Our Favorite Poker Books - Poker Tips by Chris Ferguson

In recent months, many of our players have asked for suggestions on what poker books provide the best insights into the game. Being curious ourselves, we put the question to our pros and the answers we got back included some long-time favorites, along with a few surprises.

While our pros all have poker books that they like, not all of them believe that reading about poker theory is essential to improving their play. In fact, a few of our pros expressed sentiments along these lines:

We're not big fans of poker books. Once you get the basics down, is there something you can read that will drastically change your outlook on poker? Probably not. If there were a secret formula that would guarantee you'd always win, or one certain technique to win the most money, wouldn't everyone be playing that way already? The best teacher is experience. Choose a playing style and game mentality that fits your style, then get out there and actively think about the game. See what works for you and what doesn't. No book will be as effective as your own thought process.

Still, many of our pros do have some suggestions about which titles you might want to add to your personal library.

Chris Ferguson believes David Sklansky's Hold 'em for the Advanced Player and Theory of Poker are perhaps the two best books out there. Both of Doyle Brunson's Super System books, and Mike Caro's Book of Tells have helped his game, too.

Steve Brecher agrees with "Jesus" about Sklansky's Theory of Poker for its idea of the semi-bluff and its analysis of the concept of odds in poker. Sklansky's Hold 'em for the Advanced Player and the rest of the Advanced Player series are also solid reads.

Brecher also likes Doyle Brunson's chapter on No-Limit Hold 'em in his Super System for its emphasis on the importance of implied odds (although that's Sklansky's phrase, not Brunson's).
Erik Seidel notes that he hasn't read many of the poker books out there, but his all-time favorite is The Biggest Game in Town by Al Alvarez.

Being friendly with Phil Gordon, Perry Friedman has gotten to read an advance copy of Phil's Little Green Book (due out in October), which he thinks provides the best example of how to teach people to think about the game. He adds that both of Dan Harrington's books are filled with incredible advice for tournament play.

When it comes to "non-strategy" books, the pros' choices are as varied as their playing styles at the table.

Howard Lederer says, "I've recently started reading some books on Zen Buddhism. Zen has always been associated with the fine arts of flower arranging, calligraphy, and tea making. But there is also quite a tradition of Zen in swordsmanship and archery. Through reading these books and, in particular, Zen in the Art of Archery, I have a greater understanding of the process one goes through to master an art form. And poker is most certainly an art form."

Other more poker-related titles on our pros' bookshelves include Positively Fifth Street by James McManus, The Professor, the Banker and the Suicide King by Michael Craig, and the recently published Tales from the Tiltboys by the Tiltboys. They're also looking forward to reading Nolan Dalla's biography of Stu Ungar, One of a Kind.

It's safe to say that the books listed above will provide you with an eclectic and comprehensive view of the strategies, techniques, and personality traits that can help you become a winning player. So enjoy these books, and good luck at the table.

Chris Ferguson

Play poker with Chris Ferguson at Full Tilt Poker

Sizing Up Your Opening Bet - by Chris "Jesus" Ferguson

I never get tired of saying it: If you're the first to enter the pot in a No-Limit Hold 'em game, never call. If you aren't prepared to raise, throw your hand away.

Why, you ask? Simple. By raising, you put pressure on the blinds and the other players at the table, making them consider just how strong their hands really are. Chances are that by raising, you'll force marginal hands to fold before you even see the flop, limiting the number of players you have to beat through the rest of the hand.

OK, with that out of the way, the next obvious question becomes: How much should I raise?

To that, I say; it depends. First off, you shouldn't allow the strength of your hand affect the size of your raise. A tough poker game is like real estate. The three most important factors in deciding how much to raise are: Location, location, location.

You always want to make your opponents' decisions as difficult as possible. In choosing the size of your raise, you want to give the big blind a tough decision between calling or folding if the rest of the table folds around to him.

Raising from early position is to advertise a very strong hand - one that can beat the seven or more other players who still have to act. Since you are representing such strength, it doesn't take much of a raise to convince the big blind to fold. Also, since your hand is so strong, you actually don't mind a call from the big blind anyway. The real reason for a small raise is that you have so many players acting after you, any of whom might wake up with a monster and re-raise you.

When you raise in late position, you're representing a hand that can beat the two or three remaining hands. This gives you a lot more freedom to raise with marginal hands, but your raise must be bigger or the big blind can call too easily. Another reason to raise more from late position is that you're trying to put pressure on the big blind to fold, not call and, more importantly, you don't have as many remaining opponents who can re-raise you.

One of the most common mistakes in No-Limit Hold 'em is coming in for a raise that's too big. In early position, you want to keep your raises at about two times the big blind. With four to six players to act behind you when you're in middle position, raise to about two and a half big blinds, and raise to about three times the big blind from late position.

If you're representing a big hand by raising from early position, it stands to reason that you'll only get played with by huge hands. Why risk four, five or more bets to win only one and a half bets in the blinds when you're often going to be running into monsters along the way? If you're holding A-Q rather than A-A and a player comes over the top, you can lay it down without having risked much.

Some beginners raise more with their strongest hands to build a bigger pot or raise less with these monsters to get more action. Instead, I recommend that you play your starting hands the same way no matter what you have. With A-A or A-J, raise the same amount so you're not telegraphing the strength of your hand to watchful opponents. An exception would be if you know your opponents aren't paying attention and you feel sure that you can manipulate them.
These numbers need to be modified if there are antes. You should generally add about half the total antes to any raise. Your early position raise should be two big blinds plus half the total antes, and three big blinds plus half the antes for your late-position raises.

There are many loose live games these days. If you find yourself in one of these games and you can't steal the blinds with a normal raise, tighten up your starting requirements slightly and make larger raises. If this raise still can't take the blinds, don't tighten up anymore, but choose to raise an amount that you expect to get called once or twice behind you. Since your opponents are playing too loose, take advantage of it by building bigger pots when you think you're getting the best of it.

The last exception is when you're short-stacked. If making your typical raise means putting over a quarter of your stack in the pot, just go ahead and move all in instead. Betting a quarter of your stack before the flop commits you to calling just about any re-raise or, at the very least, it gives you a very tough decision. Moving all in here instead of raising less forces the tough decision on your opponents and eliminates one of your tough calling decisions. All of which brings us back to my first principle: Avoid being the one to just call.

Chris "Jesus" Ferguson

Play with Chris Ferguson at Full Tilt Poker

How To Win At Tournament Poker, Part 2 - by Chris "Jesus" Ferguson

Last week I talked about not adjusting for tournament play, answered three specific tournament questions, and stressed that there is little difference between tournament strategy and ring game strategy. This week, I would like to expand on that by answering a fourth question, and address the two situations where it's right to deviate from simply playing your best game.

The fourth question: Surely the different payout structure between ring games and tournaments means something, doesn't it?

Yes, tournaments differ from live action in that you are rewarded for how long you last, rather than for how many chips you accumulate.

In ring game poker, the chips you save by folding are just as valuable as the chips you win by playing. In tournament play, the chips you save are actually more valuable.

Consider a typical $1,000 buy-in tournament with 100 players, where first place is worth $40,000 out of a total prize pool of $100,000.

At the beginning of the tournament everyone has 1,000 in chips with a value of $1,000. The eventual winner will have 100,000 in chips and, in live action, would be entitled to a prize of $100,000. In a tournament, that same $100,000 is worth only $40,000, meaning that, at the end, each 1,000 in chips is only worth $400. As your stack grows, the value of each additional chip decreases, which means you want to be slightly more averse to taking unnecessary risks in tournaments than you might be in live action. (And if you are at all averse to taking risks in live action, you're probably playing over your bankroll.) Don't overcompensate for tournament play. Most people would be better off making no changes at all, rather than the changes that they do make.

Having said all this, there are two cases where adjusting will help:

1. When you are just out of the money.

If you are short stacked, you need to be very careful when committing your chips, especially with a call.

If you have a large stack, look for opportunities to push the short and medium stacks around - especially the medium stacks. These players will be a lot less likely to want a confrontation with you, and it should be open season on their blinds and antes.

If you have a medium or small stack, you need to be a bit more careful. Remember, though, that the other players - even the larger stacks - don't want to tangle with you. They just want to steal from you without a fight. Be prepared to push them around a little, and even to push back occasionally when they try to bully you. This often turns into a game of Chicken between the bigger stacks to determine which large stack will let the other steal most of the blinds.

2. At the final table.

Very little adjustment is necessary until you are one player away from the final table. Here, again, you should tighten up slightly because this is the next point where the payout structure handsomely rewards outlasting other players.

Look for opportunities to push around the other players, and the smaller stacks in particular. This is good advice throughout the final table.

What about heads up?

There are no more tournament adjustments necessary. You are essentially playing a winner take all freeze-out for the difference between first and second place.

Remember: Tournament adjustments should be subtle. It is rare that your play would be dramatically different in a tournament. When in doubt, just play your best game. And if you never adjust from that, you've got a great shot of winning, no matter what game you're playing.

Chris Ferguson

Play with Chris "Jesus" Ferguson at Full Tilt Poker

How To Win At Tournament Poker, Part 1 - by Chris "Jesus" Ferguson

People often ask very specific questions about how to be a winning tournament player:

How many chips am I supposed to have after the first two levels?

Should I play a lot of hands early while the blinds are small, then tighten up later as the blinds increase?

I seem to always finish on the bubble. Should I tighten up more as I get close to the money, or try to accumulate more chips early on?

Surprisingly, all three questions have the same answer:

Stop trying to force things to happen. Just concentrate on playing solid poker, and let the chips fall where they may.

In fact, that's the best answer for almost any specific tournament question. Here is a more useful question:

How much of a difference is there between ring game strategy and tournament strategy?
The answer: Not as much as you think.

Before you worry about adjusting for tournaments, concentrate on adjusting for the other players. The most important skill in poker is the ability to react to a wide range of opponents playing a wide range of styles. Players who can do this will thrive in both ring games and tournaments alike.

Many of the most costly tournament mistakes are the result of players over-adjusting for tournament play. Let's look at these questions again:

How many chips am I supposed to have after the first two levels?

The short answer is: As many as you can get.

Play your cards. Play your opponents. Do not try to force action simply because you think you "need" to have a certain number of chips to have a chance of winning. You should be thinking about accumulating more chips, while trying to conserve the chips you already have. The more chips you have, the better your chances of winning. The fewer chips you have, the worse your chances.

Forget about reaching some magical number. There is no amount below which you have no shot, nor is there any amount above which you can be guaranteed a victory. A chip and a chair is enough to win, and enough to beat you. Getting fixated on a specific number is a good way to ensure failure. Next question:

Should I play a lot of hands early while the blinds are small, and then tighten up later as the blinds increase?

Your play shouldn't change much as the tournament progresses. Gear your play to take maximum advantage of your opponents, irrespective of how far along the tournament is. Most players are too loose in the early stages of a tournament. Rather than become one of these players, adjust for their play instead:

Attempt to steal the blinds less often

Call more raises

Re-raise more frequently

Likewise, when opponents typically tighten up later on, you should steal more often and be less inclined to get involved in opened pots. Again, this should be a reaction to the way your opponents are playing, not an action based on any particular stage of the tournament.

Last question: I seem to always finish on the bubble. Should I tighten up more as I get close to the money to avoid this, or try to accumulate more chips early on?

Usually the people asking this question are already tightening up too soon before reaching the money. In other words, they are over-adjusting to tournament play. Not only is it incorrect to tighten up considerably before you are two or three players from the money, doing so is the surest way to finish on or near the bubble. Just play your best, most aggressive game, and try not to let your stack dwindle to a point where you can't protect your hand with a pre-flop all-in raise. If you do, your opponents will be getting the right pot odds to call, even with weak hands. Look for opportunities to make a move before you let this happen, even if it means raising with less than desirable holdings.

Next week, I will address the two situations where adjusting your game will help.

Chris Ferguson

Play with Chris "Jesus" Ferguson at Full Tilt Poker

Keep Your Toolbox Well Stocked - by Chris "Jesus" Ferguson

I often get asked about my playing style. Rather than answer the question myself, I'm more interested in what my opponents say. And I've heard it all: "You're too tight." "You're too loose." "You're tight aggressive." "You're too passive."

Actually, I never hear that last one, but I've heard all the others, which makes me believe I must be doing something right. Loose, tight, aggressive - my style is that I'm all of the above, depending upon the circumstances.

One essential element of playing winning poker is forcing your opponents to make difficult decisions. That's why raising is almost always better than calling - because it forces an extra decision on your opponents. To take this a step further - you'll win more money by forcing your opponents to make decisions when they are out of their comfort zones.

Here are some examples:

Your opponent is on your left, playing too tight before the flop. You want to punish him for this. The best way to do that is to raise more often, and be more aggressive. Either you end up stealing a lot of blinds, or he adjusts his play.

If you get the blinds? Great! If he adjusts? Better! It's the best outcome you can hope for. If he starts playing more hands pre-flop, you now have a real edge. Anytime your opponent changes his pre-flop playing style, he's going to run into trouble later in the hand. A guy who usually plays nothing but very strong hands isn't going to know what to do with weaker holdings on the turn and river.

If a tight opponent raises in front of you, wait for a stronger hand to call. By playing tight when you are acting behind your opponent, you avoid losing money to his stronger hands. Again, if your opponent catches on, you're forcing him to play more hands up front, and you can outplay him after the flop.

What about the guy who plays too many hands? If you're acting first, you want better starting hands than normal. Most of the value of a marginal hand comes from the chance that your opponent will fold immediately. If your opponent has never seen suited cards he doesn't like, the value of your marginal hand decreases because it's unlikely he's going to lay his hand down. He may win more pots preflop, but this is more than offset by the extra money you're going to make when you do see a flop with your stronger hands.

If a loose opponent raises you, you can call -- or even raise -- with weaker hands, and raise with hands you'd ordinarily just call with. By taking control of the hand, you can pick up more pots later. Again, you are daring him to change his style. If he doesn't, you're getting the best of it. If he does, he's a fish out of water, prone to making mistakes later in the hand.

It's important to have a lot of tools in your arsenal. First, it's helpful in being able to adjust to your opponents and force them out of their comfort zones. Additionally, it will enable you to take advantage of your own table image when you have already been labeled as a tight or loose player, and to adjust accordingly.

For example, Gus Hansen and Phil Ivey are known as extremely aggressive players. The only way they have been able to survive with that image is by being able to adjust to different opponents and to slow down occasionally, when appropriate. I have seen this happen sometimes just before an opponent starts reacting to their aggression. They are somehow able to sense what is happening, and change their games accordingly. Other times, they won't adjust much, and force their opponents to try and beat them at an unfamiliar game.

To best take advantage of this, pay attention! To everything. All the time. Not just when you're in the hand, but especially when you're not in the hand. Every hand your opponent plays gives you valuable information about how he thinks, and how he's likely to play hands in the future.
If there's an expert at your table, watch how he plays. See what hands he expects to work, think about how he plays them, then try incorporating it yourself. See how he pushes weaker players out of their comfort zone. Paying attention is one of the best ways to learn, and a great way to move up the poker food chain.

Chris "Jesus" Ferguson

Play with Chris Ferguson at Full Tilt Poker