No-Limit Hold'em

I see lots of myths and half-truths floating around when it comes to no-limit hold'em strategy. Let's discuss some of them.

Many players of no-limit hold'em, perhaps most of them, are interested in the game from the perspective of tournament play. There are lots more opportunities to play in a tournament than a money game when you are talking no-limit hold'em. Yes, in certain respects, there are big differences between the two scenarios. But where do those differences come from?

One of my students posed a no-limit hold'em problem to me. He gave me a blind structure of $25-$50, and presented the problem, including how much money each player had. Then, he wanted to know what my play would be in a tournament and what my play would be for money.

The differences between no-limit tournament play and no-limit cash play come from the widely different ratios in the typical setting for each game. In a tournament, a player most frequently has from five to 40 times the amount of the big blind. In a cash game, he most frequently has 40 to 100 times the big blind. These differences have a profound impact on strategy. But once you specify a set blind structure and stack size, at least 95 percent of these differences between tournament and money play go out the window.

Of course, there are specialized situations in a tournament that affect strategy when you get into or close to the money. Is the event a winner-take-all satellite or a graded payoff? Is someone short-stacked who has to take the blind soon? Do I have enough chips to play a big pot and still stay in the event? But unless you specify such a situation, I do not see a difference in strategy. If such a difference came into play at all, it would be present only on a very close decision.

True, I do not want to risk all of my chips in a big pot if I can help it, when playing in a tournament. Unless there is a rebuy period, I cannot go into my pocket and pull out more money, as I can in a cash game. But if you have to play a hand for all of your money, you grit your teeth and do it. There are lots of atrocious plays made by people who do not wish to face possible elimination from a tournament event. They dog it when committed to the pot, fail to put their whole stack at risk when this is the proper play, won't risk more than a certain amount on a bluff, and so forth. You would think the penalty for busting out of a tournament was execution, instead of being "sentenced" to play in the cash games.

I am of the opinion that when the odds or poker logic say you are supposed to put all of your money into the pot, the money goes in, even if it is a tournament. If you look at how the top players play in a tournament, you see that they run considerable risks to get the money. Some people think that unless the pot odds are extraordinarily favorable in a tournament, you should avoid a confrontation and stay alive. For example, I do not buy this stuff that says if you are getting 4-to-1 pot odds in a situation in which you are only a 2-to-1 or 3-to-1 underdog, you are supposed to muck your hand in a tournament. That's ridiculous. Most of the money to be won comes from the top few spots, not squeaking in for umpteenth place. Besides, if you do not get ahold of some chips, the blinds and antes eat you up quickly during the later stages of tournament play. If you could show me a strong tournament player who settles back and peddles the nuts, instead of reaching out for pots, perhaps I might change my mind (but I doubt it).

Another weak-playing theory is the idea that at the start of the event, when the blinds are small in relation to your stack, you should play lots of cheap flops, try to make a hand, and thus give yourself a chance to accumulate some chips for when you will need them. There are many reasons why this idea is very bad, but let's talk about one of them by using a specific hand.

You are in early position with the 6 5 . You foolishly call the blind because "not many pots are being raised." First, you get lucky by being able to see the flop without putting in any more money. Now, you hit the flop. Your initial intention was to "flop a big hand or hit the door." The game plan was that you either have zilch or the flop comes something fantastic like 4-3-2. But in all probability, how did you really connect?

Chances are, you caught something that would put you at great risk. Here are the real flops that were hit: (1) K-4-3, giving you a straight draw; (2) A Q 8 , giving you a flush draw; (3) 6 4 2, giving you top pair and a gutshot. Sometimes you can do better than that, but "better" is still hands like bottom two pair or a flopped flush – hands with which you may well either win a small pot or get busted.

Here is my advice regarding those little pieces of near-garbage like the 6 5. If you get dealt such a hand, consider your position. If you are in the cutoff or button seats, and no one has raised, see a cheap flop. But in the other seats, do not waste your money. Playing this type of hand is always risky, but you can play one if you are in good position. If you are in early or middle position, muck that dog. And if you are in the small blind, do not become a bargain hunter, because you have the worst position at the table. No-limit is a game where position is extremely important. It is a game of implied odds, not saving $5 here and $10 there. Do not play small connectors without excellent position.

The last myth I will address is that of the check-raise. Believers in this myth think that if you hit a flop in early position, the "proper play" is to go for a check-raise. The truth is, you are supposed to vary how you play your good hands. A lot depends on your stack size. If you flop a whopper, you should give yourself the maximum chance to double through someone. Aim high. If you can get all in without a large overbet of the pot, going for a check-raise is reasonable. If the money is so deep that you can't get all in so easily, it may be right to lead with the hand.

The check-raise myth also is applied by some to good drawing hands, like a nut-flush draw or a straight and flush draw. I have to admit that I like to lead at the pot with these hands if I do not have too many opponents. There is nothing Bob Ciaffone likes better than to win without a fight, so I avail myself of every opportunity to do so. Checking will often get you into a spot where a blank comes off after everyone checked, meaning your big drawing hand that you were willing to play for all of your money with two cards to come has shrunk into a little drawing hand because there is only one more card coming. I prefer to bet my draws while they still have a lot of bite to them.

No-limit hold'em is a great poker form. It is our premier game for tournament play. But to play the game optimally, you have to get rid of those ideas that are popular with mainly the weaker players, and think about the game in a correct manner.

Editor's note: Bob Ciaffone's new book, Middle Limit Holdem Poker, co-authored with Jim Brier, is available now (332 pages, $25). This work and his other poker books, Pot-limit and No-limit Poker, Improve Your Poker, and Omaha Holdem Poker, can be ordered through Card Player. Ciaffone is available for poker lessons. E-mail [email protected] or call (989) 792-0884. His website is www.diamondcs.net/~thecoach, where you can download Robert's Rules of Poker for free.