Beginner Limit Hold'em Poker Forums

CJ,

What DeathDonkey has said is exactly what I would have said. Stay away from this \"respected\" pro, he\'s bitter that he can\'t beat the games for a higher rate and cannot apply S&M theorys so he dismisses them all.

What type of bad run are you on? What bankroll do you have? What limit?

Hopefully, you can get back to this and answers DD questions above so we can point you in the right direction.

Bilgefisher wrote:

LC - I am beginning to like this forum more and more. The quality of posts and posters is extremely helpful. The focused and well thought out responses have helped me already. This thread alone proves that. Please keep up the good work.

Karma Point!

Limit absolutely has higher variance than NL. The reason for this is by being able to bet any amount, if you force your opponents to make an unprofitable call against you, it can be significantly unprofitable. In limit, if someone calls your turn bet with a flush draw getting only 4:1 when they need 4.5:1, that is a small mistake, but it is quite common to play a poor player in NL who will call with the same flush draw getting only 2:1 (a pot sized bet). This edge means you will take his money much more commonly and quickly.

For your second question, you asked something that as you said could upset people, but I\'m just going to be honest and people can think what they will. The guy who told you that and is a respected local pro is a fool. The only thing that is a definitive \"2+2\" / \"S&M\" style is trying to maximize your EV while gambling, and if he isn\'t doing that, then what the heck is he doing? Just like in all places, there are posters on 2+2 who are better than others, and some of them might be outright fish if they play in the wrong games. But if I played 200/400 on Stars in a typical lineup I\'d be the fish too, and I can admit that.

His statement about 41 playable hands blah blah goes a long way towards showing me how naive he is about poker. Here is a simple example: let\'s say a huge rock is in the BB and I\'m in the SB. The BB will call my raise preflop with lots of hands because he knows I raise light because I\'m an \"aggressive young kid\" but he only continues on the flop with top pair or better. Our local pro friend is only playing his \"41 playable hands\" and I\'m raising the tight guy without looking at my cards and betting every flop. Who\'s going to do better?

You will go crazy trying to analyze why certain players succeed and others fail, all you can do is worry about yourself. But there is a particular dogma that is prevalent amongst the vegas low to mid limit community that emphasizes weak tight play. I have seen so many ridiculous face-up folds designed to \"impress\" the fellow local pros at the table that I just have to laugh. There is luck in this game but there is also a reason some guys have been and will be playing the same limit for years - they either can\'t manage a bankroll or can\'t beat the game. Worse yet, they won\'t admit to either one.

What type of bad run are you on? What bankroll do you have? What limit? I\'ve had my share of swings at live poker so I can tell you what I think is variance and what isn\'t. I believe anyone can be profitable in the long run but they might have a lot of bad habits to overcome. Maybe you should think about a live poker coach? I know Joe Tall has done that for people in the past and know a couple others who do as well.

-DeathDonkey

Great post.

-DeathDonkey

I\'m down $703, 10.7BB/hr at 4/8 limit. My bankroll has gone from right at 300BB to less than 100BB. I\'m on a -$466 streak right now.

This doesn\'t compute for me unless you are spending your bankroll on other things too. I can tell you especially at 4/8 limit, where the games are furious and crazy, losing $700 is going to occur. That\'s less than 90 bets. Small consolation I know, but in the grand scheme of things that\'s not what I\'d consider a major slide, just a rough few sessions.

-DeathDonkey

CJ - When you get back home we will play a session together. I think you will be shocked at how different my thought process will be from yours in many situations, your going to get a lot out of this - I promise!

Re the vegas pro - guys like him are ridiculously over opinionated, using their arguments as a crutch for their own playing frustrations. When Small Stakes Hold\'em first came out countless vegas pros shat all over that book because they were afraid their opponents would turn from weak tighties (whcih they were accustomed to and used to playing against) into loose agro-tags, which they weren\'t used to playing against. Their argument was really a projection of how they wanted the games to play, not how they felt about the book or it\'s content (oddly the book turned many people into agro-fish because they misapply the concepts, and the weak-tight \"local pros\" don\'t know how to deal with them either). Really simple. Stick him at a table filled with DD, JT, Entity, CDC, and myself all playing our best. Come back 8 hours later and see who still has their money:evil:

Also I am going to take a slightly different POV on variance between NL and limit hold\'em. NL variance is lower for an expert player, there is no doubt about this statement - nearly everyone agrees and we have the empirical evidence to prove it now. But for an unexperienced player the variance in NL can eat away his bankroll much faster than he can in a limit game. As you know its my opinion you should focus on limit at this stage of your growth, your bankroll is too small to take the risks inherent to NL (CJ is mostly a live player). Limit players get to experiance lots more because of the sheer number of hands they can play vs what a NL player can experiance in the same amount of time. Knowing you personally, limit is your best bet at this stage - and when you have mastered (mater is a loose concept of course) limit you can move back to NL confident in your ability to read the board, opponent hand ranges, and opponent thinking patterns.

CJ when your bankroll shrinks, step down to the lower level. It sucks emotionally, but it has to be done some times. If your playing 4/8 you should have at a very minimum 2,800 (300BB) in your roll but it would be wiser to have around 500BB (4,000) while your still learning. Your loss so far is not big at all, hell I\'m stuck more than that so far for the year in my live limit game (196 bets for the year as of yesterday, thank god I can ride through the varience much faster in my online game). I suggest you play 3/6 live and no bigger than 2/4 online right now.<br><br>Post edited by: *TT*, at: 2007/06/05 09:28

Cactus Jack wrote:

*TT* wrote:

I suggest you play 3/6 live and no bigger than 2/4 online right now.

I have no problems stepping down, having done it before without feeling embarrassed. No big deal. The rake, however, is another question. Hard to beat it. Low limit live is nothing but showdown poker--poker bingo for many--and I\'ve had nothing to show down. The donkeys have ridden me into the ground.

It\'s time I simply sit back, study, relax, and save back enough to play at decent levels. (Not enough 3/6 games in town, anyway. Most are 2/4 and that\'s worse.) Done it before, too.

That\'s poker.

move to online. rake is not a concern. For all the complaints about the rake I could probably turn a profit playing 2/4 live if I had to.

Cactus Jack wrote:

First, I think limit has a higher variance than no limit. But I have certain acquaintances who absolutely swear NL is higher. My records over the past year show that my variance is quite a bit more playing limit.

Comparing the variance of fixed limit and no-limit hold\'em is rather pointless without supplying other parameters. If you set the levels so that the expected result in dollar value is the same, the question becomes meaningful. If you set the levels so that your expected result is equal in these, then you just want to choose the one that has the smaller risk of ruin, basically. Smaller risk of ruin equals roughly with smaller swings.

Another related point is that typical winrates in no-limit are bigger in terms of big bets (or blinds). Now, you have to adjust this to the dollar values, but what this higher positive expected result compared to the blinds means that it\'s more likely that you\'re on the winning side. The standard deviation in no-limit is still far higher than the expected result so big swings both in negative and positive side are to be expected, but the probability that you\'re winning is greater, if I understand correctly.

This doesn\'t necessarily mean that your expected result in dollars is bigger in no-limit but it just means that you\'re more likely to have a positive balance. It\'s far easier to handle dowswings that have you still be winning more than losing. Fixed limit\'s downswings can be, on the other hand, very grueling and most people can\'t handle them completely neutrally.

*TT* wrote:

Also I am going to take a slightly different POV on variance between NL and limit hold\'em. NL variance is lower for an expert player, there is no doubt about this statement - nearly everyone agrees and we have the empirical evidence to prove it now. But for an unexperienced player the variance in NL can eat away his bankroll much faster than he can in a limit game.

Yeah, agreed. It\'s much easier to learn the basic principles that makes a player at least near break-even in fixed limit than it is in no-limit. In fixed limit, playing tightly preflop, aggressively postflop (in big pots), and not folding too many winners before showdown all carry you a long way towards break-even play. I have no idea what similar, pretty simple, ideas would make one a break-even player in no-limit.

In other words, it\'s much easier to be a -10BB/100 losing player in no-limit than a -3BB/100 player in fixed limit. And moving from -3BB/100 to 0BB/100 is perhaps somewhat easier in fixed limit.

LC - I am beginning to like this forum more and more. The quality of posts and posters is extremely helpful. The focused and well thought out responses have helped me already. This thread alone proves that. Please keep up the good work.

Ok, answer these two and have my total respect. Please.

First, I think limit has a higher variance than no limit. But I have certain acquaintances who absolutely swear NL is higher. My records over the past year show that my variance is quite a bit more playing limit.

Second, and this one is delicate. As this is a \"private\" board, I feel I can ask this without alienating anyone.

I had a guy who\'s respected among local professionals say, \"Show me anyone who plays the \'Sklansky/Malmuth 2+2 way\' and I will show you someone who loses at mid-stakes.\"

I found this surprising, to say the least. I was unable to get much out of him beyond this statement. He is adamant and sticking by it. He says there are 41 playable hands and half of those are from the blinds, only.

There seems to be a giant chasm between 2+2 and Vegas pros. I\'ve been told they are weak/tight. They say 2+2 players are far too loose.

To be honest, given that I\'m on a horrible bad run in which I\'ve just about lost my bankroll, I\'m getting a bad feeling about playing poker in general. That there is no consensus on pretty much anything, I\'m wondering if I can ever actually be profitable in the long run.

I\'m going to Texas, tomorrow, for the rest of the week. I need a vacation. Badly.

I hope this thread gets some discussion while I\'m gone. I\'ve got some tough decisions to make when I come back.

Best wishes, everyone.

Joe Tall wrote:

CJ,

What DeathDonkey has said is exactly what I would have said. Stay away from this \"respected\" pro, he\'s bitter that he can\'t beat the games for a higher rate and cannot apply S&M theorys so he dismisses them all.

What type of bad run are you on? What bankroll do you have? What limit?

Hopefully, you can get back to this and answers DD questions above so we can point you in the right direction.

Hi, guys, I\'m back, rested and overly well-fed. Wow, trees!

Thanks for the replies. When you\'re in between no knowledge at all and expert, it\'s easy to get confused. There are some at the Wed Poker Discussion Group that are math whizzes, and some who have played for 20 years and fly by the seat of their pants. They don\'t agree on much. I tend to side with the math guys because while I don\'t understand what they\'re saying, they have the numbers on their side to back them up.

Joe, for the month of May, I\'m down $703, 10.7BB/hr at 4/8 limit. My bankroll has gone from right at 300BB to less than 100BB. I\'m on a -$466 streak right now. This is coming at the very worst time because my job out here has seasonal variance and this is going into the slow-time of the year, after convention season, so it\'s not going to be easy or quick to reload. Plus, this is the beginning of the WSOP and I\'m virtually on the brink of busto. It sucks.

For the most part, I\'ve been horribly card dead. I\'ve also been run down over and over while way ahead by players who are donating lots of money. You guys have been great at getting me past my weak/tight phase, but the gods busting my chops but good. Just when I needed an even break to get to the next level, I run bad. Variance times 2. It\'s very hard to post hands when you get no hands to play.

How is it you can see Q4o five times more often than AKo when the odds for getting both hands are the same? (Don\'t answer, I know, just how it appears when you are running badly.)

It\'s been trying, I\'ll tell ya that.

Thanks, guys. Not crying, just sighing.

DeathDonkey wrote:

I\'m down $703, 10.7BB/hr at 4/8 limit. My bankroll has gone from right at 300BB to less than 100BB. I\'m on a -$466 streak right now.

This doesn\'t compute for me unless you are spending your bankroll on other things too. I can tell you especially at 4/8 limit, where the games are furious and crazy, losing $700 is going to occur. That\'s less than 90 bets. Small consolation I know, but in the grand scheme of things that\'s not what I\'d consider a major slide, just a rough few sessions.

-DeathDonkey

Put it over 100 now.

I\'m learning a hard lesson about BR management. 3 months ago I was running great and building up a nice cushion. A few unexpected needs and this current run has me crushed. I\'m done for, now, until I can reload. sigh

At least I\'ve got enough bad beats to fill a book.

*TT* wrote:

I suggest you play 3/6 live and no bigger than 2/4 online right now.

I have no problems stepping down, having done it before without feeling embarrassed. No big deal. The rake, however, is another question. Hard to beat it. Low limit live is nothing but showdown poker--poker bingo for many--and I\'ve had nothing to show down. The donkeys have ridden me into the ground.

It\'s time I simply sit back, study, relax, and save back enough to play at decent levels. (Not enough 3/6 games in town, anyway. Most are 2/4 and that\'s worse.) Done it before, too.

That\'s poker.