NL starting hands requirements

[GLEEBZ]

In general, how do the starting requirements differ between limit and no-limit and (more importantly) why do they differ? Thanks for the help!

[Jzo19]

they differ because TP hands go down in value , and hands with implied odds (suited connectors and pocket pairs) go way up in value ,....

[phydaux]

But as Matt & Sunny point out in their new book, this all changes as stack size changes.

With short effective stacks, less that 40bb, then hands with any two cards J or higher are powerhouse hands. The idea here is that you can raise big pre-flop and then just one more resonable bet on the flop gets you all-in with either top pair or two overcards.

But when the money is deep, effective stacks of more than 100bb, then it takes reasonable bets on every street to get all-in. So since you are offering your opponent such awesome implied odds then it becomes unprofitable to commit with TPTK hands. In these cases draws become profitable to play because if you fill your draw on the turn you can often double through your opponent for a lot of money.

[ChrisV]

I would say that really the major difference between starting requirements in NL and limit is position. You can play many more hands in late position and many fewer hands out of position.

[phydaux]

Good point, Chris.

You do have to play much tighter in EP in a NL game than in limit. This is because of the exponential nature of the bet sizes in NL. Think about when you bring it in from EP with KQ, make top pair on the flop, get called to the river and then get shown AQ. In limit this not a mistake, since the most it can cost you is 4-5 big bets (so call it 10 big blinds). In NL this is a mistake because it can cost you your entire 100 big blind buy-in.

And when it if folded or limped around then you can get away with raising much more loosely from the Button & Cut Off. If you don't just take down the pot right there without even seeing a flop, you will likely be heads up after the flop with both position and the initiative of being the pre-flop raiser. Your oponent will have to act first and he will have no way of knowing if your flop bet/raise is a naked bluff, a semi-bluff or a powerhouse made hand. Once again the exponential nature of turn & river bets comes into play, the "Hammer of Future Bets" as Dave & Ed call it. But this time it's working for you. A c-bet will take down the pot very often, and if you get played back at it usually means strength.

And that's why floating, check/calling on the flop and then betting out on the turn, sometimes even with air, is such a powerful tool when faced with a habitual c-bettor.

I'll stop now, because we're way off track from simple, solid NL pre-flop strategy and dangerously close to FPS.

And I haven't had my FPS booster shot recently...

[phydaux]

Also, it's important to differentiate between tournament play and cash game play. Although other than some special situations around the cash bubble or when very short handed, then primary differance between tournaments and cash games is that of short stack play vs deep stack play.

[gedanken]

If you read any book on limit poker, they'll give you a chart of what hands to play in what situation, and suggest you memorize it. They'll also stress the importance of solid preflop play.

That's not so true of no-limit. Preflop play decreases in importance relative to postflop. Considerations like "how good am I at playing tpmk" become important in choosing which hands to play in which situation.

For example, do you call a raise with a low pocket pair? There isn't one answer. It depends on your image, the opponent's style, the effective stack size... If you don't think you'll be able to get enough money when you flop a set, you fold, but other times, you call.

I think NL players develop their own starting hand requirements. A somewhat wider range of styles can be profitable at NL.

[PantsOnFire]

You can play more speculative hands in NL due to implied odds.

In NL, you can win much bigger pots when you hit the nuts like nut straights, nut flushes or a full house. So you can play more cards that make these hands.

Since you can win big pots in NL, this will pay for all the times you play these sorts of hands and then fold.

In limit, if you play these hands on a consistent basis you will lose money because the pots you do win will not pay for all the ones you have fold.

[gedanken]

I agree with the advice that relative to limit, speculative hands become more playable. Pants' point is excellent that hands that hit the nuts have special value -- suited aces are one of my favorites.

I'd just caution a beginner to not go crazy with speculative hands. Medium suited connectors cost me a lot until I figured out that a) they're not as powerful as they sound, and b) I suck at playing them. They have the nifty feature of drawing to 2nd-best a lot, so they take skill to exploit fully.

The best hands in limit (AA-JJ, AK, AQs...) are still the best hands in no-limit.

[TonyZ]

Iam going to have to say I really love to raise both in limit and no limit with suited connectors. They are super strong in no limit for obv. reasons, but in limit it is a different story. People usually call down with A high, so if you raise/re raise PF with SC, the Villain will put you on one of the "Good" starting hands AA/KK/AK/AQ etc. So if you hit a pair w/ a draw you will often win big in limit with that hand, b/c as stated before they will call down with a high card, due to a low junk board.