actually fairly different games, so I'd start with the one I intend to get good at and play more in the long term.

I wouldn't, for example, start out playing limit hold 'em with the intention of moving to NL after I've learned the game because to a large extent you've gotta go back to the start and learning all over again when you make the switch.

I'd recommend limit to anyone starting out. I liken it to training wheels on a bike. Limit lets you start riding with reduced risk and learn on the fly. Rookies jumping into no limit stand a good chance of skinning a few knees and elbows before they learn to stay upright.

Because of the drawy nature of it, limit HE is also great place to learn the mathematics of poker.

Out of interest.. of those reconmending limit as a starting point, who actually, really, honestly, swear on ya life, really played limit as an introduction to the game.. and by that I dont mean you plaed limit for a week and then switched, I mean who played limit and learned a significant portion of the game via limit play?

definitely limit for beginner. No limit is a very tough concept since a person can go in at any given time. With limit you learn the game, but also have fun while doing out. It decreases the likelihood of the game ending early.
Danny-sprtzfreak40@gmail.com

If u have a short bankroll , use strategy short stack.. NL , i think, NL holdem is the best for begginer, with shortstackstragy.
see u at the tables

No limit, and its not even close. Start with 30-40 buy-ins for like $5 NL, consider buying in short initially (40-50bb's), play full ring, and post some hands in the hand analysis section.

Limit is so tough, and you need to play perfect poker to see an appreciable win rate. All the people who are saying limit obviously haven't played limit poker for any appreciable amount of time. With no limit, you can focus on making 1 or 2 big decisions for your stack correctly. With limit, every decision is worth the same amount of money, and so you need to get very good at playing marginal hands since you make those much more frequently & they're worth the same amount of money as monsters.

You should also strongly consider sit & go's. Beginner sit & go strategy is much easier to learn than cash games.

I agree with those who have said NL.. here is why.

First, playing poker is a lot about reading people, you just don't get that chance in micro-stakes limit ring games.. maybe in tourney's but not really in rings.

Second, the most imoprtant thing about poker is patience and waiting for the GOOD HANDS... in limit, there IS less to lose but IMO it makes you play too many hands and that is a BAD habit to get into.

Finally, too many people play micro-limit games thinking they can cut thier losses that way but then go and play STUPID... I just don't think it is the way to start... IMO playing limit games effectively is a totally different monster than playing NL hands well. True, you have less to lose on each hand but most beginners seem to lose more over the long haul.

I actually think that NL tourneys and SnGs (I like single table becasue there is no rebalancing and it gives you a chance to learn how to read players which is hard online...) are a great way to get started since the objective is to STAY IN, you are less likely to do stupid things that will get you knocked out and those skills DO transfer well to ring games once mastered.. um.. I have yet to fully master them.. LOL I can admit it! (My biggest problem is patience.. UGH UGH UGH - LOL)

Just my 2 pennies.. is that enough for the buy-in??? LOL

yea SNGs is the way to go for a new player.

Just buy Colin Moshman's book SNG strategy and ur crush stakes upto $11 I honestly think NL cash games are evolving at a sick rate, even the lowest buyins. If i playing mirco SNGs its easy as u get so many fishes.

I played 2/4nl at Party before/ the lowest NL games. And honestly, i couldn't find a table with a Vpip over 20% and i kept having 5-6 regs with TAG stats who were multi tabling and on the grind. If i went into this environment when i started. I would have got crushed.

So go for SNGs to learn the game. haha i haven't played much poker in recent months but it is pretty funny now. I'm at the tables, where r the fish. 12/9, 15,12, 17/15 errr oh we have one 25/1 and he's weak/tight and i can't get any action from him. Happy days.

Well, i've only played 5k in the last few days and i'm running at 11/bb 100 but its not like.. Oh, i've got AA and i'm going to get some donk shoving AJ into me -) or coming over the top of my 3bet. I've got it all in 2times pre flop with Aces and Kings over 5k -_-

If you want me to teach u the basic of SNGs just pm me and i'll point u in the right direction. So simple play like a rock and get SNG wizard for when ur 10 BB and less for unexploitative shoves. Also get a Nash Equibilium chart for shoves HU and ur win the mirco ones without much effort.

Good luck.

So agree with this, i started with limit and after 3k hands still no profit and i felt i was playing pretty well, my stats were good but i couldnt turn a profit. its all so so close in limit that you have to be perfect in your play. I switched to NL and within the first 1k hands was making a profit.

Limit helps you to learn how to read the board since you see showdowns so so much more often, but its so not worth it.

No Limit all the way, can start on pokerstars since they have the $2 buy in NL as their lowest. FTP's lowest is $10 buy in. Then can move to whatever site you want after you started learning and have a feel for what you like.

^^^ I think limit is good for beginners to spend some time playing for this reason, but the play is going to be quite different. Don't spend too much time there, once you have the basics move to NL. I did start at LHE and won my first $100 grinding .02/.04 ...but its soul destroying.

Well for cash game si am a fan of limit.
you have to have a bit more patience when it comes to limit,and play the right stakes if you wanna beat the rake.
i never play less than 4/8 in live limit cash games.
when i started i was playing 2/4 and 3/6 limit and was giving it to rake.
i like no limit for tourneys though,because everyone starts out with the same amount of chips.
i hat going to a no limit cash gamewith say 20 big blinds,and have 2 or 3 people at the table,that have been there a while and have say 200 big blinds in front of them.

if i were you i would play small cash games to start out,then maybe small tourneys...but they are both diff. play

Play limit unless you are extremely disciplined with your money. Even if you decide to play no limit, try to start out with capped games.

I like that limit games limit my losses, but it is a different game than no limit. I play $1+25 tournaments to learn no limit. I especially like the freerolls, as I get to experience being in a large tournament and no money at stake. I played and still play the play money games on full tilt for experience, or I am tired, want to play, but don't want to throw my money away. That's my experience.

They are two completely different games in my opinion especially when playing at lower limits which i suspect is the case since your just starting out. Limit is much looser in nature which I feel can lead to very bad habits in nl.

I think no limit is the way to go and depending on how much you want to put in money wise would dictate on where to start. 1-table sng's(6 player even) is not a bad place to learn or even small nl's with 10 or 20 buyins.

In my opinion limit , especially at lower levels, can really affect your learning or even frustrate you to a decline in poker skills if your trying to play nl. This can happen at the nl's as well however I find on the net the majority of players in lower nl games play way better poker than in limit, thus improving your own game, than playing lower level limit.

Simple. Both. Both games have unique aspects that are more important in one or the other, but can still improve the other type by leaps and bounds.

i started play nl poker with actually no real knowledge of bankroll mangement. I didn't really read any books or forums about online poker.
And you know what happen yep i was bleeding money out of my bankroll.
Your question is it about limit holdem, n/l or just the game in general? I usually play limit hold em at the micro levels, and i've learn bankroll mangement, how to take bad beats, and bluffing. People think you can;t bluff at limit but you can. Not as much at no limit but still you can.

As for the orignial poster it just comes down to what your comfortable playing, just seriously get a book read the forums and study.
Good luck and hope it works out well for you

Another thing to consider is the rake. In Limit you have to go to more showdowns and will win a lower percentage of them than at NL where your big pots should be high % winners.

I like to round my pennies off at the end of the day, so I just sat at .02/.04 table at UB. HU we both start with .40, I finished villain off in 9 hands...I was left with 67c. So, I won in the short term but UB absolutely owned us for 36 bb/100 each .

Haven't paid attn to limit tables, but I hope the rake isn't nearly that bad at lowstakes.

I really don't like limit, seems as though people just keep betting all the way to the river, you can't chase someone out of the pot with a big bet.

Full Tilt has $1.00 + .25 No Limit SNGs. I finally cashed again in a freeroll, and have been using the winnings to play these.

I would say limit and freerolls. Limit is more just math where No-limit is math, phycological and timing. If you check out Chris Fergeson's article atFull Tilt Poker he talks about how he went from 0 to 10K in a year. Something for all of us to aspire to.

limit is very different lot of people limps in because the blinds are low (thats my exp.) i would say do no limit freerolls a lot and if you get better start with a little money!

[x] Hand up !!
I started playing stud and other limit games in '69 when the casino NLHE tables were sitting empty, no interest, no players. I still prefer limit games today, live and online.

One thing you do learn in limit games is that you are making decisions on every street and are playing more starting hands. In NL, quite often there is only one decision to make per hand dealt and you are playing fewer hands.

A lot of people refer to limit games as 'chasing' games. Wrong word, imo. The real word is 'poker' games. You make a 'poker' decision on every street if you're in the hand. In NL (especially online) it comes down to an all-in preflop decision, which (to me) is Clint Eastwood poker - "Do ya feel lucky, punk? Well do ya?" Poker's version of the kids game - "I Double Dog Dare Ya".

Deciding between limit and no limit may also rest with the ability to fund a bankroll. If you have the funds to survive a lot of variance and can reload repeatedly, and you enjoy playing 'instant gratification' poker, then NL is the place for you.

Over the years my winning limit sessions way outnumber losing ones. But then, I'm also quite happy being an ol' time grinder. The top players who do well, higher stakes players, would likely prefer NL, but they are also rolled for more swings.

I started with limit, and after 40 years of it, I'm sticking with it. It works for me.

Fixed limit is more conservative and requires more patience. You have to know the odds, play in good position and play good starting cards. You have to beat the other players and also stay ahead of the rake. Your losses will be less per pot, but so will your winnings.

No limit is all about winning big pots. You see hands go for 2 orbits with small pots and then bamm!! two or more players have their whole stack in the middle. A bit more adrenaline. You definitely have to know when you are ahead or behind and what the other guy is thinking. If you never fold your Aces stick to fixed limit. Try to play 6max NL at the lowest stakes available and see how you do. If you can break even or win after a couple of hours, you will know whether NL is your game or not.

no limit, and it's not even close