Playing Low Limits

A few months back, Ray Zee posted the most useful

five words of advice I've had on playing low

limit, no ante ($1-3 in Ct, $1-5 in LV) stud: "Play so tight it hurts".


Now I'd like to propose a corrollary: "Play to win a few big pots, not many small ones". Unlike larger games with significant antes and bring ins and better players, where you may be able to win by pushing small advantages to knock people out early, in small games you want to start strong, catch stronger and trap the other players with late bets once you have made a stronger hand.


You're looking for high flushes or full houses and hoping your opponents will stay with aces up, straights, lower flushes etc. -- which they almost invariably will.


Sklansky and other authors suggest this strategy, although I haven't seen it stated quite this way. For example, Sklansky says in a loose game where you can't knock people out you should probably just limp with a pair of kings and fold if there's a bet

and many callers and you don't improve on fourth.


I think this "extremely trappy" thinking applies even in low limit games with high antes -- (in CT, there is $1-5 with a .50 ante, for instance). In part that is because the rake eats much of the over ante. But it's also because at low limits there are such a high number of loose, losing players at most tables that you simply can't thin the field. The "horse race" theory Sklansky mentions applies. Playing knockout at low limits sets you up to lose to the losers, as they in effect "collude" to make you play the field.


As an infrequent player with miniscule actual experience, I'd be very interested in hearing comments from other low limit players as well as from higher limit, better players who have moved beyond these "baby" games.

From a 1-5 player:


I agree with most of what you say, but I disagree with your assessment of many of these players being loose. True, most will play more loosely than you. But in my experience, the no-ante structure allows the retired rocks who populate these games to sit and wait. When they play, they usually do have a hand -- but in addition to premium hands, they'll often be playing medium pairs with small or semi-dead kickers, small three-straights, and semi-dead small three-flushes.


One side note: they don't serve alcohol at the card room where I usually play (Turning Stone, outside of Syracuse, NY). I love to play in Las Vegas with some drunks at the table... that's when you see some VERY loose play (i.e., always seeing 4 or 5 cards). I think the poor play of drunks at the table just about negates the rake-effect at these low limits.


Doc.

At the TS that you mention... these are normally my starting requirements:


rolls

3 flush cards 10 and higher

3 cards to a straight flush

AAx and KKx

QQ or JJ with a suited T,J,Q,K,A kicker

xx with A or K suited kickers


You can normally get in for a buck... if no improvement by 4th... out I go.


I find the games very soft.

Joe:


Me too, but imagine if they served alcohol at TS...


Add a couple of players using less than good judgment is +EV for me!


Doc.

MRB,


Let me add a few notes to what you have said. As I think you know I live/play here in CT so I know something about the games here.


First there is a LOT of money that can be made at $1-3 and ESPECIALLY $1-5 here in CT. Your mentioning "The play so tight it hurts" phrase applies to the $1-3 BUT you still have to give yourself chances to outplay the morons at that limit, which might mean playing some 'untraditional' $1-3 hands at various times. Alot of that depends on how tight/loose the game is. ( By the way if you are playing $1-3 I hope you are playing that limit at Mohegan and not Foxwoods. Better rake structure.. )


As far as $1-5, that is the game where you have to loosen up a bit. I take advantage of the "super rocks' in that game by raising them out of every pot I am ( correctly ) able. The very fact that the game has a 50 cent ante is what makes it a goldmine. Not to mention the horrible opponents.

The $1-5 with an ante is NOT a game for "super tight". You would be better off playing $5-10 if you want to play that tight.


Best of Luck

CJ

CJ, thanks for an excellent response. I do play $1-3 at Mohegan and am about a $1/hour winner (my

records haven't always distinguished between different games, so I have to estimate)


The biggest holes in my game have been:

1) lack of experience

2) impatience leading to limping with too many hands


My playing requirements are looser than Verona Joe's -- assuming I can just limp


I play

Rolled

Live pairs 9s and up

Live pairs below 9s with an A-K kicker (Q or J if

nothing higher showing)

Live (2 or less out) flush draws -- but will fold

a low one if pot seems likely to be head up or three way

Live straight draws (rule of 2) 8-9-10 and up

Live gutshot (rule of 2) 9-j-q and up


While I win small in $1-3, I lose big in $1-5 no ante. Every time I have tried it, I lose. And yet in my experience, there are few opportunities to raise folks out. While there are some rocks, there often seem to be people who lose a ton of money by

staying in no matter what. Now I haven't played that much $1-5 ante (

While I win small in $1-3, I lose big in $1-5 no ante. Every time I have tried it, I lose. And yet in my experience, there are few opportunities to raise folks out. While there are some rocks, there often seem to be people who lose a ton of money by

staying in no matter what.




One thing I learned early on from a drunk loose-aggressive player sitting next to me (young guy, like myself, very chatty):


If you're playing 1-5 no ante, you're in late position with several limpers already in the pot, and you want to drive people out, go ahead and raise it $5. Previously, I had experienced the same frustration as you, when my raises of $2 or $3 were called by multiple players, who often then were getting correct pot odds to continue drawing against me on later streets. At most 1-5 tables, this will drive others out or get it heads up.


Now, the guy I "learned" this from did this with almost any hand he was playing, because he was crazy and liked the action. But if you do this a few times, and show split Queens or Kings when everyone folds, they should respect your raises.


Side Note: The decision of how much to bet/raise adds an element of difficulty to 1-5 Stud (or any spread limit) that does not exist in structured games. Aside from starting hand selection, the size of bets and raises in different situations may be the biggest difference between a winning or losing player at this level.

I posted 1-5 no ante in error. Meant 1-5 with

.50 ante, $1 bring in. I've played a little

1-5 no ante in Vegas and found it similar to

1-3, if anything a little better because you

can get more money with your good hands.

My low limit play is 1-5 mostly in Vegas and a little in both AC and Miss. I hear a lot of generalizing about low-limit stud and feel its way out of place. Low limit, especially in Vegas, can be loaded with clueless players and can be loaded with some of the best low-limit pokers players in the world and can be everything in between. I agree that tight is right but have found playing with the knowledgeable players, you will soon be read for what you are doing and everyone will fold if you participate in any pot unless they are holding a high powered hand. This makes game selection an important aspect of tight play.