|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
Cap Games on Full Tilt
So I get an email from Full Tilt today talking about their new cap games
For example if a player is playing a 1/2 NL game with a 60 Cap, someone could bet 6 dollars, and the most I could raise is 54 dollars... afterwards I'd be considered all in (although I have more $$ in front of me). The purpose seems to be not to let one bad beat kill your whole stack.... but honestly I think this is pretty retarded, as it'll cost you plenty of money against bad players, and it also allows drawing players to chase, knowing there is no turn or river bets for example. Other opinions?
__________________
"Most of the money you'll win at poker comes not from the brilliance of your own play, but from the ineptitude of your opponents." |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
I thought it seemed odd too. That defeats the whole purpose of wanting to have maximum chips for maximum 'ammunition'.
With that said - does anyone think this will attract weak/scared players? |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Yes I do, simply because I am actually thinking about playing these tables. Since I am just now learning to turn a profit at NL cash games it makes sense for me not to give two hours work back on a single bad beat.
Honestly, in the past two days I have played well for 2+ hours winning small to medium pots only to lose a giant pot on the river twice, once with AA and once with KK. Kinda protects me from myself in that sense. Now if I was the kind of player who was wanting to play big pots and hope people miss thier draws then I would absolutly hate this. Just because FT offers this doesn't mean you have to play it though, they still have regular tables. In the "Big Game" don't they have a limit on what you can lose on a hand as well?
__________________
If aces didn't get cracked they would be writing books about me! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I guess to take that one step further - if someone is learning to play NL - or moving up levels - this is a way to protect yourself from losing it all when you make a mistake.
i think someone posted a quote from Barry Greenstein's book that he suggests buying in for the minimum when moving up levels in NL cash games. I guess this would be a variation of that. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Good example:
KK 4x raise, flop a set on a board of 24K, bet the pot, get called, turn is a 9 (two hearts on the board now), I know I'm ahead here and push the rest in, he calls with 3 5 , can't blame him with the flush draw and open ended str8 draw, he hits the str8 on the river costing me most of my stack. Not sure I really went wrong, but protection there would have been nice. I say that only becasue I have been on the wrong end of a lot of these recently, if not, I might feel differently.
__________________
If aces didn't get cracked they would be writing books about me! |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
OK played some cap tables today and they are loose as hell so far its like a freeroll in 25nl today
__________________
I like to get my money in when behind, that way I cant get drawn out |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
This looks incredibly retarded, although I'm sure people that play loose in this game will get destroyed.
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Case and point
I guess it depends which side you are on, I just seem to be on the worng side of it too often.
Dealt QQ, raise 4x get a caller flop of AQ8, all the chips go in on the flop, well all that could go in. He turns over AA for set over set, saved me $35 since it was a .25/.50 game which the standard buy-in is $50, though the max is $1,000,000 for this cap game.
__________________
If aces didn't get cracked they would be writing books about me! |
|
|