Comments on: Building a No-Limit Hold’em Starting Hand Chart – Cutoff Standards

By: Jason

Jason — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 14:57:55 +0000

Maybe I’m just a nit, but playing hands like A8o and QTo after limpers seems like a recipe for disaster. Is this really +EV?

By: Ed Miller

Ed Miller — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 13:03:45 +0000

Just to throw something else out there, I’ve noticed some players like to try these sort of ham-handed stone bluffs at low levels. If you do a little hand-reading, their play doesn’t make much sense except if they have a monster or if they have nothing. Some players will usually have a monster, some bluff enough that they’ll usually be bluffing. You can often take them off their bluff with a resteal raise.

By: Todd

Todd — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 12:57:08 +0000

…snip…
I disagree strongly with what I consider to be a common myth that you should never bluff at small stakes.
…snip…

I am with Ed 100% here. You can bluff at any stakes. It is important to figure out what bluffs are successful at a given stake. For example, I was playing .10/.25 with a friend the other day and you could pot it on the button pre-flop with just about any 2 when there were 3 limpers to you and then pot it again on the flop. The flop bet would be large enough that you really didn’t get much action. Very effective bluff. I don’t have nearly as much success with that bluff in 1-2. That said, the micros and nanos probably aren’t the place to pull out the 3 barrel bluffs when the villain can’t fold second pair.

By: Ed Miller

Ed Miller — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 12:42:39 +0000

These ranges should be fine online too, given that you make modifications for opponents/game type. Again, no-limit is very fluid, and I can’t possibly hope to present an optimal preflop strategy in chart form. The goal here is to develop a strategy that should work ok as a baseline.

Having said that, online people are a bit more aggressive… I see more light 3-betting in, say, a $0.25-$0.50 online NL game than a $2-$5 live NL game. So you have to have more of a plan for responding to a 3-bet than you do in a live game.

I disagree strongly with what I consider to be a common myth that you should never bluff at small stakes. I bluff with some frequency at every level.

Opponents also think at all levels. They just don’t think as DEEPLY at lower levels (in general) as they do at higher levels. But they’re definitely thinking, and hand-reading at any level means getting into your opponents’ brains and reverse engineering their hand from what they seem to be thinking.

By: Todd

Todd — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 12:28:29 +0000

They do work more or less. As Raccoon said, you do need to adjust to the game a bit. Bluff less, play a little tighter, value bet more. One of the things I found when I played the micro limits was that you could really value bet your monsters. You could over bet the pot 20% on the end and still get paid off. Grab yourself a pitchfork and toss the money in when you make the nuts. Also, suited As go up in value because so many people will limp with any 2 suited and pay you off when they make a lesser flush.

By: Raccoon

Raccoon — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 08:36:59 +0000

Hey Rick,

I was gonna ask the same question, because it seems that on many sites the low limits do not follow “normal” poker theory.

Imho the key for low limits is valuebets and NO Bluffing.
It’s always nice to understand concepts and tricky plays, but where does it get you when your opponent doesn’t even notice them?

So the question is, at which levels do the opponents normally begin to think?

For me, I came to the conclusion, that I need to learn to be flexible for every game I sit down and change my plays (and “my inner” starting hand chart) according to the table.

By: Rick

Rick — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 17:44:46 +0000

I was curious how you felt these starting hand suggestions would work at nanolimit levels. Can they still be effective????