Ace Speaks Hold'em: No-Limit Versus Limit - An In-Depth Analysis Part V Differences and Adjustments: Premium on Aggression and Deception

You should understand that big-bet play puts a premium on aggression and deception – much more than limit play does.



While in limit hold'em, a somewhat unimaginative but tight and disciplined player is often able to beat the games for a decent amount (especially if he pays considerable attention to things like table and game selection, in order to play with the best possible edge), it is much harder to do in no-limit hold'em, especially in games with deep money. In these games, aggression and deception are often the key to winning – especially selective aggression and deception. Those who play in predictable patterns and who may have a somewhat weak/tight style of play may not be real big winners in limit, but they will still be able to make at least some money. In no-limit hold'em, they won't stand a chance – unless, of course, they are smart enough to be playing against only truly weak opposition, people who don't recognize or simply don't pay attention to their obvious betting patterns, and who let them get away with it.



I will analyze this with an example. If, in limit hold'em, an unimaginative player raises only with big pairs and A-K, his results will suffer – more than anything because reasonably good players will simply stop giving him action once he raises. But now let's say that this player has one specific weakness: He can't get rid of these good hands on the later streets, even when it is clear that his hand just cannot be good anymore. Will this one specific weakness make it correct for the others to sometimes call with speculative hands, in order to take advantage of this? Well, the answer is: in limit, no, as it is usually not worth it, for the following reasons:

• The cost of entering the pot is fairly high. While it is sometimes correct to call a raise with the 7 5 from the big blind against this type of player (because it is just one more small bet), calling the raise cold with this hand is usually just too expensive.



• The odds make it sometimes correct to call more bets once the flop gives you a pair or a gutshot, even when you know that the raiser has a big hand. Thus, you will usually lose some additional money.



• You will miss the flop too often. If you are playing a long-shot hand, you want the initial costs to be low, with a very high potential reward. But here, the initial costs are high, and the potential reward is only moderate.



Now, compare this to no-limit. Here, the rewards can actually be enormous: You could take the predictable player's entire stack! Also, if this player does what a lot of weak no-limit players do (make one more bet on the flop with an unimproved A-K and then shut down on the turn), calling his preflop raise will actually be a highly profitable situation for you. All in all, in no-limit, calling a raise in position with a speculative holding is correct, even when you know you are up against a very good hand, under any of the following circumstances:



1. The money is relatively deep.



2. The raiser is someone who can easily be bet off an unimproved A-K, most likely on the turn.



3. The raiser is someone who just can't lay down his good starting hand after the flop – even when it is clear that his hand just cannot be good.



So, in this case, you are not playing according to the strength of your own hand, but according to the player. Let's take our example hand, the 7 5, and see how playing this hand works in practice against the predictable player described above. (By the way, please don't ever make these kinds of plays against either very good, very aggressive, or very tricky players!) Anyway, with blinds of $10 – $20, this player makes it $60 to go from middle position. Since you and the preflop raiser both have a $1,500 stack, you decide to call the raise, knowing that almost certainly you are up against a big pair or two high cards. The flop comes 10 8 2, giving you absolutely nothing: no pair and no draw. The raiser makes a normal-sized bet, something in the range of $100 to $160.



So, now you fold, because you have absolutely nothing – right? Well, not really. Against this player, it may well be worth it to call a pot-sized bet on the flop, if you know that because of his predictable play on the turn, you will almost always have an easy decision to make. Let's say the 9 comes on the turn and your opponent checks. Now, if your read on this player is good enough to label him with an unimproved A-K, and if you know that he is the type of player who will not stubbornly hold on to this A-K, you know that you can easily take the pot away from him with a standard bet. You know that this player will reason: "Hey, he called my bet on the flop, so he either has me beat already with a pair or has a straight draw. In all cases, my ace-king has been outdrawn now, and it is extremely unlikely that I can make him fold his hand if I make an aggressive move. So, now is the time to simply throw away my ace-king." And when he does, you have succeeded in taking yet another pot, almost irrespective of the actual cards you had.



Note one thing, though. Remember that I said, "Never make this type of play against either very good, very aggressive, or very tricky players." Well, in all cases, the reasons are the same: With these players, a check does not automatically mean, "I have nothing and am prepared to give up." Aggressive players may actively have been trying for a check-raise in this situation with something like J-J or Q-Q, for an overpair plus a straight draw, a hand that they are willing to play for their entire stack. And with a deceptive player, a check can actually be more dangerous than a bet, simply because this type of player just loves to be tricky. Also, with players of this kind, a preflop raise does not automatically mean "big pair or high cards," as they will often raise with a very wide range of hands – and this makes it much harder for you to get a good read on them. So, against these players, you should not actively search for trapping situations with marginal hands – because in the end, you may be the one who gets trapped.



Anyway, these examples show that both aggression and deception are of major importance in no-limit. And at the same time, being predictable is probably the biggest no-no of all. Unless they are playing against extremely weak players, or in games with very shallow money, predictable players simply stand no chance in no-limit.



Rolf's Rule No. 8:

In big-bet poker, more so than in limit play, you should always try to keep your opponents off balance. If you play with predictable patterns, your opponents will certainly start taking advantage of it. This means that you can never be more than just a marginal winner in relatively weak games, and you will never be able to beat the very tough ones.

This is Part V in a XIV-part series on limit and no-limit hold'em. This series was created especially for Card Player Europe. The accompanying DVDs on this subject can be obtained through Rolf's site, http://www.rolfslotboom.com/.