Hi,
I was wondering does any pro here play PL HU SnGs?
When I started my playing husngs I've started from pot limit - just because specialy at lower stakes there are bunch of guys shoving almost every hand PF - i didn't understand that time that I'm making money from them and now I don't mind to play with crazy agros.
But my buddy is playing pot limit from that time and didn't change as I did - now he have sth like 19% ROI at $15 and $30 at PStars Pot Limit HUSNG. So I was wondering If someone can tell me is playing PLimits can be more profitable than NL's? or is he just rocking in his own field and he should be making vids of his own?;-)
Kind regards,
O.
With a lot of Omaha and Stud HUSNGs, the ROIs seem pretty high but the action/volume is very low, especially as you climb up the limits.
Therefore, what I've seen some guys do historically, is mix up action in PLO or Stud games with NL, it's a good value add on to supplement their income streams. At high ROIs, the downswings are less common too, so they sometimes find it more comfortable.
That said, I've seen some guys actually play a lot of these. Tatta was one of the more famous examples. I think he plays NL now though too.
Don't know If you got me right here Ry, I asked about Pot Limit Holdem:) not Omaha - or maybe it was just a shortcut of your reply and it still accurate?:)
He is at $15 level, ocasionaly play at $30, but have a 19ish % ROI over sth like 2,5K of tournaments or even more now - but the ROI is still that high from what I know.
So I know that mixed games can be quite fun for those who are wild cats in every type of poker tournaments, but really just wanted to know If the pot limit games of holdem are easier to play, having weaker opponents or just he is that good at this - because we are friends, we talked about poker a lot and still arguing about pros and cons of PL and NL, and we have basicaly the same approach, ranges, and reading abilities - though my ROI at this month at 7's is also 19% at sample of 500 games, but overall Its about 11-12% - so yeah - either he is that good, or maybe there is some pros about pot limit that I don't see :-)
anyone have a clue?:)
Kind Regs.
Ah I misread, I didn't see "holdem" so I just assumed Omaha since that's what most people mean when they say pot limit (PLO is more popular than PLHE I believe).
I think the points still apply, mainly because the PL holdem HUSNGs are not of the hyper variety. If they were hyper variety, then I would say that edges would probably be smaller per game. But in the slower formats, and with many non reg opponents not even understanding the basic adjustments to make, I would imagine edges can be pretty high.
That said, action is going to drop drastically as you move up, so it's probably only viable as a supplemental game (but a nice edge one at that if you're a solid player).
Thanks:)
Yeah, unfortunately at the 30-60's there are constantly 5 regs that sit in the lobbies for hours to find a game;]
Pot limit in hold em is pretty much an unnessesary limiting factor to the game, making it more simple, less fun. It will never be a popular poker variant, it's not worth getting into.
I dont even try to argue with that:) but just wanted to know about aditional factor - TB more specific expectations from playin it - I know.. less fun:) and yes - its is not popular, still makes me wonder how brilliant should be player who has ROI over 19% in kinda big sample for one stake - though he tried to change format into NL and run away because of crackheads shoving from 1st hand ;) He lost a couple of buy-ins and honestly I think he overreacted to downswing there - he is pretty chilled with loosing from time to time, so its not like he was afraid about his money, he just decided that PL are easier and he have their bigger edge.