Hand Selection: Limit v. No Limit

I find myself seeing a lot more flops when i play limit hold 'em because generally i do not have to worry about people behind me raising a lot. Is this reasoning correct or should I play as tightly as I do in no limit?

I guess it depends what sort of hands you are playing, but my suggestion would be to play just as tightly as you would at NL. Sure, it's going to cost you less if a player in late position raises you, but the "drip, drip" effect of doing this too often will eat into your profit.

The other thing to bear in mind with limit poker is you're not going to get too many monster payouts, so drawing hands are not as easy to justify playing. Lets take 98s as an example. If you get a fovourable flop, you've got a well disguised monster on your hands, with a good chance of doubling up (or better) in NL so you can afford to play this more often in NL as when you get paid off it will justify all those hands you had to throw down. That probably won't happen at limit.

My advice would be to play just as tight at limit, and think also about the type of hands that you play.

I tend to value suited connectors, small pps, eg, good drawing hands, a little more highly in limit situations, due to the pot odds offered. This is especially true against aggressive opponents when I have a decent read on their betting habits. For example, if I'm in against a player at 6max limit who habitually raises with any ace, or any 2 paint cards, hitting a straight, flush or set can garner huge dividends. The rewards v risk factor is high enough to merit speculating, IMO.

not sure about good limit players, but at least at the low limit tables I play super tight, because there's practically no chance to bluff, at least one person will see it all the way to showdown. On the other hand I practically never play limit (unless you count the H in HORSE, it's probably been at least 6 months since I'm even sat down at the limit tables.

reglardave said:

I tend to value suited connectors, small pps, eg, good drawing hands, a little more highly in limit situations, due to the pot odds offered. This is especially true against aggressive opponents when I have a decent read on their betting habits. For example, if I'm in against a player at 6max limit who habitually raises with any ace, or any 2 paint cards, hitting a straight, flush or set can garner huge dividends. The rewards v risk factor is high enough to merit speculating, IMO.

Click to expand...

this is goes against conventional wisdom. all those hands are better in NL because of awesome implied odds/winning stax. in limit, big cards with showdown value tend to be better and there's less in the way of reverse implied odds for them to worry about (for first reason mentioned)

As I recall, in LIMIT you'll need odds (multiple limpers/no raise) before the flop with small PPs and suited connectors. In NL the implied odds allow these speculative hands to be played with less callers or even a small raise.

Also, marginal high card hands like AJ & KQ are much more dangerous in NL
whereas in limit you may be able to play these for a profit.

goldog

When I play limit I am super loose, but not stupid loose.

I like limit a lot for grinding, but I could never play a tournament with LHE.

combuboom said:

this is goes against conventional wisdom. all those hands are better in NL because of awesome implied odds/winning stax. in limit, big cards with showdown value tend to be better and there's less in the way of reverse implied odds for them to worry about (for first reason mentioned)

Click to expand...

I realize that I sometimes play unconventionally on draws, and I don't continue to chase wheb I miss w.ith my connectors, but then I don't usually chase with just overcards either. But I'm not timid about calling to see a flop with less than premium hands. Since I'm nearly always playing 6 max,I loosen my starting requirements somewhat.