Re: PL vs NL
[quote:a3626a780c="Zero"]Since this is a poker site, I figured I'd ask a poker question.
Pot Limit verse No Limit.
Does playing Pot Limit, limit the damage variance may have on your bankroll by protecting how much you can lose on any given hand, while at the same time still relies on strategy/skill that playing No Limit offers?
Part 2 to the question, does the game being played factor into the equation at all?[/quote:a3626a780c]
I think it can only limit the variance if you play pot limit versus limit. Just as the variance would even be smaller if playing limit versus pot limit. The less money that can get in the middle in any given hand is going to reduce the variance - good or bad.
I am not sure what you mean in question 2. Of course the variance is going to matter depending on game played, and also if you play it no limit or pot limit. That is the reason for the various ways to play is because of just that - ones desire to control variance.
IMO most games are played the way they are played simply because that is the way it always has been. I think there is some logic behind why certain games are played certain ways, but the majority of the reason is because it is the way it has always been played. Take NLH for instance. For YEARS it was predominantly a limit game, but over the years no limit has taken more and more of a hold and is now the more widely played game.
I think people prefer styles they are used to - plain and simple. I do think, however, that some games are more adaptable to a certain style (Limit, Pot Limit, No Limit). One that comes to mind is Omaha. It is such a drawing game it would be a sick game if played balls out No Limit. It is rare in Omaha that you don't have at least one draw, and more often than not many. If you were to take your average 23 year old NLH player, who is willing to risk all their chips many of the times on draws, and put them in a No Limit Omaha environment and you would have some wild ass hands. I also think you would have less people interested in playing Omaha No Limit due to the amount of "suck outs" (I placed that in quotes, because it is tough to label suck outs in Omaha) that they would experience.
Seven card stud could easily be a no limit game IMO, but is still a better game with controlled betting. This allows the hand to develop a little more prior to people committing their entire stacks to the pot. Hold Em is a bit different in that you see over 70% if your hand generally before you have to commit a large amount to the pot, because you can always choose to walk away pre-flop. With betting at every round in 7 Card Stud it would seem you would have an ALL IN on essentially every single hand due the numerous extra streets that are dealt.
I think these games could be played no limit, but in general it is a more comfortable game how it has always been played. With that said if it was pushed enough by the media, poker players, etc. then if played No Limit I am sure it would catch some traction eventually. |
