Making the Switch, Part I

Since leaving absolute poker and switching to full tilt, I've made two changes in how my time is spent at poker. The first is playing some sit-and-goes, which weren't available on the absolute java client (only cash games and MTTs for some reason). Sit and goes are fun, and can be fairly lucrative: I quite like the heads-up winner-take-all 4 player tournaments: a $2.15 buy-in can become $8 pretty easily.

However, the bigger switch is to play no-limit instead of limit. I've tried that switch before, very unsuccessfully. However, after reading more of Ed Miller's, I became convinced that low-stakes NL is very beatable.

So far the results are good but not great. Here are the big differences I notice:

---

1. Multi-tabling is harder. In limit, multi-tabling is easier because the options are fixed to check, bet, call and raise. Because you need to specify the size of your bet in NL, it takes more keystrokes or mouse-movements. I've found 4-tabling is almost impossible with any accuracy because of this. 3 tables is about the maximum for acceptable concentration and mistake-free play.
   
   
2. Getting raised is a much bigger problem. Suppose you're playing low-limit and you're in the blinds with Q♥ T♥. Someone raises and you call. The flop is:
   
   Q ♠ 7♣ 3♠
   
   I would probably check-raise here; a pair of queens is likely good, and he will probably bluff with a hand like AT or KJ.
   
   In no-limit, this is a totally different situation. First off, I'd think much harder about calling the raise in the first place. If it was a minimum raise, I would certainly call. A raise to 4 times the big blind, and I would probably fold. Anything bigger and I definitely fold.
   
   Then there's a flop. Depending on where the raiser was sitting, he could have a worse hand than me, something dominated like JT or even T8s. However, finding out what he has is going to be expensive most of the time.
   
   With top pair here, a check raise is a bit risky. You're letting the pot get pretty big with a check raise: you check, he bets 6x the big blind, and you need to raise to at least 15-20x the big blind to give him bad odds and convince him you have a hand. If it works, you've won a pretty good-sized pot with a marginal hand (top pair, 4th kicker).
   
   But suppose he's a decent player holding A♠ 9♠. He figures that you have top pair, but he has a draw to the nuts (not to mention an overcard that's probably good here). He re-raises you, making this a very big pot in the area of 50-60 big blinds.
   
   How do you read the re-raise? It could be the hands that are crushing you, namely:
   
   AA

   
   KK

   
   QQ if you're really unlucky

   
   77

   
   33

   
   KQ

   
   QJ

   
   
   You're almost drawing dead to all of these hands; with KQ and QJ you'll lose unless you hit your kicker (3 outs); against higher pairs you have 5 outs, and against a set you're pretty much hopeless (you could hit quad queens or running QT against the sets of 7s and 3s). Add in the semi-bluffing hands - all Ax and Kx of spades - and this is a very tough call to make. One of the basic rules of no-limit is "big pots for big hands, small pots for small hands." Top pair/fourth kicker is about as small a hand as you'll ever consider playing.
   
   In limit, this just isn't a huge problem. I'm probably going to check-raise and call him down even if I get re-raised on the flop. He might be getting cute with AK or JJ; I may be behind, but unless there's a 4-flush on the board or two overcards, I'm sticking with this.
   
   That would be a bad way to play low-stakes NL. This is actually a poor flop for QT because you're either going to win a small pot (i.e. he has some hopeless hand like JTo and just folds) or be forced to play a big one out of position with a marginal hand. I wouldn't stand much of a re-raise here, although I'd call the minimum. I would much prefer a flop like:
   
   J ♣ 9♥ 5♥
   
   This leads to the next point...
   
   

3. Draws have much more value as bluffing hands

   . Playing low-stakes fixed-limit games, I learned basic tricks like raising draws for free cards and betting straights draws in position to induce a bunch of callers. But draws can be far more valuable in NL, because you can actually make someone fold a better hand with just a straight draw. Combo draws are even more dangerous.
   
   Again, if you hold Q♥ T♥ and the flop is:
   
   J ♣ 9♥ 5♥
   
   This is a great situation, even out of position. You have an overcard and draws to high straights and flushes. This could be a great situation to check-raise with a draw, maybe even all-in.
   
   If he has AJ, J9, 55, QQ or any number of hands, it's going to be hard to fold here. But you're going to stack him more often than not even with those hands, since you have a monster 30-outer (9 hearts plus 3 kings plus 3 eights, the majority of the remaining deck).
   
   Even better, this strong bet will get some leading hands to fold. After all, you just have queen high; a guy with AK or J7 is winning this hand right now. But you just can't call an all-in raise with two overcards or a "riverdancer" (low-kicker hands, ha-ha).
   
   In low-limit, this isn't as strong a hand. You're not going to make a ton on it because the draws aren't well hidden, and any decent player will fold top pair if the next card is a king or a heart.

---

It's fun so far, I hope to post more on this transition.