Okay, i started this train of thought as a TJH (Tightwad Journal Highjack)- at the time it was a somewhat delerious, shoot-from-the-hip type thought perhaps brought about by being up for 40 or so hours straight- but after a little sleep i woke up and thought some more about it, and seriously entertained the thought that the days of Limit Holdem, as a lucrative 'Profession' may indeed be over, in all but the most favorable of circumstances.

I say this for a few reasons:

First, it is probably the simplest / easiest of all poker games to play and understand. Its high only, you only get two cards, and though it definitely has its ins and outs, someone with a very basic Sklansky-read understanding of starting requirements, position, domination, etc.is not going to yield you a hell of a lot of money. Sure, if you are a GOOD player and he's just an okay player, you have an edge - but the fact is that the edge of a GOOD player over a DECENT player in holdem, in my opinion, is not a huge one. Unlike the more complicated games like Omaha, Stud, and even triple draw lowball, limit holdem is sufficiently uncomplicated that it does not lend itself to non-obvious mistakes, at least once you learn that you shouldnt call a PF raise with QJo, which you can very easily pickup if you have read ANY literature at ALL... Compare this to an Omaha game, where players ROUTINELY call lots of bets for either 1/2 or 1/4 of the pot, and chase non-nut hands which are drawing dead- or stud, which i dont know enough about to name a big mistake, but which i guaran-fucking-tee is REAL easy to play bad in. And 2-7 triple draw? Ha! Dont even get me started on chasing non-nut rough 8 draws and shit like that people pull.

Secondly, in addition to being the simplest and most straightforward game available in poker these days, limit HE probably has the MOST literature available on it, and even more importantly, is the game where reading a bit about it will help you the most (in contrast to NLHE, where the game has so much read/feel/instinct involved that reading about it will only provide the most basic foundations).

I guess the upshot of this is that LHE has for a LONG time been the most beatable game out there, and anytime there is a game thats widely beatable, well, its only a matter of time before the game becomes far less beatable, because now, in trying to 'beat' it, most people have gotten decent enough at it that they can at least hold thier own- and if your looking for the games in which you are going to make the most money, maybe its best to just move on..

Or, maybe im running bad and will go onna mad rush after which i will put up a post entitled 'An irrefutable and comprehensive treatise on how to play the game such that losing is a logical impossibility'. Who knows.

Any thoughts from like, the three or four limit HE players that we have on this board?

Calling stations will always be calling stations and maniacs will always be maniacs no matter how much literature is out there. I don't think poker will ever not be profitable to the good players.

It seems like every month or so I read a post on 2+2 where someone is worried the games are tightening up, but I continue to log on and find 30% VP$IP tables.

I agree with norton. I just think that if you are an equal level player at NL and limit HE, you will make more money playing NL. I was always a limit player and its what I did for years but it gets to be a real grind as even if you win, you often with a small pot. You can't get 2 stacks in on the flop when you are a huge favorite like you can in NL.

It got to be tedious to play limit online. You look at your cards and know what you are doing with all of them before the action gets to you. While in NL, there is more room to manuever as you have greater implied odds and you can play things lik 97s for a raise heads up if you feel its right while a lot of times that would just be wrong in limit.

I wouldn't worry too much about the limit games getting too tough to beat and beat well. The literature to help players in limit holdem has been out there a long time even if you just look at Sklansky's first small treatment of the game and still players for the most part play unoptimally in many situations. The difference in a break even or moderate winner in limit and a solid 1-1.5 BB/hr winner is extremely small and most of this difference is due to superior post flop play. Any monkey can tighten up and play non troublesome hands but to get the most out of those hands takes a good amount of skill which will only come with experience in the trenches. When you can start to maximize your pots as well as learn to lay down those hands which you know are beat instead of paying off you will continue to see month after month through slumps and rushes that end figure of 1-1.5 BB/hr.

If anything I think alot of your concern probably comes because of your amazing run at the outset of 1020 shorthanded and the last few weeks/months have just been some long term equalizers. I haven't played enough SH to get a feel for if the players are actually much better on average than their full ring game counterparts but I suspect that this is the case (at least on average they are more aggressive and this is always tougher to deal with than a calling station).

I still think that if you take what you have learned from your SH play and adapt that to a full ring game you will be an incredibly tough player and will probably show a much more consistant profit given what you have said about the overall toughness of the higher limit SH games on Party.

Just to argue the other side. Limit's rules and betting structure are so simple that its the easiest game for a newbie to get into. Even if s/he reads a couple of books, people generally learn through experience i.e. pay for it. And very few seem to learn at all, judging by some of the tables I've seen. Plus, everyone's favorite book - Sklansky and Malmuth, while excellent in general, is pretty poor for the low limit no-foldem games where I play.

Another point that (i think) is often overlooked is that the limit game can be beat with a fairly simple strategy - which allows limit players to play more tables than no-limit players who have to pay attention all the time. So the return at a single table may be less, but you could compensate by playing more hands.

My 2 cents----

Poker of any sort is a card game as well as a "people" game, and winning players will adapt to ANY situation...Similar to the game of life, winners will always find a way to win, and losers will...well always lose....

The variance may change, the style you play may have to change, but as long as you can adapt, all will be well...

This is being written by a true "dinosaur" who literally HATES changes....

As long as Mecos is around to be viciously sucked out on, limit hold 'em will never die for me.

I've been lurking these boards for a couple of months now. Great site you all have here. Just wanted to drop my two cents into this discussion.

Limit poker, and any other skill-requiring endeavor, will never die for one very simple reason: Human beings are mistake-ridden creatures. It's true that a lot of information is readily available for anyone truly willing to learn the game (and that's a finite number), and online poker has allowed a novice to gain years worth of experience in a much shorter period of time. However, even with all these advantages, winning poker still comes down to patience and resolve (as Ace said), and discipline and determination. The player still has to concentrate on doing the right thing on every single hand. The patience, resolve, discipline and determination required to even attempt to do this are internal qualities, not learned knowledge. Most human beings on this planet simply don't have these qualities and will never even admit that they need them, thus making all the things they might learn or experience essentially useless. And may they all find their way to our tables!

Dead on the money guys, I dont have a Bankroll or the money in general to go all in on some non nuts hand. In limit i can control the situation and the opponent to some extent. Strategicly there is as much if not more strategy in limit just due to the fact the guy with the huge BR can stomp the guy with the small BR into being a passive little fish at the no limit tables. great thoughts and it is interesting to think about the future of limit.

Interesting thread, even if it was started as a whine.

(Nice first post, Mr. Leaf. Welcome aboard.)

My answer, for which I'm absolutely positive of my opinion, is...I don't know. There as as many possible answers as there are people, I think. Limit may be dead to some because they aren't very good at it, or they find it boring, or they aren't smart enough to know what they know and don't know. I don't know, either.

What I do know is if limit is dead, why is it so hard to get on a table? Couple days ago there was a 10 person waiting list on TGC for the $1/$2 tables. I cleared $40 in bonus, and won an additional 200, in about 3 hours. Yeah, that was an exceptionally good day, but only about twice as good as usual for me (when I get decent cards). So, I guess even a mediocre player such as myself can make a bit of ching from playing limit. This may end that area of disagreement, at least from my end.

But I think it may be easier to win at limit than NL, and will continue to be for much, much longer. Praise the Lord for ESPN. It brings in a new school of fish every year. They are gutted very quickly on the NL tables, but they like the game, so they find the limit tables. They are gutted just the same, but they bleed out so slowly they don't realize they are dead until their stake hits 0. They play the same way they see "the pros on ESPN" play. Then, if they really want to keep playing, they may buy a book. Anyone who has really learned from reading poker books knows that one read through isn't going to make them a winner. Nor will two or three times through. If the book isn't dog-eared, pages taped back into the binder, page after page underlined and highlighted, and the reader is able to quote entire passages like the rosary, they still will find more to learn. As said above by a wise poker player, it's about experience, which always costs dearly. Either you pay for it with money, or with time and dedication. Whichever, you will pay or you will lose. If you're willing to pay the price, you'll reap from those unwilling to work at it, but ever so willing to pay you for your hard work.

That's what makes Texas Hold 'Em the greatest card game ever invented. So very easy to learn the rules; so very, very hard to learn the game. It seems so easy, Ma, so why am I still losing???

Because it just ain't easy, Sparky!!!

It always will be thus. The lottery is easy, but unbeatable. Yet people still play it every day. They bet the dogs and ponies. The bet the Super Bowl. People love "easy money" and they see all the money that is being won in Vegas on ESPN and how easy it is and they will keep playing. THE is the game of now and always. Anytime, anywhere on any site, there is a limit table with 10 players, 2 at most are really good, four are calling stations, 2 are maniacs on their way to broke, and 2 are clueless. If there are 2 at your table that are really good, let them win their share. (See sig below.) You split up the rest between you. If you're one of the good ones. It's easy to know. What's in YOUR wallet?

Good thread.

CJ