Making the Transition From Limit Hold'em to No-Limit Hold'em

Even after several years of playing limit hold'em on a professional level, I was still terrified of no-limit hold'em. The thought of facing huge bets, losing my entire stack in one hand, and making one mistake that would cost me months of rent money flooded my head. I was playing high-limit poker, too, up to $400-$800, but still, even a $25-$50 blinds no-limit hold'em game was daunting. At the same time, however, the allure of playing no-limit hold'em was undeniable. Unlike limit hold'em, no-limit enables the best players to play many more hands and rewards good player-reading ability more than limit hold'em.

In limit hold'em, a good player oftentimes will get a read that an opponent has a strong hand. However, this read does not often benefit the great player much since the pot is laying him such a large price that the read almost always has to be right to go against the pot odds and fold. The good player typically ends up going against his read and calls, even though he thinks he is very likely beat. Likewise, good players will read an opponent as being weak, but in limit hold'em, that often does not mean much. If a good player is heads up in a limit game and has read his opponent as being weak, he will still often check a marginal holding, because even though his opponent is probably weak, if he has a better hand, he will often call the bet, and will fold a worse hand, making the bet accomplish nothing. The good player will bluff only when totally missing in this spot, hoping his opponent has completely missed and will fold. Note also that even without a solid read on his opponent, a good player will often bet the end of a pot if he is sure his hand can't win a showdown, since he can often pick up the pot if his opponent also missed. Thus, the good player would generally play the same way in both cases, whether or not he had a good read on his opponent.

In no-limit poker, these good reads would be greatly rewarded. In the first example, the good player would likely be facing a sizable bet relative to the pot and would be able to fold even a fairly strong hand, sensing great strength in his opponent. In the second case, the good player would be able to make a large bet on the river (if he had the chips to do so) and could likely push his opponent off a weak hand, as few players have the ability to pick off a big bluff with a weak hand when all the cards are out.

As my ability to read people improved, my desire to be able to put this skill to use most effectively increased, as well. I started playing more and more no-limit hold'em tournaments to gain no-limit hold'em experience and hone my people-reading skills. However, this transition from limit hold'em to no-limit hold'em was not an easy one for me.

When I first started playing no-limit hold'em tournaments, I played them similarly to how I play limit ring-game poker. I played fairly tight preflop, and when I played a pot, I almost always came in for a raise or a reraise, rarely limping or cold-calling raises. This is often a poor strategy in no-limit poker, especially if both you and your opponents are deep-stacked. For example, let's say that you are dealt queens against a good player who raises from early position to $300, with the blinds at $50-$100 and both of you having $10,000 in chips, like you would in the beginning stages of the final event at the World Series of Poker. Now, in my early no-limit hold'em days, I definitely would have reraised in this spot, just as I would have done in a limit hold'em ring game. In a limit ring game, this play would work great. I would reraise my opponent, put a lot of pressure on the people behind me and the blinds, and likely go into the flop heads up with position on my lone opponent and a great starting hand. Even if someone woke up with a big hand behind me and capped the betting, or everyone folded to my lone opponent and he capped it, it would cost me only one more bet to see the flop, which is no big deal.

However, reraising with queens in this spot can put you in some difficult situations in no-limit hold'em, especially when the chip stacks are deep. Going back to my example, if I make a very standard reraise with the queens, making it $900 total to go, my opponent will likely reraise me with aces or kings. Furthermore, he will fold lots of marginal hands, such as A-Q, A-J, A-10, K-Q, and K-J, which are hands against which I would like to see a flop with my queens, hoping the board comes queen high or smaller and he makes a big top pair and loses lots of chips to my overpair. If he thinks I'm strong, he may call my additional $600 with smaller pairs just to try to hit a set and bust me, or with some kind of deceptive suited hand with which he could bust me if he caught the right flop. He also would likely call with A-K, and if he flops any ace or king, I am in big trouble. If he has A-K and decides to reraise me a significant amount, I would be hard-pressed to call him with queens, figuring that I was probably up against aces or kings. And, at best, if I was up against A-K, it would be a coin-flip situation, which you would generally like to avoid in no-limit hold'em, especially if it is for all of your chips. Also, heaven forbid, if another player behind me were to reraise, I would hate my hand, as this person would be raising two early players who had shown great strength. He likely would need aces or kings to make this play, unless he was a real maniac. Therefore, the reraise with queens in no-limit when the stacks are deep can get you into tons of trouble. Just calling in this case would probably be a stronger play against a good opponent, whereas in limit poker, reraising would generally be the best play.

I made many more mistakes as I was making the transition from limit to no-limit hold'em, like overvaluing certain hands, particularly A-Q, A-J, and K-Q. If I raised from early position with one of these hands and an opponent with position on me made a moderate reraise, I usually called. In limit poker, this would be absolutely correct, as I would be getting great pot odds to call one more bet to see a flop, even if I thought I had the worst hand and may even be dominated. However, in no-limit hold'em, it is often correct to fold these types of "trap hands," even for only a moderate reraise before the flop. Furthermore, if you and your opponent have deep stacks, these hands may be some of the worst hands with which to call in this spot. Seeing a flop with a potentially dominated hand when out of position in no-limit hold'em is one of the easiest ways to go broke or lose lots of chips, since it is so easy to flop a big second-best hand, and when you do flop the best hand, you usually do not make much money.

A-Q is the perfect example of this. Let's say that if you raise from early position in no-limit with A-Q, your average opponent will reraise you a modest amount with A-K, kings, queens, jacks, tens, or nines, and you will call his reraise. Now, if you flop an ace and it is the best hand, a pair of aces is such an obvious hand that even your opponent's strongest possible second-best hand (pocket kings) will probably not give you much action. Now, if you flop an ace and your opponent has A-K or makes a set, you are likely to lose lots of chips, if not go broke. Thus, you're rarely going to put yourself in a good situation by calling with A-Q in this spot, and should fold preflop against even a modest reraise.

Against a reraiser in this spot (if we are both deep in chips), I would much rather have a small pocket pair or some kind of suited connector, a hand that can become deceptively huge with the right flop and bust my opponent if he makes a big second-best hand.

I will continue with similar topics next issue, and hope you will learn from the mistakes I made during the learning process.

Thomas "Thunder" Keller is a 23-year-old professional poker player and one of poker's young and rising stars. To learn more about him, go to his website at www.thunderkeller.com, and feel free to e-mail him.