Standard newbie questions

[jasonHoldEm]

Hi everybody,

So I'm going to throw my hat into the NL (or maybe PL) ring games and see what happens. I have Ciaffone/Rueben's book as well as Super/System as my base info (I haven't read either yet, but from what I know of the authors it will be fun trying to compare their styles). I plan to start at the $25 games with whatever the recommended bankroll should be and see how it goes.

Just a couple of newbie questions:

- Bankroll, how much? I've heard 10x the buy-in (so that would be $250 for a $25 game if my math is correct /images/graemlins/blush.gif )...this seems really small to me so I wanted to double check.

- Big unsuited go up, suited connectors go down...right?

- How much can a good player beat the games for? In the limit world we have the maxim of 1/BB/hr just wondering what the equivalent is in the NL world.

- Anything else you want to tell me before I start?

Thanks,
Jason

[Ben]

[ QUOTE ]
- Bankroll, how much? I've heard 10x the buy-in (so that would be $250 for a $25 game if my math is correct )...this seems really small to me so I wanted to double check.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're just starting. 20 is better.

[ QUOTE ]

- Big unsuited go up, suited connectors go down...right?


[/ QUOTE ]

I assume you mean up/down in value. If so, yes. As you'll begin to understand, Party's 50BB stacks make playing hands like suited connectors lower in value.

[ QUOTE ]

- How much can a good player beat the games for? In the limit world we have the maxim of 1/BB/hr just wondering what the equivalent is in the NL world.


[/ QUOTE ]

Varies a ton. I don't really know what average would be.

[ QUOTE ]

- Anything else you want to tell me before I start?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, start reading every post on this board. Post lots of hands for evals. Be careful with the advice in SuperSystem, lots of it doesn't apply to Party-type games.

-Ben

[ML4L]

Hey Jason,

[ QUOTE ]
Bankroll, how much? I've heard 10x the buy-in (so that would be $250 for a $25 game if my math is correct /images/graemlins/blush.gif )...this seems really small to me so I wanted to double check.

[/ QUOTE ]

For good players who play a relatively low variance game, 10 buy-ins is probably enough. Twenty might be better for a newbie. Some players (AeonBlues comes to mind) would recommend 50-100 buy-ins, but most players aren't that conservative.

[ QUOTE ]
Big unsuited go up, suited connectors go down...right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Got it backwards. Paint cards, especially out of position, are dangerous in big-bet because you often won't have more than top pair, and that's generally not a hand with which you want to commit your entire stack. Holdings that make strong/nut hands are what you want, and suited connectors fall into that category. But, be careful of paying too much on your draws; the stacks aren't deep enough online to justify it.

[ QUOTE ]
How much can a good player beat the games for? In the limit world we have the maxim of 1/BB/hr just wondering what the equivalent is in the NL world.

[/ QUOTE ]

One thing that I cannot stress enough is NOT to worry about this at first. There is no gold standard for big bet the way that 1 BB/hr is the standard for limit. There are just too many variables to consider. But, to satisfy your curiosity, a common figure quoted for EXPERTS is 10-15 big blinds per table per hour in online games...

[ QUOTE ]
- Anything else you want to tell me before I start?

[/ QUOTE ]

Run a search on 2+2 for more tips. There are hundreds of posts written on the topic of tips for NL newbies.

Good luck.

ML4L

[1800GAMBLER]

Hi.

Your variance will be around 4 times your win rate (limit variance is usually at least 10 times).

You'll beat the game for 10BBs/100h or 8BBs/100h at party (50 big blinds stacks there).

That's all you need to know.

[Ben]

[ QUOTE ]

Got it backwards. Paint cards, especially out of position, are dangerous in big-bet because you often won't have more than top pair, and that's generally not a hand with which you want to commit your entire stack. Holdings that make strong/nut hands are what you want, and suited connectors fall into that category. But, be careful of paying too much on your draws; the stacks aren't deep enough online to justify it.

[/ QUOTE ]

My thinking was that it's so easy to charge draws too much based on the small stacks that suited connectors aren't really worth it...

[1800GAMBLER]

I'd like to add that big unsuited none trouble cards DO go up in value on party's NL games and suited connectors go down in value ... compared to limit. That will disagree with probably every poster in this thread. However this isn't the case for most NL games.

[Paddy]

I'm not sure if Party is the exception, but in general in no limit holdem, big unsuited cards go down in value. You're using big unsuited cards to make top pair/good kicker, which you'll seldom double up with.

"That hand is okay at big bet poker for winning a small pot--or losing a big one." says Ciaffone in "Pot Limit & No Limit Poker."

So from what I've gathered from Ciaffone etc. is that suited aces, big pairs, and intermediate pairs go up in value, while big unsuited cards go down.

I read a lot more than I play at this point, so I'm speaking from the book(s), and not from experience. So while I'm trying to help, you might want to listen to what the smart kids have to say here!

Welcome to NL. I'm looking forward to hearing about your success.

[Paddy]

Man, when I started my last post, there was only one reply.

You guys are good!

[Ben]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure if Party is the exception

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup, it is the exception.

Players at the $25 NL tables WILL double you up when you have TPTK. Hell, you can double up with TP against some of them.

The play there really is that bad.

-Ben

[1800GAMBLER]

[ QUOTE ]
which you'll seldom double up with.



[/ QUOTE ]


<font color="red"> I DISAGREE WITH EVERY SINGLE INCH OF DISGAREEMENT I COULD HAVE. </font>

[1800GAMBLER]

Interesting though, Bob Ciaffone has a new NL Hold Em book out at the end of this year.

[jasonHoldEm]

Oh great...ask a simple question and it sparks a big debate. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Thanks for the input everyone. I actually take lessons with Ciaffone so I'll probably be following his school of thought more than the others (at least to start). I'm really starting from square one at this point (my only expereince with NLHE is from tournament play), so it should be fun to relearn the game from the beginning.

I'm off to tear through Ciaffone's book. I'll see you at the $25 games tomorrow. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Peace,
Jason

[ML4L]

Yep, read your post after I wrote mine. I think that we're both correct; I was speaking to the conceptual issue. But you're right, in practice, they're generally losers in the small stack online games.

ML4L

[Paddy]

[ QUOTE ]

<font color="red"> I DISAGREE WITH EVERY SINGLE INCH OF DISGAREEMENT I COULD HAVE. </font>

[/ QUOTE ]

Ahhh! /images/graemlins/blush.gif

Like I said, I'm going by the book here, and not by personal experience. (I'm trying to help, so I'd better keep personal experience out of this...)

I don't think Ciaffone had Party Poker in mind when he wrote the book, if so he might have said, "Big unsuited cards go waaay up on PP. Those dingleberries will call you all the way to the river with middle pair/bad kicker. Suckers."

I'm looking forward to throwing a deposit on PP, and witness the badness first hand!

[jasonHoldEm]

THought of one more question.

I haven't played the games before, but if your stack size drops below the buy-in it seems that it would be correct to add on (i.e. always keep your stack at $25 or higher, since the one time you let your stack size drop is when you'll pick up AA). Does the software allow you to do this? Is my thinking correct?

Thanks again,
Jason

[jdl22]

Yes you're correct and yes it does allow this.

[Ben]

You can rebuy, yes.

Your thinking is mostly right. You want the full stack not just because you want to have ammo for your big hands, but because if you're the best player at the table, you want to have everyone covered (have a stack larger than theirs) so that you can always win their full stack when you outplay them.

-Ben

[Ben]

From a Ciaffone article on Cardplayer.com:

"Here is my advice regarding those little pieces of near-garbage like the 6d5d. If you get dealt such a hand, consider your position. If you are in the cutoff or button seats, and no one has raised, see a cheap flop. But in the other seats, do not waste your money. Playing this type of hand is always risky, but you can play one if you are in good position. If you are in early or middle position, muck that dog. And if you are in the small blind, do not become a bargain hunter, because you have the worst position at the table. No-limit is a game where position is extremely important. It is a game of implied odds, not saving $5 here and $10 there. Do not play small connectors without excellent position."

-Ben

[Paddy]

Good post.

Thanks.

[Lucky]

You only need to know 3 things to start:

1. Don't call big bets

2. Don't call big bets

3. dont call big bets.


Also, while I understand you've had a tough run at the 3/6 recently...When you start to do well (and I have no doubt you will) at NL, please don't make it your life mission to have all the 2+2 limit players converting to NL.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure if Party is the exception, but in general in no limit holdem, big unsuited cards go down in value. You're using big unsuited cards to make top pair/good kicker, which you'll seldom double up with.

[/ QUOTE ]

Party is the exception because the stacks are so tiny and the players like to call so much. I played the $100 and $200 NL there for a while and I doubled up w/ one-pair a lot. Party short-stack NL is a different game than what many of us think of as NL.

[jdl22]

Thanks for the article cite Ben. It seems I've been faaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrr too loose in the SB. I was pretty much calling if a straight was possible or if I had two suited. wow.

[ACW]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Bankroll, how much? I've heard 10x the buy-in (so that would be $250 for a $25 game if my math is correct )...this seems really small to me so I wanted to double check.



[/ QUOTE ]

For good players who play a relatively low variance game, 10 buy-ins is probably enough. Twenty might be better for a newbie. Some players (AeonBlues comes to mind) would recommend 50-100 buy-ins, but most players aren't that conservative.

[/ QUOTE ]

One factor to consider is how tilt-resistant you are. You can face huge suckouts at NL compared with limit, and if you are prone to tilting when this happens it's best to keep the buy-in well covered by your bankroll. If you've got good self-control, it's less critical.

I buy in with 2% of my bankroll, partly to guard against tilt and also against days when I'm just not playing well without being aware of the leak. Another reason is to protect against going up in stakes too quickly! By buying in for 2%, you get plenty of experience before it's time to move up to the next stakes. With 10% buy-ins, you could want to move up to the next level in a matter of days. This may be good, but you also could run into sharks before you're ready, and if that happens, your profits will quickly evaporate. I suppose it all comes down to your risk-tolerance.

[Ben]

Same here.

I'm glad I stumbled onto it.

-Ben

[Iceman]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi everybody,

So I'm going to throw my hat into the NL (or maybe PL) ring games and see what happens. I have Ciaffone/Rueben's book as well as Super/System as my base info (I haven't read either yet, but from what I know of the authors it will be fun trying to compare their styles). I plan to start at the $25 games with whatever the recommended bankroll should be and see how it goes.

Just a couple of newbie questions:

- Bankroll, how much? I've heard 10x the buy-in (so that would be $250 for a $25 game if my math is correct /images/graemlins/blush.gif )...this seems really small to me so I wanted to double check.

[/ QUOTE ]

In soft games that's enough. In tougher games you'll want more like 20x the buy-in.

[ QUOTE ]
- Big unsuited go up, suited connectors go down...right?

[/ QUOTE ]
The opposite. Small pairs, suited aces, and suited connectors are the kinds of hands that can win someone's stack when they hit, while hands like AJo or KQo win a small pot at best. It's much more complicated than that, but that's the basic idea.

[ QUOTE ]
- How much can a good player beat the games for? In the limit world we have the maxim of 1/BB/hr just wondering what the equivalent is in the NL world.

[/ QUOTE ]

NL win rates are much more situational than limit win rates. But unless you have very soft games available to you, you'll usually earn more money in 3-6 and higher limit games than in $100 NL/PL. The games on Party used to be very easy to beat for a large amount, but they've become much tighter over the last six months as the weaker players either go broke or improve, and the games become dominated by rocks.

[LikesToLose]

A pooh-bah and I agree. I'm feely cocky now.

Flush draws suck in Empire NL because you will be putting all the money in with a draw and will not get extra in after you hit on the turn or river. All the talk about implied odds go out the window when there is no more money to bet.

BTW: I only play Empire because of reload bonuses they routinely offer. Same tables, a bit of extra bonus.

[aces_full]

My suggestion is that if you are new at NL you might want to consider playing micro-NL. I have never played at Party, but I hear it's pretty fishy. I have no interest in playing NL there anyway. Although the idiots will double you up with their crap cards, I think the 50 BB max buy-in severely cripples any advantage a good NL player may have. In order for it to be a real NL game in my opinion, the maximum buy-in has to be at least 100 BB.

I'm relatively new to NL myself, and I learned to play at Paradise Poker .01/.02 $2 max buy-in NL tables. Paradise offers a 25% deposit bonus on new accounts, and if you deposit say, $50 you will have enough bankroll to ensure that you never lose it all at the $2 NL tables. The play there is pretty realistic even at the $2 level. There are enough idiots around to double you up, but not enough to make it scary when you push 20BB pre flop with AA and six players call to see the flop. I also play .01/.02 NL at Poker Stars and to me that is more like Party with deep stacks. PS lets you buy into the .01/.02 game with $5 so the stacks can be much deeper. Generally the penny NL players at Stars don't respect raises. It seems like I can flop a set, and short of pushing all-in, I can't bet enough to get the suckout artists to fold their draws. I have severely overbet the pot, and flush draws will call almost every time. Great for you when they miss, but it sucks when you are almost all in against these jerks and the third of a suit falls on the river. However the .01/.02 PL Omaha at Stars has been pretty lucrative for me. The great thing about micro-limit PLO is that bad hold'em players are horrible Omaha players. Micro PLO is pretty boring and unimaginative, but it is profitable. Basically you only enter a pot with a good coordinated hand that can make many good nut hands. On the flop it's a clear fold to any action unless you flop the nuts with redraws to a bigger hand, or flop a big draw with many outs (all to the nuts). For example a hand like top set with a redraw to the nut flush. When I hit a hand, I bet the pot. At micro I usually won't bet less than the pot because people will call anyway.

Now as far as big cards vs low suited connectors. At a site like Party with 50 BB or smaller stacks, I would think that low suited connectors would go down in value since the implied odds are not there. However in games where your opponents have at least 100BB in front of them you are getting good implied odds with them.

When choosing any starting hands in NL, and in playing beyond the flop, you have to consider the pre-flop action. In an unraised pot, I think it is okay to limp with some of the trouble hands like AT, AQo,AJo,KQo,and KJo. Low suited connectors are okay, but if you make your flush, it may not be good, so be very, very careful with non-nut flushes. The reason the "trouble" hands might be alright in an unraised pot is that if you hit TP/TK or top two pair, your hand figures to be good.

In a raised pot, my play goes against everything you know about limit poker. You will hear the term around here "gap concept" It applies mostly to tournaments, but basically it states that in NL, you want a better hand to call a raise with than you would raise with yourself. My personally corrallory to the gap concept is (for cash games mostly since I'm really not a tourney player)..or a hand that is much worse and has little chance of improving. Calling a raise with "fair" and "good" (but not great) hands will put you on the fast track to getting broke.

As an exampe, say a player in EP makes it 5BB. You are on the button with AQ and decide to call. NOw the flop is AxQ and the pre-flop raiser leads out and bets. What do you do? Well you have top two, but chances are you really don't know if your hand is good here. Your opponent could have raised with AK, so he has a chance to outdraw you, same for KK. But what if he raised with AA or QQ? now your hand is no good, but how do you know. If you raise him, he will probably let you know pretty quickly by playing back. But what if he does only have AK? Are you willing to now risk all of your chips to find out? In this type of situation you are left second-guessing yourself, and being wrong can be costly.

But what if, say your opponent had KK on the same board and he checks to you. You bet, he folds. You have won a small pot, but risked your whole stack. You have to remember that every time you play a NL hand your whole stack is at risk.

Now what if instead of AQ you had 6d7d and called the raise. On the AxQ flop your response to a bet would be clear-fold, you have nothing, end of story. Even if your opponent had nothing, chances are his nothing is better than yours.

Now consider the same action, but with a flop of 458. You made a straight. Since the pre-flop raise knocked a lot of players out, and chances are that all the remaining players have big cards, that flop meant nothing to anybody except you. If your opponent raised with AA, KK,or QQ chances are he will lead at that flop, often for a big bet. If he does, you have him trapped, he won't be able to get away from his aces. Depending on the situation, you can either call, hoping to get him in on the turn or river (this works best against aggressive players who will bet the turn too. But there is a chance your opponent might check the turn and fold when you bet) , or you can go over the top right here. Most micro-limit players will go all in in this spot anyway. You are getting great implied odds to make this kind of play. If you miss, you only lost 5BB, if you hit, you could be making 25:1 on your initial pre-flop call. You are risking a relatively small amount to win a lot. C&amp;R reccomend in their book calling a raise of no more than between 5 and 10 percent of your stack. I try to keep it 5BB or less. The same can be said of pocket pairs, but I will often call with them out of position. The reason being is that if I make a set, I will lead right into the raiser for a BIG bet. They may fold, but if the flop contains an A or K, chances are you will get them all-in.

Another way that I play NL different than limit is with premium hands. If I look down and see AA,KK, or AK I really don't want to play a pot with those big cards. I would rather steal the blinds to have chips to play drawing hands later on. If I have to play a pot, it's not all bad either, only I want to be all-in pre flop, in a heads up-situation where I figure to be a big favorite.

The trouble with the big hands is that if you do play a pot, one of two things is going to happpen most of the time. You will either take it when you bet the pot on the flop-winning a small amount, or someone will have made a hand against you and take all your money.

If you play NL the implied odds will dictate that you must play MUCH looser than you are used to in limit. In order to not lose your shirt, you must really learn to play past the flop. Another thing I don't much consider is pot odds and whether hands play better multiway or heads up. Every time I throw money in before the flop, my intention is to break somebody. I only need one opponent to make a hand profitable. If I hit a flop, I must now figure out the best way to get all the money in the middle, and that's the goal of no-limit, doubling up.

[jasonHoldEm]

Could someone elaborate on the 50 BB stacks vs. 100 BB stacks? I looked around and noticed that most (all?) the other sites have 100 BB stacks. I realize that deep money is a good thing, so I'm wondering if I should be playing somewhere other than party?

THanks
jHE

[jasonHoldEm]

aces,

thanks for the great post...cleared up a lot of loose ends.

[ohkanada]

I have mostly been playing on Ultimate because of the stack size issue on Party. I don't like the restriction. Bigger stacks give you the ability to limp with more hands and call raises with a few more hands. The bigger the stacks the more room you have to play some real NL. It becomes even more important to top off your stack after each hand if you are below the maximum because of this. If you raise and make one stab at the pot, you are down 25% of your stack.

Absolute has 200x stacks.

Ken Poklitar

[jasonHoldEm]

First session results.

Probably played too tight, I basically folded for an hour and finished +$4 (8 bb). I had rather aggressive players on my right and it might have been better to find another table, but I felt that if I waited for a premium hand I could win a big pot against them.

I made a couple laydowns that are probably borderline or flat out wrong. I folded AQo to a raise and a reraise (3xbb raise, 3xbb re-raise...it was 6xbb to me cold and I felt to high a price to pay). I also folded AJo UTG because I feared a re-raise from the aggresive players (who were in LP on this hand).

Got to play aces in MP, UTG+1 raised 3xbb ($1.50), caller in MP, I raised it to $7 (roughly the size of the pot), but they both fold...guess my table image seemed sorta rocky by this point. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

All in all it was a good time as I got to watch some good hands...it'll be fun if/when I get to play some, lol. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Peace,
Jason

[aces_full]

[ QUOTE ]
First session results.

Probably played too tight, I basically folded for an hour and finished +$4 (8 bb). I had rather aggressive players on my right and it might have been better to find another table, but I felt that if I waited for a premium hand I could win a big pot against them.

I made a couple laydowns that are probably borderline or flat out wrong. I folded AQo to a raise and a reraise (3xbb raise, 3xbb re-raise...it was 6xbb to me cold and I felt to high a price to pay). I also folded AJo UTG because I feared a re-raise from the aggresive players (who were in LP on this hand).

Got to play aces in MP, UTG+1 raised 3xbb ($1.50), caller in MP, I raised it to $7 (roughly the size of the pot), but they both fold...guess my table image seemed sorta rocky by this point. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

All in all it was a good time as I got to watch some good hands...it'll be fun if/when I get to play some, lol. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Peace,
Jason



[/ QUOTE ]

Laying down AQo to the raises was correct. If you fear a raise behind you, I think dumping AJo would probably be correct too. As far as AA, that's really what you can expect with AA, you are going to win a small pot or get busted most of the time.

[Daithi]

I am used to tourney play were the blinds are relatively high compared to the stack size. So I feel more comfortable with the Party structure.

[dogsballs]

I read some good advice regarding pot limit play...(can't remember who posted it first tho').

Basically, it goes: Try not to lose the big pots.

Stood me in good stead.