Esatblishing A Table Image - Pro Poker Tips by Allen Cunningham

In poker, image matters.

Throughout a tournament, your table image will help determine how much action you'll get and, ultimately, how you can manipulate your opponents into making big calls or big laydowns at the wrong times.

While establishing a loose, aggressive image early on can help build your initial chip stack, I believe it's important to develop a tight table image in the later stages of a tournament because it gives you the ability to maneuver at the times when the chips matter most.

When the action is folded around, some players will always raise from the cutoff and the button. The problem with this play is that's its predictable and can be easily exploited. If you always raise from the button, the players in the blinds catch on sooner or later and will put in a big re-raise with any two cards. You will also find players just calling you with a much wider range of hands from the blinds before putting in a big check-raise on the flop.

Why do they do this? Because you have been presenting a loose table image by raising any time the action is passed to you. During late-stage play, this image hampers your ability to maneuver because any time you try to make a move, it's likely that someone will play back at you.

It doesn't take long before your loose table image will make you a target for the experienced players at the table (or even the inexperienced players who get tired of being pushed around). The amount of chips you risk by being loose in these situations is usually not worth the reward of just picking up the blinds. Be careful, though, because when you play too tight you end up missing many opportunities to slowly accumulate chips or even just stay afloat. Ideally, you want to project a very tight image while actually being somewhere in between the standard perceptions of "loose" and "tight."

I have one very simple piece of advice to help you with this part of your game. It may sound so simple you would wonder why I bother mentioning it but, in fact, this is one of my most important rules: Always fold junk.

By always folding junk hands, you accomplish a number of goals:

You resist the temptation to attempt a blind-steal just because action was passed to you. With the level of aggressiveness that characterizes today's play, it's better to pass on bad hands even in position.

You avoid pot committing yourself with a hand that will usually be dominated in a race with a short-stack. For example, if you raise from the cutoff for 3x the big blind with J-3 attempting to steal the blinds and a stack with 8x the big blind moves in behind you, you are in a bad spot. It's better to just avoid these situations altogether.

Most importantly, you further cement your image as a tight player. Now when you raise with a hand like A-8, you can feel confident that your tight image will allow you to steal the blinds although you're actually playing a bit looser.

Another temptation players face is to pick on someone's blind just because they view that player as "weak." I rarely pick on someone's blinds without a decent opening hand. Opening from the cut-off with a hand like K-9 suited is about as low as I'm willing to go in attempt to just pick up the blinds.

Using my tight table image enabled me to maneuver through a very tough field in the $5,000 Pot-Limit Hold 'em event at the 2007 WSOP*. After I doubled up early in Day 2, I used my table image in the late stages to steal blinds and to pick up a number of pots in key situations. I was able to carry this momentum to the final table, where I was fortunate enough to win the bracelet.

Remember, it takes more than good cards to be a winning player. By creating a solid table image in the late stages of a tournament, you may actually be able to play a wider variety of hands than your opponents expect and take down key pots at critical times.

by Allen Cunningham

Allen Cunningham plays poker online at Full Tilt Poker

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

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

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

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

Not Playing by the Book - by Phil Gordon

Once I am involved in a hand, many of the actions I take after the flop are automatic, or nearly automatic. Therefore, the most important decision I have to make in No Limit Hold 'em takes place before the flop:

Should I play the two cards I've been dealt?

When I first started learning how to play, I reviewed the standard charts that suggest which two cards to play from each position. But while they provided useful guidelines, the charts don't tell the whole story.

Poker is not a game that is best played by the numbers. Poker is a game of situations.
In blackjack, there is always a correct decision to be made - a "perfect strategy." Once you have compared the strength of your hand against the dealer's "up" card, the odds will -- or at least should -- dictate whether you should hit, stand, split, etc.

Poker, however, is a game of incomplete information. There are many factors to consider that go above and beyond what "the book" tells you to do. Some of them include:

My opponents' tendencies

My state of mind

My opponent's state of mind

Our respective stack sizes

My image at the table

Computer programs can look up hands in a chart. Real poker players analyze situations and make their own decisions after processing all of the available information. I might raise with A-J from early position in one game, and fold the same hand from the same position in another.
A good chart can help give a very specific set of circumstances, namely:

You are the first person to voluntarily put money into the pot and are going to come in for a raise of about three times the big blind

You don't know much about your opponents

All the players at the table have an average-size stack

The blinds are relatively small in relation to the size of the stacks

When the above things aren't true, you'll want to look beyond the charts.

If you're a new player, these tables are a great place to start. The more poker you play, however, the more comfortable you will feel letting your experience and your instincts serve as your guide.

Phil Gordon

Play with Phil Gordon at Full Tilt Poker

Playing Two or More Tables at Once - by Erick Lindgren

Most players eventually realize that it's fun and fairly easy to play at multiple online tables at one time. Early in my career, I played as many as eight games at once on a daily basis. Here are some tips and instructions for playing multiple games:

1. Increase the resolution on your monitor. You can do this by right clicking on the desktop, then clicking on Properties, then clicking on Settings. You can then grab the arrow in the Screen Resolution area and move it to a smaller resolution.

If possible, use the 1,600 x 1,200 setting to get up to four games on one screen without overlap. In order to maximize your screen area, make sure your video card and monitor support higher resolution settings.

2. Once you get into playing more than one game, the best way for you to keep up with the action is to look for hands you can fold automatically. Use advance actions. That will help you pay more attention to the game you have a real hand in.

3. Play the same game at every table. It will help you avoid mistakes in reading and playing your hand, and you'll find it easier to get into a good rhythm.

4. Most importantly: Track who has raised the pot. Make sure you make a mental note of this since it is the key to how you will play your hand later. It sounds simple, but it is easy to get in a pot and not recall who raised when you're playing more than one game.

5. Make sure you take some breaks. When I used to play eight games, I was an animal. I would run to the bathroom and every screen would be beeping at me. Take a few breaks. The games will still be there when you get back.

Playing multiple games is a lot of fun and I hope to see you at the table. Or tables.

Erick Lindgren

Play with Erick Lindgren 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

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

Common Mistakes - by Phil Gordon

Everyone makes mistakes. The thing is, a good player will learn from them while a bad player will make the same mistake over and over again. And poker players that can exploit these mistakes will win.

Here are some of the most common mistakes that bad players make and my usual methods for exploiting them:

A player doesn't bluff enough. When these players bet or raise, I usually give them credit for a good hand. When they check, I will usually bet to try and take the pot.

A player overvalues top pair. The "average" winning hand in Hold 'em is two pair. Yet many players are willing to take tremendous risks with top pair. When I have a hand that can beat a player who overvalues his top pair, I will over-bet the pot and put them into a position to make a big mistake. I go out of my way to play small pocket pairs against these players because I know that if I flop a set, I'm likely to get paid off in a huge way.

A player under-bets the pot. It is incredibly important, especially in No Limit Hold 'em, to make bets large enough to punish opponents for their draws. When a player under-bets the pot and I have a draw, I take advantage of their mistake by just calling the small bet. When I think I have him beat, I'll make a raise.

A player calls too much. I will very rarely bluff against a "calling station." I will, however, make value bets throughout the hand.

A player tightens up under pressure. Most bad players "squeeze" too much in the middle stages of a tournament, or when they're on the bubble. They tighten up and wait for a huge hand. Against these players, I will play a lot looser, looking to steal a larger share of the blinds and antes.

A player telegraphs the strength of his hand with "tells." I am always observing these players, whether I am in the hand or not.

Playing perfect poker may be nearly impossible for most players but, by recognizing your own tendencies - and those of your opponents - you're much more likely to limit your mistakes and capitalize on the weaknesses of others at the table.

This lesson is from Phil Gordon's Little Green Book of No Limit Hold'em Simon Spotlight Entertainment, Sept 2005.

Play with Phil Gordon 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

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

Why Sunglasses and Headphones Aren't For Me - by Howard Lederer

I know this newsletter is being written for an online poker site, but I hope that most of you still find time to play live poker. As much as I love online poker, I would never completely give up sitting at a table and getting the chance to size up an opponent. This week's lesson will examine why I think it is a mistake to wear headphones or sunglasses during live play.

Poker is a game of information. You give information to your opponents, and they give information to you. Most of that information is in the form of betting patterns, which is why online poker is such a great form of the game. All of the betting information is right there for you to use while playing a hand. But when you play live, there is a small amount of additional information that is given off through physical tells and audio cues. I am a very visual player, and am blessed with good eyesight. I wear contacts, and with them, my vision is 20/15. I constantly use my eyes to take in every nuance of what's going on around me at the table. If I wore sunglasses, much of that information would be lost to me. I am confident that the information I take in with my eyes far exceeds what I give away.

If you currently employ sunglasses when you play, I would encourage you to try playing without them. Yeah, you look cool in them. Maybe. But, if you try playing without them while staying committed to taking in as much visual information as possible, you might find that not only are you doing better, the game is suddenly more interesting as well.

I reserve special scorn for the rampant use of headphones in poker tournaments. They slow down the action and, on the whole, I believe they hurt the people who use them. When a player throws a single, large chip into the pot, he usually announces 'raise' or 'call'. But all the guys at the table wearing headphones can't hear the call. Invariably, they have to take off their headphones and ask the dealer what the bet is. It is annoying when the action comes to a grinding halt to clarify something that anyone without headphones already knows. Also, poker is a social game. It would make me sad if poker someday becomes a game where nine people are sitting at a table listening to music, and no one is talking to one another.

Also, there are some valuable things you can pick up on simply by paying attention to the conversation around the table. You can sometimes tell when someone is over his head just by listening to him talk. In a recent tournament, I won a very large pot as we were nearing the last few tables because I heard someone speaking a few minutes earlier.

It was the Bellagio $15K WPT poker tournament. The blinds were $4K-$8K and I was in the big blind. A player who'd been playing very tight so far opened the pot from an early position for $25K. The small blind called and I looked down at 9-9. I often re-raise with this hand, but this seemed like a good time to just call. The flop was 8s 5s 3c. The small blind checked and, with about $275K in front of me and $100K in the pot, I continued playing cautiously and checked. The opener checked, too. The turn was (8s 5s 3c) 6c and the small blind checked. I felt like I must have the best hand, so I bet $50K. I was very surprised when the original opener raised all-in for a total of $175K. The small blind folded and now I had a big $125K decision to make. If I call and win, I have $550K and am in great shape. If I call and lose I'm in real trouble.

I didn't think he had a big hand, but it didn't seem like a very good bluffing situation either. The board looked really dangerous. Plus, I hadn't seen this player get out of line at all. But then I remembered a comment he had made to his neighbor about ten minutes earlier. He had hardly played a hand for about an hour, and said to the guy next him that his cards had been so bad, it would have been just as well if he had stayed in his room after the last break. Remembering that comment, I felt there was a good chance that he was frustrated. With that factored in, I made the call. He turned over the Kd-Qd, and with a 2 on the river, I won a key hand that put me in great shape in a big tournament. If I had been listening to music, I don't think I could have made the call.

Poker is a game of information. Sunglasses might keep some information from getting out, but they stop more from coming in. Headphones simply give you fewer opportunities to gain valuable information about other players. These are handicaps I am not willing to spot my opponents.

Howard Lederer

Play with Howard Lederer at Full Tilt Poker