Some No-Limit Hold'em Decisions

In no-limit hold'em cash games, you have several options of how to play a hand. Most important is not the exact play you select, but the reasoning that goes into choosing it. If your reasoning includes the correct factors, you can refine your game to make the right plays more often.

Recently, a member of my forum (at www.barrytanenbaum.com) posted a hand for discussion with several interesting considerations. The poster made some good decisions, but he also missed something. Here is the (edited) post:

Background
I'm playing in a game with $5-$5 blinds, a $200-$500 buy-in, and some downright silly plays. The standard preflop raise is about six times the big blind, and a preflop raise of three times the big blind will result in eight players seeing the flop. My table image is relatively tight, but I have shown some marginal starting hands and given up on some hands when others showed continued strength. After a great afternoon, I have a stack of about $3,500. The only other stack of similar size is three to my left, where a refugee from the baccarat table has $4,000. The other stacks are $400 to $1,000.

Hand
I'm dealt black aces in early position and raise to $30, which could mean anything. If I had to narrow the field significantly, I would have raised more - to $50, maybe. But I wanted the other big stack, who was way too loose, to come in and give me some of his stack. Also, after several callers early, the button has been known to make a squeeze type of reraise, which also would be fine with me. Anyway, I got the big stack in and many more, and we are sixhanded going to the flop (the pot is $180). I'm second to act.

Flop
The flop is the A 9 6. The good news is, I have top set. The bad news is the three-flush, as several of these players will play any two suited cards. The blind checks, and I decide to play strongly because I have a pretty good hand and I want to know where everyone is at. I bet the pot and am called by the player two to my left, who has played pretty tight post-flop. He is a decent player, and after calling, he has about $500. I put him on a made flush (most likely), a draw to the K or Q, or an attempt to catch me in a bluff (least likely). Everyone else folds, and it is heads up with $540 in the pot.

Turn
Here is where I am not sure if I did the right thing. My flop bet eliminated most of the field, but how should I play the turn? I'm going to get 2-1 on my money if I'm drawing and it all goes in. If he's drawing to one diamond and the turn bricks, I don't want to let him keep drawing. But if he's already made his flush, I shouldn't draw (although, if he has already made the flush, most of my draws to pair the board should be live). The turn bricks completely, I bet out $250, and he pushes his stack. I do some quick math, and realize that the pot odds don't quite pay for me to draw pair to the board.

Then, I think about the chances that this is either a semibluff or a move based on his belief that I am semibluffing a worse draw. I decide that the chances of the semibluff are just enough to make up for the difference in what the pot is paying, and I call.

Analysis: He did many things right. Most importantly, he detailed not only the plays he made, but his logic for making them. I actively try to discourage posters and students from posting hand records, as they do not discuss why the plays were made. This information is vital for proper commentary and learning.

I liked the smaller initial raise, as the poster recognized that he was playing mostly against only one other player. While all of the opponents mattered, only the player with an equally large stack mattered a great deal, as that player was both the primary target and the primary threat. Although we could argue whether the actual bet size was correct for the logic, it is important that the poster did not simply make a "standard" bet, but tried to use his bet to create the situation he wanted with respect to the other large stack. He also considered the tendencies of the button to come over the top, and tried to invite such an action.

Many players do not think about these things, but simply throw an amount out that they read in a book was the "right bet size," thus reducing the chances that an opponent will make a bad play. If your opponent has weaknesses, you must give him a chance to exhibit them.

The flop bet was also thought out very well. Perhaps a somewhat smaller bet would have done the job as well, but many players either panic and make a tiny bet, hoping to save money if a flush is present, or make a huge overbet to "protect" their hand. A bet offering opponents 2-1 deters all but the biggest hands and draws from playing, while still giving some inferior hands reason to continue.

Once the poster got one caller, he was able to assess the stack size he was facing and make a reasoned decision on the turn. Unfortunately, he did not actually do this - first betting, then doing the math when raised. Also, he did the math incorrectly, so let's do it for him. He was facing a $250 call into a pot of $1,290, giving him better than 5-1. With 10 outs, he was a 3.4-1 dog, an automatic call.

He certainly should have done the math and planning first, and realized that if he was going to bet $250 and call a $250 raise, he should have either moved all in, bet less, intending to fold if his opponent stacked off, or checked.

Given that the caller may have a flush, but also a hand like A-9, 6-6, or the A K, it is almost impossible to get away from top set in this game against a player with only $500 remaining. His proper turn play, therefore, not knowing his opponent, was to move in and live with the consequences.

Some people love to know the results (which are interesting, but not important to whether the plays were correct): His opponent had the 5 4, but the board paired, so the poster won.

Conclusion: Our poster did some excellent reasoning preflop and on the flop, but seemingly stopped thinking on the turn. If you think through every bet, determining why you are making it and what you hope to accomplish, your no-limit game will improve considerably.

Barry Tanenbaum is the author of Advanced Limit Hold'em Strategy, and collaborator on Limit Hold'em: Winning Short-Handed Strategies, both available at www.CardPlayer.com. Barry offers private lessons tailored to the individual student. Please see his website, www.barrytanenbaum.com, or write to him at [email protected].