How Bad are the Beats? Pro Poker Tips by Steve Brecher

While playing on Full Tilt Poker, I have said that there are three topics I won't discuss in table chat; politics, religion, and whether online poker is rigged. That's because many people's opinions on those topics are hardened and not amenable to friendly or productive discussion.

Away from the table, I'll venture a couple of comments about improbable events in poker. While not direct instruction in the tactics and strategy of play, these comments may help you take "bad beats" in stride -- and that, in turn, is an essential part of poker maturity.

First, let's consider what most would view as a typical "bad beat" -- a lower pocket pair winning against a higher pocket pair in hold 'em, such as KK beating AA. When those hands share one suit, the chance of the worse hand winning is about 18%. The chance of the lower pair winning twice -- that is, the next two times that such hands happen to go against each other -- is about 3%. If in one session of play, a lower pocket pair beat a higher pocket pair twice, that might seem a little, well, weird to some players.

Consider another situation involving chance. When two dice are thrown, the chance of rolling "snake eyes" (1-1) is about 3% -- about the same as a lower pocket pair beating a higher pocket pair twice.

Suppose there were 600 craps tables using standard, unaltered dice with nine players around each table -- a total of 5,400 players -- and these tables operated for a three-hour "session." How many players would observe snake eyes being thrown at least once? The statistical expectation result is not important. The point is that it's easy to intuitively see that a large number of players would.

Further, do you think some players might see snake eyes thrown several times in an evening -- say, three or four times? (That is equivalent to six or eight poker "bad beats.") And if some of those players would be inclined to report their observation on forums and in chat, then it might seem to some as if the dice were "fixed."

Let's go back to poker. Recently, I played a hand of No-Limit Hold 'Em on Full Tilt Poker. An opponent four seats in front of the button open-raised pre-flop. It was folded around to me in the big blind, and I called. I semi-bluff check-raised the flop, continued with a semi-bluff bet on the turn, was raised all-in, and called the raise. I made my draw on the river. After the hand my opponent chatted:

opponent: ur horrible steve
opponent: why the [****] did u call that?
opponent: horrible that this site rewards that

(Confidential to opponent: I know these comments were made in the heat of the moment after a big loss and don't necessarily reflect your considered view.)

Let's take a look at my call on the turn. I held Ad Td; my opponent held Kd Kc. The board was Qd 9d 7h Jc.

With my opponent's actual holding, I had 16 outs to win the pot on the river, making me a 1.75 to 1 underdog. Of course, it could have been worse for me against other holdings, but even the worst case for me would have been to be up against K-T (a made straight), and then I would have been only a 3 to 1 underdog.

After my bet and the opponent's all in-raise, I was getting pot odds of 3.7 to 1 to call, so the call is clearly correct. But it seemed to my opponent -- and to at least one observer -- that I made a bad call, and that my winning with a 36% chance to do so when I called was a bad beat for my opponent.

The moral of this story: While "bad beats" (low-probability events) do occur, sometimes a closer examination of a poker hand can change first impressions and allow you to continue to play with a cooler, clearer head.

Steve Brecher

Play with Steve Brecher at Full Tilt Poker

Third Street in Seven Stud - Pro Poker Tips by Perry Friedman

For those of you who are unfamiliar with seven-card stud, there are some betting quirks in the game that you should understand. During the opening round of betting (also called "third street"), the player with the lowest up card is forced to act first. There are two choices: Bet the "bring-in" amount (which is usually one-third of the full bet) or "complete" the bet (make it a full bet). If the player chooses to bet the bring-in amount, another player has the option of completing the bet. Note that this is not considered a raise, because it is only increasing the initial bet to one full bet. This means there is still a bet and three remaining raises allowed during the opening round.

You should almost never bring in for a completion in Stud Hi, except in very rare tournament situations. There are a number of reasons for this, including the need to conceal the strength of your hand and the desire to keep your options open later in the round.

If you make it a habit only to bring in for a completion when you have a good hand, an astute player will pick up on this and will steal from you every time you don't complete the bring-in. Conversely, if you always complete the bet, you are throwing away money when you are forced in, which is usually when you have a bad hand since you already have the lowest up card.

Furthermore, bringing in for a completion limits your betting options. If you bring in for the minimum and someone else completes the bet, you can raise back for a full bet, whereas your opponent can only complete for a partial bet. You can also decide to slow play your hand if someone completes. Completing the bet exposes you to being raised back a full bet. By always bringing in for the minimum, you do not give away the strength of your hand and leave your options open on third street.

When playing in a live ring game, I will seldom even look at my down cards when I am the bring-in. Whether or not you look at your cards first is a matter of personal preference, but by not looking, you can't give a tell. However, one of the important aspects of stud is being aware of what cards have already been dealt out to your opponents. If you decide not to look at your hole cards, you should still peruse the table and take inventory of what cards are already out.

For some people, cataloguing all the upcards may be a tedious and exhausting process, and they will prefer to look at their downcards first so that they immediately know which key cards will improve their hand, or if they even have a playable hand at all. The only flaw with this shortcut is that when you do have a playable hand, you need to be aware of what your key cards are and know which cards will help or hurt your opponents. I recommend getting in the habit of always mentally keeping track of all of the up cards.

In heads-up play, keeping track of the cards is much simpler; they are always there to see and you don't need to remember who folded which cards. This makes it even less important to check your down cards before acting.

In online play, you will always be aware of your down cards, but you should still get in the practice of tracking your opponents' cards. One way to keep the game interesting - and to work on your skills at the same time - is to track all the cards even when you are out of the hand. As the hand progresses, try to figure out what hands your opponents are likely playing. At the showdown, you can see how well your reading skills are coming along.

Stud can be a very enjoyable and interesting game, but it relies less on intuition and more on keeping your mind focused and your eyes open.

Perry Friedman

Play Online Poker with Perry Friedman at Full Tilt Poker

Holding On To Your Winnings - Pro Poker Tips by Aaron Bartley

One of the most important poker lessons has nothing to do with how to play Aces in late position or how to adjust for the maniac in seat three. It's how to manage your money in a way that will make it grow as quickly as possible with minimal risk.


Some of the most highly skilled players in the game have gone broke (repeatedly) simply because they played too high, too fast, too often. How can we make sure this problem never happens to us? It isn't a matter of smarts, but rather, one of discipline.

The most important step is to be honest with yourself. You should know your relative skill level at all times. Suppose you're a $1/$2 No-Limit Hold 'em player who's had a great night, and you're toying with taking a shot at the $5/$10 game. Your bankroll is up to $1,500, but you would need to bring at least $500 to the table in order to play comfortably at the higher level.



Why would you risk putting a third of your bankroll on the table to play in the $5/$10 game? For starters, your bankroll isn't big enough for the stake; more importantly, you also need to consider that the skill level of the $5/$10 players is greater than the competition you're used to. (That's not always true, of course. There are some very skilled $1/$2 players and some weak $5/$10 players, but it's not unreasonable to assume that the higher-level games are filled with better players.)

This is where self-control comes in. One slip-up can spell disaster for a bankroll, and watching six months of hard work disappear in six hours of foolish play is enough to crush anyone's spirits.
The safest course of action is to continue doing what you're doing. You're beating the $1/$2 game for a tidy profit every week - stay right where you are. Continue proving that you can beat the game. While you're doing that, your bankroll should grow accordingly. Beating a game for six days is proof of very little. Beating the same game for six months is better evidence that you are a winning player.

Start tracking your results. You can buy tracking software or easily create a database of your own. Put in all of your information after each time you play - limits, time at the tables, profits/losses. Go over your information every few weeks, both for your recent play and for your entire poker lifetime. Try to spot bad trends before they get out of hand. If you've been playing well at a certain level over a long period of time, only then should you consider moving up to the next highest level.

Above all, know where your money is at all times and how it is being used. Ask yourself, "Is this too much risk for me considering my current bankroll?" If the answer is yes, do the responsible thing and change tables. Months later, you'll be thankful you did.

by

Aaron Bartley



Play Poker with Aaron Bartley at FullTiltPoker.com

No-limit by the Numbers - Pro Poker Tips by Andy Bloch

I get asked a lot of poker strategy questions, from beginner to advanced. Some are easy, but some involve the kind of math I can't always do off the top of my head. When that happens, I rely on one of a number of free tools to calculate the probability of winning the hand.

Here's an example based on a hand posted on a website I run:

Our hero was playing at a small stakes No-Limit table online, with $.25-$.50 blinds. At the start of the hand, he had $44. He was dealt Ad-Td and raised to $2. Both blinds called. The flop was Kd-Jd-2c, giving our hero a royal flush draw. The big blind bet $2, hero raised $2 more, the next player called, and the big blind (with more chips than our hero) re-raised all-in.

Should our hero call with his last $38? Let's assume the third player will fold. If our hero were to call and win, he'd be up to $94 (the $18 in the pot, plus his $38 and his opponent's $38). If he wins the hand four times out of 10, on the average he'd have $37.60 after the hand ($94 multiplied by four, and divided by 10). In poker, it's the long run that matters, so he should only call if his probability of winning is greater than 40%. Now he needs to figure out the probability he'd win the hand.

The first step is to put his opponent on a range of hands. Sometimes, you can figure out exactly what your opponent must have by the betting or tells. Most of the time, you're left to guess a little. In this situation, the other player probably has a very strong hand, but there's a chance he's bluffing or even semi-bluffing.

The strongest hand our hero could be facing is three kings. He has 11 outs to win the pot - every diamond but the 2d, and three queens. But even if our hero makes his flush or straight, his opponent could still win by making a full house or quads on the last card. I could calculate the probability by hand, but I don't need to.

Instead, I head to the Internet and one of the many free poker odds calculators, such as the one at twodimes.net. Enter "Kd Jd 2c" in the box labeled "Board" and "Ad Td" and "Ks Kc" under "Hands", and click submit. The result says that Ad-Td wins under 34% of the time - less than the 40+% that would make a call the right play. If our hero knows that his opponent had three kings, he should fold. The probabilities for the other possible three-of-a-kinds are the same.

But what if he's up against two pair - kings and jacks? Using the poker calculator again, his probability of winning would be 44%. That's enough to make calling correct. Our hero might also be against other two pairs, which he'd beat a little less often (42%), or A-K (46%). He might even already be ahead if he's against an aggressive player who would semi-bluff with something like Q-T (81%) or Qd-9d (82%).

Having calculated the probabilities of winning, our hero is now left with the subjective part of the answer, guessing the probabilities of what the other player has. I would guess that it's more than twice as likely that the player has two pair, or A-K, or even some weaker hand than that he has three of a kind. And I would guess that maybe 5% to 10% of the time, Ad-Td is actually ahead. I told our hero that, based on the numbers, I would have called.

Our hero did call, and the other player had K-J, giving our hero a 44% chance of winning the hand. The turn card was the 2d, but the river was a jack and our hero's flush lost to a full house. The river card was a tough break, but playing by the numbers, he still made the right play.

It's good to know the numbers, but it's equally important to know how to get them. And if you use the available tools whenever you aren't sure, you'll start to remember them when they come up at the table. In poker, every tool in your toolbox brings you one step closer to mastery of the game.

by

Andy Bloch

Play No Limit Holdem with Andy Block at Full Tilt Poker

Chip Sandwich - by Phil Gordon

Let's say an early position opponent - preferably a loose opponent - raises and gets called by one or more players. Now there's a lot of money in the pot. More importantly, the players who simply called are unlikely to have a hand that would merit calling a big re-raise. If they had such a hand, they probably would have raised instead of flat calling in the first place. Now it gets to me.

I "sandwich" the callers with a big raise.

If my raise gets the initial raiser to fold, the meat of the chips will very often be coming my way.

I prefer to make this play from the blinds than from the button; if one of the blinds happens to wake up with a great hand, it really doesn't matter what the initial raiser was betting with - my goose is cooked.

I get maximum value from the sandwich raise when I am down to about 15 big blinds. For instance: I'm in the small blind. A loose player brings it in from early position for three times the big blind. Two players call. There are now 10.5 blinds in the pot. I look down and find 8-7 suited.

I raise all-in.

The initial raiser now has to make the tough decision as to whether to call a significant raise. Even if my timing is off and he has a big hand - let's say A-K - and decides to call the bet, I'm still in pretty good shape. My 8-7 suited will beat his A-K about 41% of the time. I've invested 15 big blinds and stand to win 37 big blinds. I'm getting exactly the right odds on my money here.
I won't make this play with a hand that can easily be dominated, like a small ace or king. I don't want to be 25% (or less) to win if I can help it.

And by making the play all-in, I completely negate my positional disadvantage, and make the most of my short stack. With all of my money in the pot, I can't be outplayed after the flop.
If it's chips you're hungry for, try the sandwich. You might just find that it hits the spot.

Phil Gordon

Play with Phil Gordon 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

Dealer, Leave the Bets in Front of the Players - by Greg Mascio

It's a familiar refrain at the Omaha/8 table, when the betting is capped on the turn in a multi-way pot. In theory, this request is about saving time -- it's easier to divide the chips at the end of the hand when they're not in one monster pile at the center of the table. But the subtext is clear. "Give us the damn river already!"

It's often just one pot like this one that makes the difference at the end of the day between winner and loser, genius and live one. And playing these hands correctly goes a long way toward determining one's success in this sometimes volatile game.

Other than catching gin on the river, however, how does one go about getting out as cheaply as possible when beat, and maximizing profit when holding the nuts?

The first and most important thing, especially in Omaha/8, is knowing where you're at on every street. Many players will simply not throw a hand away even when they're sure they're beat in a big pot. They call it down just to find out what they were right about four bets ago.

A typical hand where you can get into trouble is flopping two pair with a hand like A-3-6-K. The flop comes A-3-J, with a flush draw you don't hold. You're first to act and fire a bet into the pot. It then gets raised, called, called and three-bet by the time it gets back to you. You very well could be drawing extremely thin at this point. If an Ace comes, it's likely you hold the second-best full house. If you catch a King on the turn, your two pair might be beat by the 10-Q-K wrap who called all those bets on the flop. If a 6 comes, you're still likely beat by Aces and Jacks, and all the made lows and flush draws are Freerolling on you.

Still, most unseasoned players call in this spot nearly 100 percent of the time. Why? One reason is because average-to-below-average players rarely ever make a bet and subsequently fold on the same street. I almost never see this. To be a winning player, especially in O/8, you have to be able to lay down your losers.

On the other hand, say that same A-3-J flop comes down and you hold A-2-4-5 with the nut flush draw. Yes, you have a monster. You're first to act and bet, and again it gets raised and three bet. This time you cap it. The turn comes a deuce. Now it's time to make extra bets.
With all the action that came behind you on the flop, you can be almost certain someone will bet if you check. You check, which puts the thought into the other player's mind that you may have been counterfeited, or at best are holding a set. After a bet and a few calls, now you are in position to make that check raise -- and you might not even lose some of the people drawing dead! Excuse No. 1 why a losing player calls when drawing dead? "The pot is too big."
If you had bet out on the turn when the deuce hit after capping it on the flop, any above-average player would most likely put you on your hand and you won't get any action. That same player may still call your check-raise, perhaps hoping to fill up on the end, but at least he will have to pay to get there.

There are a lot of large multi-way pots in O/8. It's easy to be tempted by the amount of money in the center of the table. But, like in most forms of poker, a hand that is usually strong heads-up or three handed simply doesn't carry the same weight in a multi-way pot against multiple draws. And in O/8, you might have to fend off five or six players, each holding four cards in their hand. It's just flat tough to make two pair on the flop hold up in that case.

Omaha-Eight-or-Better is all about holding the nuts or at least drawing to them. Its one reason why A-2 with two blanks -- like say 8-10 -- is such a dangerous hand. It gets played pre-flop almost every time, yet it rarely gets more than half the pot, and costs too much when the low that doesn't get there.

Hands that work together for both high and low, like A-2-Q-K or A-2-4-K (I'll take mine double suited, thanks) are key. "Nut-Nut" is a beautiful thing, especially at the end of a monster pot where the dealer has to do nothing with all those chips in front of everybody but push them to you.

Greg Mascio

Play with Greg Mascio 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

Specialize at Your Peril - by Howard Lederer

The recent poker explosion on TV and the Internet has created a flood of new players who are serious about developing their game. Sadly for them, television is sending a skewed message. No-Limit Hold 'em is the game of choice when the game is shown on TV, and it's easy to think there is only one game out there. While no one would argue that No-Limit makes for the most exciting television, there are many dangers associated with playing only one game.

First, you run the risk of getting bored, and boredom will lead to a stunting of your poker development. Enthusiasm is a critical ingredient for a successful poker career. When I spend time around the best poker players in the world, the one thing that they all share is a genuine love and passion for the game.

Next, you might be missing your true poker calling. As it happens, my best game isn't No-Limit Hold 'em - it's Limit Hold 'em. Had I not tried playing limit, I would never have found the game I am best at.

There are reasons why all the biggest casinos in the world feature multiple games. Stop by the big game at the Bellagio in Las Vegas and you're liable to see No-Limit and Limit, with games ranging from Seven-Card Stud to Deuce-to-Seven Draw. The best players in the world simply love to play poker. To deny themselves the pleasure of playing some of the best forms of the game would be unthinkable. They also know that if they play just one game, the specialists in a particular game (who are not nearly as good overall poker players) would be able to sit at their game and win. If you want to climb to the top of the poker world, you better become a great poker generalist. If you insist on limiting yourself to one game, you'll never make it.

Even if your ultimate goal is to become an accomplished No-Limit Hold 'em player, I encourage you to at least play a lot of Limit Hold 'em. Too many No-Limit specialists get by with almost no post-flop skills. To get good at limit Hold 'em, you will be forced get more comfortable playing after the flop. Getting free cards on fourth street and making close value bets on fifth street are just two of the skills you'll be working on. And those skills are transferable. Developing these skills in limit Hold 'em will allow you to play your hands with all your options available. And your No-Limit results will improve dramatically.

Playing the other games will develop skills that will simply make you a better poker player. Skills that have subtle value in No-Limit Hold 'em are very important in the other games. Acquiring these skills will have profound effects on your No-Limit game, even though you might not even be aware of their importance now.

Playing Seven-Card Stud will definitely teach you the value of free cards. It is a fundamental skill necessary to succeed at the game. In Pot-Limit Omaha you will learn the power of position and the power of the semi-bluff. Seven-Card Stud 8/Better is a game where you need to learn how to narrow the field at the right time. The number of players in a pot can make a hand go from a fold to a raise. Razz? Well, if nothing else, it will teach you how important patience can be when things aren't going well.

The world of poker has a lot more to offer than No-Limit Hold 'em. And if you start to explore that world, I am confident you will enjoy the game more. Getting good at each game will take time, so start out small and read what you can. Have fun; a new world awaits.

Howard Lederer

Play with Howard Lederer at Full Tilt Poker

Don't Play a Big Pot Unless You Have a Big Hand - by John Juanda

I'm at Foxwoods playing the $2,000 No Limit Hold 'em event. We all started with $3,000 and now I've got $15,000. At my table is Richard Tatalovitch, a player whom I've competed against many times.

I raise pre-flop from middle position with K-J offsuit and Richard calls from the big blind. The flop comes 9-6-4 with two diamonds on the board.

Richard hesitates for a moment before checking, and I put in a pot-sized bet. Richard thinks for a while and calls. All of a sudden, I don't like my hand -- so much.

Imagine my relief when a non-diamond J hits the turn. Now I have top pair and a pretty good kicker. Then Richard comes out betting. Uh-oh.

Now, let me back up a moment and mention that when someone hesitates before checking, it's usually a huge tell. But Richard is the king of delayed action, so I ignored his tell and bet the flop anyway. And his bet on the turn just screams, "Raise me! I dare you!"

I go into the tank and my thoughts go something like this:

1. He flopped a set. That explains the smooth call on the flop - he's trying to trap me into staying, hoping I'll bet the turn, too.

2. No. If he had a set, he'd have checked the turn and waited for me to hang myself right then and there, or let me catch something on the river. He can't have a set.

3. The jack helped him. I don't have the jack of diamonds. Maybe he does, and he called the flop with a jack-high flush draw. If so, I like my kicker and my hand.

4. He's betting on the come with a flush or straight draw and is hoping to buy the pot right there.
I run through these possibilities and reach no conclusion.

Normally, I would just call here. We both have a lot of chips, and I don't want to put them all in with nothing but top pair. Then, I have the misfortune to remember a hand from a month earlier at Bellagio:

Richard had been running bad and was complaining about a string of horrific beats. I saw him check and call with top boat because he was afraid of quads! A guy that afraid of monsters under the bed isn't going to check-call top set on the flop with a flush draw out there.

"All in!" I declared.

Oops. This is now a Big Pot. And rest assured, top pair doesn't even resemble a Big Hand.

In the four years I've been playing with him, I've never seen him call so fast. I am drawing dead to his perfectly-played 9-9.

Sometimes, we all forget that big cards don't always equal a big hand and that the smart move can be to play conservatively instead of going for the quick kill. As for Richard - he had the good sense to be in a Big Pot with a Big Hand, and the patience to make it pay off.

John Juanda

Play with John Juanda at Full Tilt Poker

Ask and Ye Shall Receive Part 2 - by Erick Lindgren

Last week I offered an example of a hand where asking the right question - "Why'd you bet so much?" - netted me a sizeable pot.

This week, I'll show how a very different question at the same tournament proved equally effective.

Case Two:

Today, I start my table as the chip leader with more than double the average stack. This is a tougher table, with Annie Duke, Bill Gazes, Casey Kastle, and Lee Salem.

An older gentleman at the table is raising and reraising a lot of pots, and generally, playing wildly. Like the Cowboy from a day earlier, he is definitely today's mark. He's got Casey, who's stuck on his right, especially frustrated. The three times Casey brings it in for a raise, the old man reraises, and Casey throws his hand away. This hand, Casey limps in for $1,200. Annie, Lee, and another player all call.

I'm pretty sure I have the best hand with A-T, and raise it $5K. I expect to win the pot right there, and am rather unhappy when Casey quickly says "All in" for a total bet of $25K. It's folded back to me, and I am now faced with a decision for half my chips.

Here, Casey is representing that he limped in with A-A hoping for a raise behind him so he could reraise all-in. This is a typical slow play in our game. But his play here doesn't make sense. Wouldn't Casey have been more than happy to raise with his A-A, knowing the older gentleman would reraise him? I look at Casey hoping to get a read, but he is frozen like a kid playing statue.

I need more information, so I try to get Casey to acknowledge that I'm still in the hand, or at the very least, that he's still alive. I ask if he limped with aces and I still get no reaction. I then say, "Can you beat queen high?" He finally looks up, smirks, and says, "Yeah, I can beat queen high."

Now, some people in poker like to lie about their hands. Here, it felt like Casey was happy to be able to tell the truth in response to what is, admittedly, a pretty silly question. After all, if I can't beat queen high, why am I even thinking of calling?

Now I feel certain that Casey is holding K-T, K-J, or K-Q suited. I have him. "I'm not buying it," I say as I push in my chips. "Good call," he says and turns over K-T of diamonds. I proudly showed my A-T and it holds up, winning me the $50K pot.

Sometimes a simple question can return a very profitable answer. Remember though, information flows two ways at the tables, so be sure that you're getting more information than you're giving.

Erick Lindgren

Play with Erick Lindgren at Full Tilt Poker

Ask and Ye Shall Receive Part 1 - by Erick Lindgren

All Talk and No Action, A Two-Part Lesson from Erick Lindgren

You can learn a lot by listening. You can learn almost as much by talking, if you ask the right questions.

The following occurred at a tournament at Bellagio in 2004.

I draw a very good first table and recognize only two faces. They are solid pros, neither of whom is very aggressive. I know I can take control of the table and quickly look around to find the best targets. I notice an older gentleman in a cowboy hat who's involved in too many pots and decide he's my mark. My plan is to bluff him at first opportunity and do anything I can to get under his skin. I want him to view me as a young hot-shot, with the hopes that he'll bully me later when I have the goods.

I chop away at some small pots and my $20K starting stack is now $43K when Cowboy and I finally get to lock horns. I've been raising a lot of hands and splashing my chips around a bit. In this case, the blinds are $200-$400, and I bring it in for $1,200 with pocket jacks. I get three callers, including Cowboy, in the big blind. The flop comes 7h 4c 4h and the small blind checks. It's Cowboy's turn, and he pushes all in. He looks proud, firing his $37K into a $5K pot.

I'm completely befuddled. What's going on? I can't make any sense of it. There's a player to act behind me, but he's only got $3K - he isn't going to matter at all in this hand. My best bet here is to get Cowboy to talk. "Why'd you bet so much?" I ask. He tells me to call and find out.

I make a list of his possible hands: A-x hearts for the nut flush draw. Pocket eights, maybe. Or a random berzerko bet with a pair of sevens. After a minute or two of deliberation, I call. He flips up T-7c for one pair! He fails to improve and I now have $80K, and am ready to roll.

It's important to know who your weaker players are. Concentrate on playing against them and finding ways to get them to make a big mistake. You can't count on the pros to make those mistakes. In this particular case, I knew he was getting tired, and through a few verbal jabs, I was able to make myself his target.

Next week, a similar question with a very different answer yields an equally large profit.

Erick Lindgren

Play with Erick Lindgren at Full Tilt Poker

Should I Stay or Should I Go - by Jennifer Harman

Being a winning player isn't only about playing good cards - it's also about making good decisions. And there is one important decision you face every time you sit down in a cash game: Should I quit, or should I keep playing?

When should you keep playing?

I see so many players playing short hours when they're winning, and long hours when they're losing. It should be the other way around.

When you are winning in the game, at least a few of the other players must be losing. And when your opponents are losing, they often aren't playing their best. But you are.

When you're winning, other players fear you; you have a good table image. And when you have a good table image, you can get away with things that you can't seem to when you're losing. For one thing, you can bluff more. Usually a losing player is scared to get involved with a winning player, so it's easier for you to pick up pots. You can represent more hands than you actually have because your opponents believe you're hitting every flop.

The only time to quit when you're winning is when you are tired, or when you start playing badly.

When should you call it a day?

Many players can't seem to quit when they are losing. You have to remember that there will always be another poker game -- if not tomorrow, then the day after, or the week after. I like to think of poker as one continuous game going on for my whole career. So, if I'm losing more than 30 big bets in the game, I usually quit.

There are a couple of reasons I do this: For one, if I lose a ton of money in one day, I don't feel so hot the next day. That means if I go in to play the next day, I might not be able to play my best game. I might actually have to take a few days off to get my head straight. Another reason is that when I'm losing more than 30 bets, I might not be playing that well. I might think I'm playing my "A" game, but in reality, I'm probably not. You can't be as objective about your play when you're losing. After all, we are not robots; we're just human beings.

Jennifer Harman

Play with Jennifer Harman at Full Tilt Poker

In Pot Limit... by Clonie Gowan

Most Pot Limit Omaha players know that Omaha is a game of "the nuts." In a multi-way pot, the winning hand is, more often than not, the best possible hand out there. When you start with four cards, you have six different possible two-card hands. This increases the chances that someone is holding the nuts. What many beginning Pot Limit Omaha players do not understand is that Omaha is really a game of redraws.

A redraw means that after the flop, you not only have some kind of made hand, you also have draws to a better hand. Having redraws in Pot Limit Omaha is so important that it is sometimes mathematically correct to fold the nuts on the flop. For example: suppose you raise in the late position with Ac Kh Tc 9h -- a very good starting Omaha hand. Two players call and you see the flop three-handed. The flop comes 6d 7s 8s. You've flopped the nut straight, which is the best hand possible at the moment. The problem is that you have absolutely no chance to improve your hand. This is as good as it gets. This may be okay if both of your opponents check to you. But, if one opponent makes a pot-sized bet and the next one makes a pot-sized raise, then what do you do? How can you fold the nuts?

If one of your opponents has flopped a set, and the other player -- or possibly even the same player -- has a flush draw, you are almost a 2-1 dog to win the pot. If one of those opponents has the same straight as you with a flush draw as well, or a wrap to a higher straight (such as 9,T,J), your hand is even worse because you can only win half the pot even if you don't lose to a flush or full house. You have to ask yourself what your opponents would possibly be betting and raising with on this flop. If there is a chance that all of the redraws are out against you, then you should always fold. If both of your opponents check and either one is tricky enough to be capable of a check raise, then you should still check this flop. If a blank comes on the turn - the 3c for instance -- your hand will be much stronger. Keep in mind, though, that if all of those draws are still out against you, even now you're not much better than 50% to win this pot.

Having multiple redraws to the nuts is much better in Omaha than having the best hand at the moment. Lay this hand down and save your chips for use in a better spot.

Clonie Gowan

Play with Clonie Gowan at Full Tilt Poker

The Script - by Phil Gordon

In an effort to simplify my decisions, every single time it's my turn to act, I try to run through the same script in my head:

Are my opponents playing conservatively? Aggressively? Tentatively?

What are some of the hands my opponents are likely to hold?

What do my opponents think I have?

Once I have the answer to the first question, and feel confident about my range of answers for the second and third questions, I move on to the most important question:

Should I bet or raise?

If I think I have the best hand, I nearly always answer "Yes" and I bet or raise.

If I think I can force weak opponents out of the pot with this bet or with future bets, I nearly always answer "Yes" and I bet or raise.

If I don't think betting or raising is the right decision, I move on to the last question:

Should I check (or fold)?

If I think I have the worst hand, I nearly always answer "Yes" and I check or fold. If I think my opponents are strong, I nearly always answer "Yes" and check or fold. After a careful analysis, if I'm not sure if I should raise and I'm not sure I should fold, I feel confident that calling a bet (or checking) is correct.

I find that even in straight-forward and obvious situations, by running through the script I often find opportunities that other players might miss. And by asking the "raise" question before the "fold" and "call" question, I ensure that I am playing aggressive, winning poker.

Try using this script next time you sit down at the table, and see if simplifying your inner dialog forces your opponents into making more complicated decisions.

Phil Gordon

Play with Phil Gordon at Full Tilt Poker