From: hall@kronos.arc.nasa.gov (Michael Hall)
Subject: Re: Low limit Holdem strategy
Organization: NASA/ARC Information Sciences Division
Distribution: ba
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 01:26:52 GMT

In article <17761@autodesk.COM> jamesr@Autodesk.COM (James Rowell) writes:
>A question for you expert poker players...

Disclaimer:  I'm an expert only in no limit net hold'em :-)

>I've been playing hold`em at some of the local bay area poker
>clubs (and doing better than my last moaning posting, which I
>apologize for!) and find that it's easier to play at the higher
>stakes tables than lower stakes.  I think the generally accepted
>wisdom is that you can apply some more strategy at the higher
>stakes tables and consequently control the table better.

Yes, a lot of people say that.  I've personally never played above
3-6, though.

>Anyway, the question is, what is the "correct" strategy to follow
>for the lower (say 1-2, 2-4 or even 3-6) tables?  I can't seem to
>really get things to go my way at these tables.  I'm more or less
>following Sklansky and Malmuth's advice for 6-12 tables and it
>seems to work fairly well (however I'm still pretty green).
>
>Anyway, just wondering what you've found useful etc...

Low limit hold 'em is essentially a drawing game, where you
bet/raise-for-value as long as you think you have the edge, and call as
long as you think you are getting sufficient pot odds.  The most
important thing is to play good hands, and to raise before
the flop with very good hands.  Sklansky's advice will do you well
here, but note that because of the drawing game, suited connectors
increase in strength, while high pocket pairs decrease in strength.
Also, you can play a little looser than Sklansky's advice, because
you'll still be playing better hands than the rest of the table,
but just don't get carried away.  Fold if the flop spells doom.  Most
of your edge comes from the fact that other players play almost any hand
and don't fold if they have any chance in hell of winning the hand.  You
usually need a big hand to win, given all the players in until the River.

Slow-playing is almost always a mistake.  Bet, bet, bet, and
you'll be shocked at how many fish call all the way to the end,
despite your display of strength.  Fancy plays are usually
a bad idea, since your opponents are not intelligent enough to
fall for them.  However, the check-raise can be a valuable tool to
increase action (by stringing them along to call two bets sequentially)
or to drive players out of the pot (by forcing them to call two bets
cold with a threat of two more bets), depending on the position of
the suspected raiser.

Because of the great pot odds, it's often good to bluff on the River
when you missed your hand, or to raise back at a suspected bluff when you
have at least ace high.  However, I strongly suggest heeding Sklansky's
advice of not bluffing versus more than one other player.  When you become
very experienced, you can sometimes bluff against two players.  But more
than that nearly assures you will be called.

Also, it is my bitter experience that head-on reraise wars are dangerous,
unless you have the absolute nuts.  Don't go wild unless you are sure you
have the nuts.

>P.S. I'd ask your advice about no-limit tournament play, but
>somehow I just don't trust you at this point in time...  :-)

Steve Jacobs' advice was totally wrong.  You should always "CALL *"
when you play against me.

-- 
Michael Hall            \
NASA Ames Research Center\  "Tropicana... Atlantic City in the desert"
hall@ptolemy.arc.nasa.gov \  - ad slogan proposed by Michael Buck

Newsgroups: rec.gambling