a "making ajustments from limit to NL" post

[Rev. Good Will]

Been playing limit online for quite a while, and been having fun, winning much more than loosing, building my BR up to 350-ish from my initial $50 deposit. Now, paritally isnpired by this thread, and the fact that I completely pwn my local, oddly structured, micro-stakes NL college game (2 blinds of .25, a buy-in of only $5 is "strongly encouraged") and decided to take a swing at online NL, and just wanted to iron out a few wrinkles in my game before I take the dive:

1 - medium through small suited connectors/gappers

firstoff, my PF is most accurately described as a variation of this (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=999097&page=0&view=collap sed&sb=7&o=14&fpart=1) in limit, with some more rasing a la isolation and blind stealing.

I'm guessing no longer limping Q8s in EP, and not as much play for 76s and such... correct assumption?

2 - QQ-99

while these hands were great in limit cause they won on average, in NL, I'm not gonna be pushing these hands as hard (maybe QQ I'll still be playing hard against a few loose limpers in LP) other than that, swich to the "no set, no bet" philosphy with these hands? Do pot sized bets typically if they are over-pairs?

3 - PF raising

Don't know how to guage strength of PF raises, or if I should be raising with KTs in LP anymore, or if I am, how much is a decent amount a loose table? stuff like that.

as an extension of it, what about blind steals? If its folded to me in LP, and I only do a mini-raise to steal, my raise is gonna look pretty transparant.

4 - Multi-tabling

Not much of a multi-tabler, in limit games, I usually stick with 2 tables, 3 tables if I'm playing mindless "no fold'em" hold'em. That is nothing compared to the 4-8 table trouters that are in the micro-limit forums, and is it safe to assume you guys aren't multi'ing as much?

5 - books

Harrington on Hold'em good even though its written for tourney play? I've read the NL SS section, not for me, I'm more of a thinking player than an intuitive one. Stick to ToP? maybe I should just wait for that Ed Miller/David Sklansky NL cash game book to come out...



random shoutout to Grunchcan, we miss you in the micros!



thanks in advance,

Reverend Good Will

[Grunch]

Hey, RGW -

I'm basically in the same boat as you. I studied & played a lot of limit, built my bankroll pretty high. (All of which I then had to give to Uncle Sam, but that's just a bad beat story.)

I'm now playing NL exclusively. I'm studying a lot & trying to get my game going. I've learned a few things so far, and some of them were hard to learn. I hope this thread lives a long time so we can document our progress, as we get better.

You shouldn't assume that what I say here is correct; I'm still a dog to be right. I hope the better posters correct me where I’m wrong.

First, here's a dual of aphorisms that I've just recently realized to be true. Limit is a game of taking odds. NL is a game of giving odds. Limit is a game of expressed pot odds. NL is a game of implied odds.

Next, while they are basically the same game and have the same purpose -- to win money -- there is a subtle but profound difference in the object of NL versus the object of limit. The object to limit is to leverage small edges to grind out small but steady wins. SSH teaches this approach, but on steroids. Even the tiniest of edges are leveraged, and the smallest gains are maximized.

The object of NL is to double through the opponent. (I learned this through the Ciaffone book) This can virtually never happen in limit, but it can happen at any time in NL. The difference in strategy is profound, and not limited to just pushing the same hands harder. You're looking for different hands, ad you employ different strategies..

In particular, while TPTK made with AKs is a fine hand to win a small pot, you aren't going to double through the opponent with it. TP-type starting hands are worth much less in NL than in Limit, where I would be pushing very hard PF and after the flop with AKs. Hands that in limit are normally fairly strong, like AJ or KQ, are often not even playable in NL. The two hands I just mentioned I would be playing virtually every time, from every position. In NL, the conditions have to be right, and more often than not, I'm folding PF. I’m still getting my arms around these sorts of situations. As a hard-core limit player, I am naturally very aggressive with many hands that in NL I should muck.

Other hands and situations that are bad gambles in limit are a through ticket in NL. Hands that are almost never playable in limit, like offsuit connectors, could win a very large pot in NL if the right situation arises. Surprisingly, if the pot was raised PF and called by several opponents, this makes the hand playable, not unplayable. Normally you'd muck after the flop. But if the stacks are deep enough, a straight can easily double you up.

I would throw away the SSH-style starting hands charts for NL play. The advice there doesn't apply to NL, and many of the actions advocated by the SSH charts are opposite of correct play in NL.

Stack sizes in limit really only come in to play when an opponent is nearly all-in, and likely to be stacking off. In NL, stack sizes are a vital consideration on literally every single hand.

Hand reading plays a much bigger role in NL than Lim. In Lim, you can be a profitable player without ever being very good at reading hands. If you are an excellent hand reader in Lim, you can push more leverage on thinner edges, helping your results a little. Not so in NL. You simply can't not lose if you can't read the opponent at NL. The bets are just too big.

Controlling the size of the pot is very important in NL. It's also important in Lim, but when you have the sort of hand that you would want to control the size of the pot in Lim (something like TPGK), you automatically get that effect by playing fairly passively. In NL, passive play doesn't always control the growth of the pot. Sometimes you need to take a more active role by putting out continuation and blocking bets. Often when the pot becomes an out-of-control wildfire, the best play is to bail, whereas in Lim you can always jut call down.

These are all my thoughts so far. As others occur to me, I'll contribute to this thread.

[Grunch]

Bump becasue I'd love to hear other peoples' thoughts on this.

[JFB37]

GrunchCan's post is excellent. It contains very sound advice.

Here are some random thoughts that I would add:

1. You need to learn to pick up relatively small pots. It is hard to give specific advice but, basically, the situation arises very frequently where nobody shows much strength and that all you need to do put in a decent sized bet to take it down. As you begin do this with situations where you have some kind of an out, maybe a gutshot or underpair on a ragged board but as you gain confidence you will be able to do it with less.

2. Position is King in NL. It matters much, much more than in limit.

3. Pay close attention to the other players pf action. If several people limp to you, the one to worry about is the first one (who possibly was planning a limp-reraise). You will figure out pretty quickly what everyone considers raising hands and if there is no raise, they probably do not have one.

4. It is much easier to isolate in NL than limit.

5. Learn and understand set mining. Many tighter players at the mid sized online NL games are essentially set miners. For example, there were some recent posts in the mid-high forum in which people took the position that JJ is not a raising hand from ep because of its set value. (I'm not necessarily taking that view but pointing out that others have it.)

[phillydilly]

I'll throw my beginners thoughts out there.
but first,
EXCELLENT post Grunchcan!
now, my thoughts...

Top pair top kicker
this is an extension of what grunchcan said. In limit, TPTK, you're betting the whole way. In NL, is someone really going to bet their entire stack on a hand that cant beat TPTK? unless extremely LAG, the answer is no. It took me a while to learn this, but you have to be able to lay down TPTK.

Odds
In limit you learn to think about odds on that particular street. This is not necessarily correct in NL. I have KK, raise to 5 preflop, bet 10 flop, bet 20 turn. Assume i have one caller the whole way, who min raises me on the turn. That means i need to call 20 with 90 in the pot. WAIT!!! this decision would most likely be for your entire stack on the river!!! Consider that possibility!!!!

Taking shots.
Taking a shot at a pot is fine. if you dont take the pot down though, dont be afraid to give it up. its better then throwing more money at bad money.

doubling thru
grunchcan could not have been more right. AKs AK AQs AQ are huge money makers in limit. Not in NL. They will lose big and win small. your huge hands are pocket pairs for the most part. when you hit that set, you're generally taking down a large pot.

implied odds (continuation of doubling thru)
say you and an opponent have $100. .5/1 blinds. he raises to 5. you have 22, 33 etc. in limit you probably would lay this down. in NL, if you miss the flop, you fold, lose a few bucks, you hit, you probably will double up. again, doubling thru is where the money is.

closing
i'm a beginner, but i think these couple things are essential adjustments. and also, rereading this i've rehashed alot of grunchcan's post, but i think a lot of what he said in changing your thinking from limit to NL is dead on.

[mpethybridge]

This is mostly a bump because this is an excellent thread, but I will throw my newbie thoughts into the mix, mostly to emphasize what others have said.

After eight months of playing NL (I never was a limit player) I have only recently begun to understand the value of small and medium pocket pairs. I chortle with glee now when EP raises 4 BB and I look down at 44. It is an excellent opportunity to break someone.

Same for suited connectors. The first time I was on the button as the third caller of a 4BB raise with 87s and the flop hit it hard--well, I won't say it was better than sex, but just as good in a different (greedy and rapacious) way (wait, that's how I am with the sex, too--never mind).

Starting players like me who have read Sklansky but not Brunson start out in No Limit auto-folding these hands to a raise. But they are great hands to speculate with sometimes, because that guy with AA simply won't believe that you called him with 87s most of the time.

So what you do is you see the flop and if it hits you hard you likely break the raiser and if it doesn't, you fold and lose 4BBs. Or, at least, this is what I do--Brunson advocates seeing the turn when you have caught a small to medium size piece of the flop, but I find this difficult (nerve-wise) to do.

Well done, earlier posters--you pointed out some of the most important aspects of no limit. I know I haven't really added anything new, but I swear I read SuperSystem six times before Brunson's message about breaking somebody with these hands shouted down Sklansky's hand group 6 or 7 talk. So repitition is not an entirely bad thing.

(And if anybody can teach me how to play KQ--I swear it is a lifetime -EV hand for me--I'd be eternally grateful).

[Rev. Good Will]

what hands are you guys raising PF?

[Alpha13]

I am also an NL newbie, but I'll give my 2 cents anyway. I don't think chasing monsters to double up is the goal of NL. The implied odds are thhere ONLY if the other guy is willing to put his stack in. When you're calling a 12 bb raise with 44, you're 8.5/1 against hitting your set. When you hit you need to make up for those 8.5 times you missed. If villian is a short stack this isn't possible. If he's a large stack chances are he's somewhat decent and will not call any significant bet/raise/checkraise with hands as weak as one pair. Most of the time you need for your opponenet to hit a good second best hand to get paid off on your monsters (At least this has been my experience)

Top pair hands are still very good in NL. They can't drag huge pots but they have the benefit of reverse implied odds working for THEM, rather than in limit where its vice versa. Hit a TPTK with AQ and you're HU with someone likely on a draw? Raise 20-40 bbs and make him pay dearly to chase. I always play my top pair hands strongly early on when I know they are still a favorite.

[mpethybridge]

The most important consideration is position, obviously. EP: premiuim only, unless I am advertising or making a play.

MP premium, plus AQs sometimes, KQs, TT, 99 sometimes, depending mostly on the personalities at the table. Not much, really, especially if there's a limper ahead of me (and read this with a grain of salt, because I am lifetime loser with AQ, so clearly I am doing something horribly wrong).

Late: here's where it's fun--with nobody in before you, you can raise with almost anything--really, literally with anything, and play your position only, not your cards. Don't try this against calling stations, though. with an early position limper, you have to credit him with a solid hand--AK, AQ, AJ, TT, and raise cautiously, maybe only with those hands or better.

But if you have one or two limpers from mid or late position, you can raise with any legitimate hand, or any hand better than or including Axs Ax KTs, QTs, any pocket pair, stuff like that. Saw a post last night by a guy who says he raises when first in with J8 or J9, so some people dip down that low for a late position raise. Basically, with only one or two late limpers ahead of you, you are raising based on math--the odds are that your otherwise trash hand, is, in fact, on this hand, the best one out.

You also have to be aware of the player types that are behind you--you don't want to raise preflop with J8 against a guy who will play back at you from the BB every time, for instance. (And here I have to admit that I have been in many a $30 pot where I was on the button and either won or lost with, say J9 against a blind defense wih T5 or something). So you want to be careful raising with absolute garbage, even from late position, against certain player types.

[dalerobk]

I agree with Alpha as far as trying to bust someone. I love small pairs too, and they're probably my biggest money maker. But you can't go crazy with them either. You can lose a lot of money calling every preflop raise with 2-2. My general rule is that the have to have enough money behind them for it to be worth it, and I generally like to be the second person to call the raise, not the first one. That normally takes care of my odds problem and I have a better chance of getting paid off by at least one of them when I do hit.

The only other thing I would add to this very high quality discussion is that you shouldn't get too carried away with trying to steal pots at the lower NL tables, especially full ring games. At this lower levels, people will call you down with some absolutely ridiculous things. That's not to say never bluff. I almost never bluff at limit, but will bluff at NL. I'm just saying you have to be very selective and really study it to find the best time to bluff. And it is often easier to bluff at the small pots successfully than the big ones.

Also, patience is the key to NL, even more than limit. Like everyone said, you're looking to double through someone. If you can just break even for 4-5 hours and than double through on someone then you're doing great. Sometimes you double through on 3 people in one hour, other times...well, I'm about 2 weeks since I have. It's unreal, but that's for another post. The point is, just don't do anything dumb and be PATIENT. Double up, Double up,Double up. That's the name of the game.

[mpethybridge]

I agree with most of this in principle. In practice, 12 BB PFRs are rare, and heads up is also a rare situation. The more common situation is that you see a 4bb raise, and there are one or two callers, or maybe a reraise (in which case I usually bail). Everything is situational, but, in general, preflop you are only infrequently to sometimes going to be heads up against a raiser if you call in a small stakes game. So the math is quite a bit different; you will flop a set 1 out of eight and a half times or so, other times your pocket pair will win unimproved--99 v. AK, for instance, and you will fold for a 4bb loss most of the rest of the time (every so often you will get a bizarre and helpful flop, like 235 when you are holding 44). In the more typical situation, there are 12 bbs in when you call, so you are getting two to one on your money, not one to one. This halves the average profit you need to make per set to show a profit. I am not a math guru, so I don't know the precise figures, but, intuitively, I try to get a good return on my pocket pairs by only playing them in multi-ways from increasingly later positions as they get smaller. In a multi-way, when you hit the flop the odds are better that you are in against someone else who was helped by the flop, or who didn't need help because he is holding a big pair. And, under these circumstances, you certainly are going to get some action on your sets.

Last night, for instance, a player who had me covered at the $50 game--he had $140, I had $70-ish, moved in on me on a ragged flop where I had hit top set. He simply thought, well, I don't know what he thought, but he showed down aces. So that $70-ish I won from him will finance a lot of speculation, and it is pretty typical at the small stakes games (or at least, not unusual).

Suited connectors are more speculative, but also decptive in a raised pot.

In summary, I win monster pots--I break people--in three typical situations: I manage to get all my money in preflop with AA, I hit trips when others are holding big pairs and the flop is ragged, and I hold suited connectors that are helped in more than one way by the flop. These last two are some of the most hidden hands you can have in hold 'em, and they tend to pay off big.

And, yes, along the way, I try to pick up small and medium pots with TPTK and the like.

The one thing I do disagree with is the object of NLHE. It most certainly is to break people with monsters. Sure you want to pick up small pots, but, really, the purpose of picking up small pots is at least partly to finance your speculating in raised pots with things like suited connectors and small or medium pocket pairs. Or, at least, this is what Brunson says in SuperSystem, and I, for one, am not arguing with him. Instead, I am trying to emulate him, and showing a profit doing so.

OK; I'm gonna keep saying this until the blasted forum stops listing me as a "stranger:" I am new to the game, and you're not going to hurt my feelings disagreeing with me. You need to evaluate everything I say aginst the more experienced and mathematical players on this forum. But I am always looking for an opportunity to take someon's whole stack; if I wasn't, I'd be playing limit.

[BigF]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with Alpha as far as trying to bust someone. I love small pairs too, and they're probably my biggest money maker.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I'm positive they are not.

[mpethybridge]

Yes, this is it in a nutshell--pocket pair, late position, raised pot one or more callers ahead of me. I am drooling at the thought.

[TheWorstPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with Alpha as far as trying to bust someone. I love small pairs too, and they're probably my biggest money maker.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I'm positive they are not.

[/ QUOTE ]
Me too. Give me AA over 88 any time. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Good thread guys. I think I wrote out a lot of my thoughts on this topic in Grunch's first posts and don't really feel like re-typing (and can't remember what I said). Basically, just try to avoid Ax hands like the plague where x<K and don't play anything up front unless stacks are short and you'll be fine until you get more experienced. Also, play frikkin 6max! You can thank me later.

[mpethybridge]

I'm gonna run this on Poker Tracker tonight. I am almost certain that my small to medium pocket pairs, as a group, represent the majority of my profit.

[mpethybridge]

why six max? and what adjustments do I make from ten-handed?

[TheWorstPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
why six max? and what adjustments do I make from ten-handed?

[/ QUOTE ]
SEARCH

[Rev. Good Will]

[ QUOTE ]
why six max? and what adjustments do I make from ten-handed?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm gonna be hitting up the limit 6max pretty soon for what I'm guessing is the same reason

in short, you actually have to make more "poker decisions" and nut peddling alone will not get the $

[TheWorstPlayer]

Along with weaker players on average, more hands per hour, etc.

[mpethybridge]

Something for me to think about for my future. For now, I think I am one of those weaker players folks like you prey on. I am still long run negative on marginal situations, I think. I think my hand reading skills are sub-par and I have not yet gotten adequate at turn and river play (which is probably the same thing).

[TheWorstPlayer]

You will improve a lot faster at 6max. And will enjoy it more. I was also hesitant at first but my coach suggested it and I have never been happier. No way would I regularly go back to a full game. You should really give it a shot. Buy in a bit short if you are nervous of later street play at first.

[JFB37]

Let me add a conceptual point. It is easy to find lots of rules about how to do certain things. For example, "always raise or re-raise with AA" or "AJo is unplayable behind a raise" or "make a continuation bet when you raise pf." You can even memorize most of this stuff. But the key to learning NL is to really understand why these things are the conventional wisdom. You really have to understand, for example, why AJo is a crap hand. You have understand and internalize what it means to be dominated. I'm willing to bet that virtually everyone had to learn this the hard way by calling a raise with it and then being outkicked.

I picked some pretty basic examples but I'm trying to make a general point. The rules we get taught are based on much deeper concepts. You have to get behind the rules to learn the concepts.

Other posters have mentioned some, position, domination, implied odds, etc. Those are the things you need to master.

If you find yourself wondering is T8s or KQo playble in this situation, don't try to find the answer in a hands chart. Think about, what can this hand do? What do I have to flop? Is it going to flop a draw or a made hand? If it flops a draw am I going to be able to play it from this position?

A lot of times you will see posts that say things like "fold pf" or "raise the turn" with no explanation. Don't just try to memorize the answer. Think about why that advice is being offered and what is behind it. Only then will you begin to understand.

I hope this isn't too blatantly obvious.

[mpethybridge]

I think you just have your eye on my stack. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

OK, I'll be there tonight; Party $50, same screenname, if u are a party guy (actually, is it possible we have played at the same table before?) I'll check PT.

[mpethybridge]

Amen, brother. Far from blatantly obvious, this post is worth it's weight in gold. You argue for understanding concepts and thinking--can't go wrong there. well done.

[TheWorstPlayer]

If I'm playing NL25, sit at my table for sure, I'm a big donator apparently.

[mpethybridge]

yeah, right. But I will look you up, if only to watch.

[TheWorstPlayer]

No, seriously. Maybe you haven't read the threads where I mentioned currently being on a 10 buyin downswing at NL25. And you can look me up as GoggUMagog.

[mpethybridge]

I feel your pain. I lost 11 buy-ins at $100, so I rebought, dropped down to $50, and have made most of it back. My drought lasted a month, and I think I spent the last 10 days of it just on tilt, practically writing checks to the other people at the table. "Throwing a party," as Brunson calls it, but I wasn't having any fun.

[Zukeman66]

Important in Limit: Strength of your hand
Important in NL: Strength of opponent's hand

[Rev. Good Will]

[ QUOTE ]
Important in Limit: Strength of your hand
Important in NL: Strength of opponent's hand

[/ QUOTE ]

incorrocet, they both involve strength of your opponent's hand

[theblitz]

[ QUOTE ]
Give me AA over 88 any time.

[/ QUOTE ]
Funny you should mention 88.
They have actually being doing better than AA the last month.

55 is my biggest PP winner.

[theblitz]

It's not only the number of hands you can get in.

6-max is FAR more aggressive. You VPIP should be at 25-35% and you PRF MUST be at least 8%.
If that suits your style then it is great.

Also, stealing small pots is easier.
Sitting on the button when the flop has been checked round is a prime case for a steal.
Much more dangerous in full-ring and much harder since you will generally be up against more opponents.

And, yes, there are just as many idiots at 6-max as there are at full-ring tables.

[JFB37]

I just played this hand. It captures a lot of concepts in this thread.

***** Hand History for Game 2430065684 *****
$200 NL Texas Hold'em - Tuesday, July 26, 22:28:10 EDT 2005
Table Table 36731 (Real Money)
Seat 5 is the button
Total number of players : 10
Seat 1: electricman5 ( $290.85 )
Seat 2: snoozehooz ( $176.25 )
Seat 4: Beevers1 ( $255.75 )
Seat 5: FishGoneWild ( $198.85 )
Seat 7: muffy4042 ( $194.55 )
Seat 8: lookfuker ( $278.55 )
Seat 9: JFB37 ( $226.55 )
Seat 6: FreddieBeach ( $196 )
Seat 10: nckstradamus ( $200 )
Seat 3: garybrock ( $196 )
FreddieBeach posts small blind [$1].
muffy4042 posts big blind [$2].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to JFB37 [ 5d 5s ]
lookfuker calls [$2].
JFB37 calls [$2].
electricman5 folds.
snoozehooz calls [$2].
garybrock raises [$20].
Beevers1 folds.
FishGoneWild folds.
FreddieBeach folds.
muffy4042 folds.
lookfuker folds.
JFB37 calls [$18].
snoozehooz folds.
** Dealing Flop ** [ 5h, Qc, Qs ]
JFB37 checks.
garybrock bets [$100].
JFB37 calls [$100].
** Dealing Turn ** [ Jd ]
>You have options at Table 36734 Table!.
JFB37 bets [$80].
garybrock is all-In [$76]
** Dealing River ** [ Ts ]
JFB37 shows [ 5d, 5s ] a full house, Fives full of queens.
garybrock doesn't show [ 9d, 9s ] two pairs, queens and nines.
JFB37 wins $4 from side pot #1 with a full house, Fives full of queens.
JFB37 wins $396 from the main pot with a full house, Fives full of queens.

[mpethybridge]

Tripled up on the party NL $50 six max last night, TWP. Thanks for the tip. I'll probably play some more there.

[mpethybridge]

VNH. No disrespect intended to your play--you had a live one there (and then played him perfectly).

Guts reraise preflop.

[derick]

[ QUOTE ]
I just played this hand. It captures a lot of concepts in this thread.

***** Hand History for Game 2430065684 *****
$200 NL Texas Hold'em - Tuesday, July 26, 22:28:10 EDT 2005
Table Table 36731 (Real Money)
Seat 5 is the button
Total number of players : 10
Seat 1: electricman5 ( $290.85 )
Seat 2: snoozehooz ( $176.25 )
Seat 4: Beevers1 ( $255.75 )
Seat 5: FishGoneWild ( $198.85 )
Seat 7: muffy4042 ( $194.55 )
Seat 8: lookfuker ( $278.55 )
Seat 9: JFB37 ( $226.55 )
Seat 6: FreddieBeach ( $196 )
Seat 10: nckstradamus ( $200 )
Seat 3: garybrock ( $196 )
FreddieBeach posts small blind [$1].
muffy4042 posts big blind [$2].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to JFB37 [ 5d 5s ]
lookfuker calls [$2].
JFB37 calls [$2].
electricman5 folds.
snoozehooz calls [$2].
garybrock raises [$20].
Beevers1 folds.
FishGoneWild folds.
FreddieBeach folds.
muffy4042 folds.
lookfuker folds.
JFB37 calls [$18].
snoozehooz folds.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm beginning NL after playing lots of Limit, so take what I say with a grain of salt.

That $18 call seems a little on the expensive side.

For $10 I'd call every time, for more than $20 I'd fold ... I'd find it tough to call with 55 in EP.

Your postflop play looks perfect.

[Heine]

well i think with 55 is easy to play post flop against that raise. i.e. if i a 5 comes don't fold your set.

Am I right in saying the strong your hand the easier it is to play OOP?

[delexaet]

That HH, maybe one in a while a call for 10BB is worth is with low PP. But if you do that even for 10% of the time, it's a losing play imo