Am I wasting my time with limit?

[OzExorcist]

All I'm saying is it's cheaper in LHE to work on the basics since mistakes cost less. Hope that clears things up, OZ. I'm talking strictly beginners and I got the impression (maybe wrongly) that the OP fell into that category. If the player is not a beginner and has all this basic stuff down pat already, then I agree with you OZ. LHE doesn't help a NLHE player much.

I only picked HU $200NL because it made the numbers easy and it was a math point I was trying to make - by all means assume that I mean $2NL FR and adjust the numbers, positions and other irrelevant details to suit if you think it makes a difference.

And while I don't dispute that you can go through all that math when you're playing LHE, my question is how many people (especially beginners) actually do it for every hand?

The fact is that the math in LHE is almost always simple and most players will quickly learn shortcuts along the lines of "if there's at least X bets in the pot then it's OK to call one more on a flush draw" rather than actually doing the math.

You run into a lot less marginal or difficult to calculate spots (like the one I fabricated above) and even if you do manage to come across a marginal spot in LHE you're only risking one bet so you're not really being punished for your mistakes. Absolutely mistakes cost less in LHE but if you're not being punished for your mistakes, how are you going to learn?

 

[ats777]

This has been a great debate for me to read on this thread. I don't like considering myself a beginner because I've played poker for 5+ years, so I do have a generally good understanding of the game, but what I lacked was a deep understanding of the basic fundamentals that lead to winning poker. I either did not know them or just ignored applying them. This led to very mixed results. After a couple years off, I came back recently with a renewed committment to learning and applying those fundamentals and slowly moving up the levels. So I am self aware enough to know to treat my process as a beginner to instill those fundamentals.

I began at .10/.20 fl and have moved up to .25/.50. Been mistakes and poor judgements along the way, but I think that's to be expected. Been sticking to BRM except for about a month where I went nuts on some NL. (luckily no real harm done to BR). After that came back to the FL where I've grinding away trying to improve.

I do think FL is helping me in terms of hand selection and calculating odds and keeping my mistakes cheaper, but it's hard to argue that NL will provide even greater complexities to advance mylearning. Seems that if NL is really where I want to end up, then progressing there sooner rather than later would be the way to go to put me in more complex situations to learn.

 

[dwolfg]

I only picked HU $200NL because it made the numbers easy and it was a math point I was trying to make - by all means assume that I mean $2NL FR and adjust the numbers, positions and other irrelevant details to suit if you think it makes a difference.

And while I don't dispute that you can go through all that math when you're playing LHE, my question is how many people (especially beginners) actually do it for every hand?

The fact is that the math in LHE is almost always simple and most players will quickly learn shortcuts along the lines of "if there's at least X bets in the pot then it's OK to call one more on a flush draw" rather than actually doing the math.

You run into a lot less marginal or difficult to calculate spots (like the one I fabricated above) and even if you do manage to come across a marginal spot in LHE you're only risking one bet so you're not really being punished for your mistakes. Absolutely mistakes cost less in LHE but if you're not being punished for your mistakes, how are you going to learn?

It can just be how you view it. In nl, if you lose one hand by calling a pot size bet on the turn with only a fd, then you can lose one big pot and possibly learn from that right away. However in the long run, you can be punished more harshly in fl ifyou do not learn from your mistake(s). Those "little" mistakes in fl over time can really add up if you do not learn from them. Eventually those little mistakes will drain a br.

 

[Stick66]

I only picked HU $200NL because it made the numbers easy and it was a math point I was trying to make - by all means assume that I mean $2NL FR and adjust the numbers, positions and other irrelevant details to suit if you think it makes a difference.

And while I don't dispute that you can go through all that math when you're playing LHE, my question is how many people (especially beginners) actually do it for every hand?

I do. Maybe I'm weird, but I know of many other people who do also.

The fact is that the math in LHE is almost always simple and most players will quickly learn shortcuts along the lines of "if there's at least X bets in the pot then it's OK to call one more on a flush draw" rather than actually doing the math.

That seems like a cool shortcut. But just so you know: The first real poker book I ever read was "Small Stakes Hold'em" by Miller, Sklansky, and Malmuth. It's a Limit HE book and stresses memorizing the odds ratio chart. It does mention "X bets in the pot" but doesn't really teach that as a calculation much at all. I guess that's how the odds chart got ingrained in my head.

You run into a lot less marginal or difficult to calculate spots (like the one I fabricated above) and even if you do manage to come across a marginal spot in LHE you're only risking one bet so you're not really being punished for your mistakes. Absolutely mistakes cost less in LHE but if you're not being punished for your mistakes, how are you going to learn?

OK Oz. I guess you & I half agree and half disagree about all this. I guess different people can learn in different ways and there isn't just one pat answer for the OP.

No hard feelings. Cheers.

 

[Poker Orifice]

Wow! It's very surprising to see this negative opinion of the relation between LHE/NLHE here at Cardchat.

Most poker experts say that Limit Hold'em is the PERFECT PLACE TO START OUT since LHE gives the chance to focus more on basic calculations AND the fact that mistakes in LHE cost much less than in NLHE. Figuring pot odds, break-even odds, etc., is so much easier in LHE and are considered basic & automatic in NLHE. Get good at your basic calculations in Limit and that's one less thing to work on in No Limit.

.

agreed 100%!!
Seems odd that so many poker pros would also agree (both live & online pros).

 

[left52side]

Personally I like to play limit ring games and no limit tournaments.
It took me along time to adjust but think I have worked on it quite well keeping it that way.
For me I found that playing anything less than 3/6 or 4/8 limit was a losing battle due to rake and pot sizes.
Generally I like to play 6/12 games of limit to beat the rake and due to the ammount of pot sizes.
IMO they are 2 completly different games,but the same at the same time.
You can certanly make the transition in the two but never forget they are two different games.

 

[DonkyKilla1]

I played LHE for many many years.... I lived in Fresno CA and they did not allow NL action, it is a great game to learn from and the swings are so small when compared to NL that it allows you to slowly increase your bank roll without too much threat of going broke in just a few sessions, you also get to play many more hands in LHE vs NLHE but that’s also its down fall..... if it's two bets to you in LHE and you are sitting with a hand like 5H6H it's an easy call and you can hit a big flop but in NL if it comes two bets to you (I.E. bet - raise) its an easy fold.... and this is the same thing your fellow players are facing..

Consider the following:

NLHE gives you the opportunity to get people off their drawing hands and apply the pressure…

NLHE requires a lot more bankroll management because of the huge swings

NLHE allows a lot more traps to be set and huge pots to be won (or loss)

NLHE is much less likely to have a showdown (you can win the pot by pure aggression and showdowns are rare when compared to LHE)

LHE gives you the opportunity to chase with great pot odds

LHE has much smaller swings

LHE most of the time their WILL be a showdown so the best hand on the river is going to win much more frequently

So all and all my advice would be… evaluate your play and figure out what kind of player, then devote every once of energy to be the best LHE or NLE player you can be!!!

 

[F Paulsson]

There are plenty of reasons why playing LHE when you start out is better than starting directly with NLHE, even if you do plan to play no-limit eventually. Whether or not they're sufficient to make up lost time is debatable, but if you know you're in it for the long haul, learning the basics - i.e. pot odds, something that the majority of no-limit players seem to have difficulties with ("how often do you need to have the best hand to call a halfpot river bet?") - is not a bad idea. You'll pick up some bad habits that will take awhile to shake once/if you make the switch, but I came through alright in the end. Of course, there are other ways of learning these things than by spending a year playing a game you're not interested in.

Yeah, there are a lot of pros who advocate starting out with LHE. Obviously, these are pros who DID start with limit hold'em. Whether or not that makes them right is debatable. It's all debatable. Personally, I'd lean towards "play the game you like to play." Going through the motions of LHE as some sort of stepping-stone school while longingly eyeing the wonderful world of NLHE is no way to spend your free time.

One final thing: Swings are only steeper and more difficult to handle in NLHE if you count strictly big blinds. To say that a LHE player "only" loses a few big bets when he hits a bad hand is missing an important point: Most LHE players play with bankrolls of less than 1,000 big bets (or 2,000 big blinds, if you prefer), and the majority of small stakes LHE players probably with more like 300-500 big bets. If you look at how badly a downswing will butcher your bankroll, LHE can quite possibly be said to be worse and that's because the edge of a great player is not that huge. Downswing sizes are affected mainly by your win-rate, and the lower the win-rate, the bigger the swings. And even an expert LHE player is not going to achieve the kinds of win-rates that an expert NLHE player will.

 

[F Paulsson]

Oh, I forgot:

LHE is an easier game than NLHE. That's what makes it harder to beat, and thus requires more skill. Mmmm, irony.

 

[Exit141RTe1]

I tried limit there for a while. Got really frustrated and didn't like it in the end. The NL game is superior in my view and not an easy transition. Just my two cent.

 

[LuckyChippy]

Oh, I forgot:

LHE is an easier game than NLHE. That's what makes it harder to beat, and thus requires more skill. Mmmm, irony.

Tasty, tasty irony.

I saw you had posted in this thread, pretty much ignored what others put and read yours, cause unlike a lot of the people ITT I know you have actually made that transition. The first post I read was sickening in its falseness.

I agree, if you want to learn NLHE, the learn NLHE. You'll enjoy it more and you'll get the hang of it eventually. Just make sure you learn it right. There's nothing wrong with starting at LHE but you could be wasting time and not enjoying yourself. That sounds pretty silly.

There are lessons that can be learned from LHE, ones that you are forced to learn there and that can be used at NLHE. I haven't played LHE but a big thing I know FP has mentioned is that he goes to showdown a bit more than the average player, something picked up from limit. Realising your equity compared to your pot odds at the river and making calls based on these. These lessons are often hard/expensive to learn and it all pads the win-rate.

Play what you want to learn, maximise your free time not just for learning but for enjoyment too. At the end of the day if you're paying recreationally/learning, you should be having fun. It makes the learning easier too.

 

[PasoTex]

Very interesting discussion. Most of my poker experience is in playing limit hold 'em, but I've thought about learning NL because that seems to be where the action is. I have tended to think that my limit experience would help me, so I was surprised to see so many of you think otherwise. I still would like to learn NL, but I'm not sure I'll do well in it. I am a little nervous at the thought that I can make one mistake and lose my whole stack. How does a good NL player deal with that?

 

[dmorris68]

I am a little nervous at the thought that I can make one mistake and lose my whole stack. How does a good NL player deal with that?

1. By practicing proper BRM.

2. By not being results oriented, i.e. being confident that you made the right play regardless of the outcome. Of course it takes practice, study, and skill to know what the right play is, and even then you don't always get it right, but the point is that's the goal you strive for. Moreso than winning (or not losing) a stack.

Losing a single stack (or even several stacks) should not concern you if you're practicing both of those. Over time, losing a lot of stacks without winning at least as many tends to indicate a leak(s) in your game that you should work on. The good news thought is that plugging those leaks and/or getting lucky at the right time can quickly reverse your loses, much quicker than in LHE.

Personally, from Oct 2009 through mid-Feb I went on a 30+BI ($1500+) downswing at 50NL, over a fairly small sample of 25-30K hands (I wasn't playing nearly as much then as now). WVHillbilly, a fellow CCer, offered to do a sweat session and go over my stats with me, helping me to identify some leaks. Taking his advice, my swing immediately reversed course and if I can sustain it, I'm on track to recover my losses within probably another month or so, maybe even sooner now that I'm putting in heavier volume (1-2k hands per day) and now get rakeback since the first of the year (over $100 in RB earned just this week). If it weren't for a brutal 5.5BI bad session on Saturday, I would be up every day in March. I didn't let that bad session tilt me, and over the next two sessions made most of it back. I've also since joined Stoxpoker and Cardrunners (again thanks to the increased volume and freepokertraining.com) and have been download/watching videos like crazy. Next step after I've reached maybe 50K more hands, again based on a recommendation from WVH, is to pay a stats coach/expert to go over my HEM DB with me, kind of like what WVH did but much more intensely. All of this to reach point #2 above, i.e. striving to always make the right decisions, regardless of outcome. I feel confident that if I'm making the +EV decisions, the immediate outcome doesn't matter much and the long-term outcome will take care of itself.

As others have pointed out, if you have a prolonged downswing, once you do start running better it will typically take a much longer time to dig yourself out of that hole in LHE compared to NL.

 

[atlantafalcons0]

Well said lark. Limit and NL are way different games. The using limit as a stepping stone is a farce imo.

Yea, I really don't see how you can use limit as a "stepping stone" at all.

They are two totally different games!

 

[belerophon]

As someone who started trying to learn NL in my first year then switched to limit on the advice of some books I read I want to chime in with my vote on limit before no limit.

I won't go on about learning the math and the differences between each as has already been mentioned but I want to add that the next main very important skill I learned from limit. Card reading. I feel it is so vital to be able to put your opponent on an accurate hand and over all on a good range for what they play.

In limit so many more hands go on to showdown than in Nl that you can begin to see where your reads are. This can be a huge buildup in confidence. Common patterns in betting are easier to suss out and see in limit and unlike in Nl you will get to see your opponents pocket cards a great deal more.

Another problem which is much easier to work on in limit is self control. If you can get yourself to the point where after being drawn out on and investing so much into a pot yet you still will not pay off that last BB because you know you lost then your well on your way. IMDO

Anyway, while I'm down in playing NL, I have a great deal of confidence in my Limit game and that confidence carries over in my other games.

 

[woodwidgeon]

I play at 4/8 limit tables in casinos & 1/2 NL, Limit is a slower game as far as action goes. You have to be able to sit there waite & play your good starting hands. As said it's a different game from NL. I enjoy playing limit at times to slow the pace down -- it is a grind.!

 

[BabyAcey]

If you enjoy it great, it drives me a bit crazy in the beginning but when it gets going it's not so bad!