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

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

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

A Way to Approximate the Odds - by Clonie Gowan

It is very difficult to calculate the exact odds of hitting a drawing hand when you're sitting at the poker table. Unless you're a genius with a gift for mathematics like Chris Ferguson, you will not be able to do it. That leaves two options for the rest of us: The first option is to sit at home with a calculator, figure out the odds for every possible combination of draws, and then memorize them. That way, no matter what situation comes up, you always know the odds. But for those of us without a perfect memory, there's an easier way. Here is a simple trick for estimating those odds.

The first thing you need to do is to figure out how many "outs" you have. An "out" is any card that gives you a made hand. To do this, simply count the number of cards available that give the hand you are drawing to. For example: suppose you hold Ac 8c and the flop comes Qh 9c 4c. You have a flush draw. There are thirteen clubs in the deck and you are looking at four of them -- the two in your hand, and the two on the board. That leaves nine clubs left in the deck, and two chances to hit one.

The trick to figuring out the approximate percentage chance of hitting the flush is to multiply your outs times the number of chances to hit it. In this case that would be nine outs multiplied by two chances, or eighteen. Then take that number, multiply times two, and add a percentage sign. The approximate percentage of the time you will make the flush is 36%. (The exact percentage is 34.97%.) Now let's say that on that same flop you hold the Jd Th. In this case you would have an open ended straight draw with eight outs to hit the straight (four kings and four eights). Eight outs with two cards to come gives you sixteen outs. Multiply times two and you will hit the straight approximately 32% (31.46% exactly) of the time.

One important thing to keep in mind is that the percentage stated is merely the percentage of the time that you will hit the hand you are drawing to, NOT the percentage of time that you will win the pot. You may hit your hand and still lose. In the first example, the Qc will pair the board and may give some article a full house. In the second example both the Kc and the 8c will put a possible flush on the board, giving you the straight, but not necessarily the winning hand. Still, knowing the approximate likelihood of making your hand is a good beginning step on the road to better poker.

Clonie Gowan

Play with Clonie Gowan at Full Tilt Poker

Sit and Go's Made Easy - by Howard Lederer

The Sit & Go (SNG) is online poker's great gift to the aspiring tournament player. Prior to the SNG, final table experience was hard to come by. You could enter a dozen multi-table tournaments and never find yourself at a final table. Or you could make one or two, only to get knocked out in 8th or 9th place. Adapting to an ever-diminishing number of players at a single table is a crucial skill in tournament poker, and it's a hard experience to find offline without investing a lot of time and money. Online, this experience is a mouse-click away. The SNG's advantages are many. For starters, it's low-cost, or even free. It's also fun, and convenient: You don't need to schedule it -- a SNG starts every time the table fills up -- and it's usually over in less than an hour. It's the flight simulator of final table play, and mastering it should be considered mandatory homework for the serious student.

Now that you know why you should play, let's look at how:

The most obvious difference between a SNG and a multi-table tournament is that when someone goes broke in a SNG, there isn't someone waiting to fill their spot. Multi-table play consists mostly of full-table, ring game poker. But as players get eliminated from a SNG, the table gets shorter- and shorter-handed. This reduction in players basically serves to artificially raise the antes. For instance, say you're playing five-handed and the blinds are 100-200: You're paying 300 in blinds for every five hands, or 60 per hand. As soon as someone gets knocked out, you're four-handed. Now you're paying 75 per hand -- a 25% increase -- despite the fact that the blinds have remained the same. Accordingly, you're forced to gamble more, or risk getting blinded out.

Since the size of the blinds relative to your stack size should always play a major role in your hand selection, I recommend starting out with pretty conservative starting hand requirements. This serves two functions: First, the blinds dictate that you play fairly tight early; the blinds are small and you are nine-handed, so they don't come around as often. Second, this helps you establish a tight image, which you hope will pay off later when the blinds are high and you might really need a timely ante steal.

But there's another not-so-obvious reason to play tighter earlier and looser later: The payout structure rewards tight play. Most SNG's pay 50% to first, 30% to second, and 20% to third. This payout structure dictates that you play for third. Why? Looking at the payout structure another way might help. Basically, the payout means that 60% gets awarded once you're down to three players, 20% gets awarded when you get down to two players, and the final 20% gets awarded to the winner. If you can just get to third, you get at least one-third of 60% of the prize pool, or 20%. You've locked up a profit, and you have a chance to win up to 30% more. It's only now that you're in the top three that your strategy should take an abrupt turn. Now it pays to gamble for the win. Let's look at the numbers again: 60% of the prize pool is off the table, and moving up one spot is worth only another 10%. But move up just one more spot and it's worth a whopping 30% extra -- that's three times more for first than it is for second. And with the blinds going up, gambling for the win is even more clearly the correct play.

I see many players employ a nearly opposite strategy. They figure they have nothing to lose, so they go for the quick double-up early. They take chances too soon when, in their view, there's "nothing on the line". Then, once they're in the money, they tighten up, thinking about that extra payout for moving up a spot. If you start to rethink your SNG approach and adopt a "slow early, fast late" strategy, you'll see an almost immediate improvement in your results.

Best of luck and see you at the tables,

Howard Lederer

Play with Howard Lederer at Full Tilt Poker