Don't Just Go All In

"Sooner or later, you hit the deck – you get found out"


I've been playing no-limit hold'em cash games online recently. Initially, I wanted to do some research about the current state of no-limit hold'em cash play online. Once I did that, I stuck around because of what I learned: It's terrible.



Playing $2-$4 and $3-$6 no-limit hold'em (I trust that the play at higher limits is somewhat better), I saw mistake after mistake. We're talking about basic strategy stuff here, folks, like calling all in with a naked flush draw on the turn, getting about 2-1 pot odds. (If you don't know why this is a fundamental error, please read my book, Winning Low Limit Hold'em, or another good entry-level poker text.)



But the very favorite mistake (and one of the largest) was to just push all in at random times during the hand for amounts grossly larger than the pot size. Without going into the exceptions, note that it is rarely correct to make a move like this. Here's why:



When you put a bet into a poker pot, you are offering your opponent certain pot odds to call that bet. The worse pot odds you offer him, the more it is correct for him to fold rather than call. That is the upside of betting a large amount compared to the pot. For instance, consider a limit hold'em game in which you've made a very good hand, but are fearful of draws. You would like to bet a lot, but because of the structure of the game, you can put in only a fixed-size bet. Perhaps there's $150 in the pot, but this is on the turn of a $10-$20 limit hold'em game. Your only option, if you bet, is to bet $20 – offering your opponent 17-2 pot odds to call (good enough for all kinds of draws). In a pot-limit hold'em game, you could bet as much as $150 into that pot, offering your opponent only 2-1 odds, making virtually any draw a poor bet. And in a no-limit hold'em game, you could bet that same $150, or you could bet $300 or $3,000.



And here's where the trouble starts. The occasionally forgotten downside of large bets is that you are risking the amount of your bet to win whatever is in the pot. In a limit game, this is a no-brainer, so it doesn't get discussed. If you are pretty sure you have the best hand, you're more than happy to risk $20 to win $150. And, in fact, in the pot-limit game, with presumably the best hand, you are relatively happy to risk $150 to win $150. But let's suppose that you bet $150 into a $20 pot (as I've seen recently). Sure, you are offering your opponent(s) scant 17-15 odds to call. Anybody making a draw with those kinds of odds is taking far the worst of it. And the most likely outcome is that you will win that $20.



However, the times that you get called, unless you happened to wake up with the nuts (or close to it), you're probably going to get shown the nuts (or close to it). And you're out $150. Now you have to win seven and a half $20 pots to make up for that $150 mistake.



Furthermore, some players are so predictable about making this play that they set themselves up. One of my opponents in a $3-$6 no-limit game had the following pattern: He'd put in a raise before the flop. Then if you checked, he'd bet the flop (a reasonable bet – perhaps three-fourths of the pot or so). If you called and checked the turn, he'd move all in – often for four to five times the size of the pot. I got into three hands with him. The first two times, I checked and folded on the flop, but I was learning his pattern from watching him play against others (he managed to play a lot of pots). The third time, he made it $15 before the flop (a fine raise), and I called from the big blind with K-Q suited. So, the pot was $33. The flop came K-Q-4 rainbow. I checked, and he bet $25 – another perfectly reasonable bet. I called. There was now $83 in the pot. The turn was a 7. I checked; he moved all in for about $350. In the older days of no-limit hold'em cash games, this would have given me pause. A solid old-school player who moves all in at that point is saying, "I have a set of kings or queens. Please throw away your jack-ten right now and give me the pot." But this was not the older days, and this was no solid old-school opponent. I decided that if he had a set of kings or queens, it was his lucky day, and I called. Sure enough, he had Q-J and was drawing dead. So, he had risked $350 to win $83.



What should he have done? Well, I'm not delighted by his raising with Q-J. But it's hard to fault anybody for raising, anytime. And he put in a very sensible raise of two and a half times the big blind. The flop was not very good for him, but I don't necessarily have a king, and his bet was, again, a great size – about 75 percent of the pot. But when I call on the flop, he needs to be done. He gave it his best effort, but I've told him in clear language that I've got something. If he wants to be extra assertive, he can bet again on the turn; I could find no fault with that. But that bet should be in exactly the same range – somewhere around half the pot to the full pot. So, let's suppose that he had bet $60 into that pot. I would have promptly walloped him with a check-raise to about $250, and he could have folded with a clear conscience and an extra $290 in his bankroll. A good alternative could have been to check behind me on the turn, and then consider calling a moderate bet on the river.



But offering me his entire stack on the chance that I didn't have him (badly) beat was just not the right play. Don't get into the situation in which you're saying, "I don't know how I'm meant to act with all of you lot – sometimes I don't try, I just move all in."



"Save it for later."



Lee Jones is the poker room manager for PokerStars.com and the author of the best-selling book Winning Low Limit Hold'em, currently in its third edition.