Play poker online at Doyles Poker Room

TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreward Preface Introduction My Story The History of No Limit Online Poker Exclusive Super/System 2 Specialize or learn Limit Hold'em Poker Omaha Eight or Better Seven Card Stud High Low Pot Limit Omaha High Triple Draw Poker Tournament Overview No Limit Hold'em World Poker Tour Poker Glossary

NO-LIMIT HOLD’EM POKER
by Doyle Brunson

INTRODUCTION

When I decided to create this all-new edition of Super/System, I pondered how much no-limit hold’em has changed in the past twenty-seven years. Players are more knowledgeable and aggressive today. And no longer do you have the luxury of facing half a table full of opponents who don’t have a clue.
So, I sat down to revise this chapter, to bring it up to modern day standards. But you know what? I hadn’t read my own advice for fifteen years, and when I sat down to examine it, I just kept nodding my head in agreement and muttering, “Damn, that’s good!”
For you, this advice will be as profitable today as when I first wrote it. For me? Well, I’ve had to adjust my game. Most of my opponents have read this chapter in the original Super/System, and if I played that way, I’d be too predictable.
You don’t have to play exactly the way I describe in this chapter. You’ll probably want to pick your own style and modify these concepts to fit the games you play. Still, if you incorporate this advice, making it the soul of your strategy, the rest will fall in place.
I’ve added new thoughts and expanded some of the ideas, but the core concepts remain as valid and as profitable today as ever. So, here is my up-to-date advice, blending the previous tips and the tactics that will always win at no-limit hold’em with some new insights I hope will earn you extra money. Here’s how to conquer any no-limit hold’em game in the world.

Ante Up
Now let’s join the introduction from my original no-limit hold’em chapter. There’s a story I’ve been hearing around poker games all my life. It’s about a colorful player down in south Texas named Broomcorn. (Ever since I related this story about Broomcorn in the original Super/System, people have asked me time and again who was the real Broomcorn. He is the late Lawrence Herron from Houston.) Whenever someone in the game is playing real tight, the opposing players needle him by saying, “Well, you’re gonna go like Broomcorn’s uncle.” The tight player perks up and responds sharply, “What do you mean, I’m gonna go like him?” And they say, “Well, he anted himself to death.”
Whenever you find yourself playing a very tight and defensive style of poker, you’ll be in danger of anteing yourself to death. As I’ve always said, the ante determines how fast you play in any poker game. Since you’ll generally play in a normal or medium ante games, if you play an aggressive style of poker, you’ll have the best of it.
That’s the way I recommend you play, and it works. This is especially true in no-limit hold’em, which in my opinion is the Cadillac of poker games—and not just because it’s my best game. Many of the world’s best poker players, some of whom are only beginning to appreciate the great variety of skills you need to be a top-level hold’em player, agree with me. Although hold’em is similar in some respects to seven-card stud, there are enough differences to put it in a class by itself. It’s truly a game that requires very special talents in order to play it at a world-class level.
Above all else, no-limit hold’em is a game where you have to be aggressive—and you have to gamble. One of the great things about hold’em is the infinite variety in the game. There are so many different combinations of hands and various plays in certain situations that the game never gets boring. Unlike other forms of poker, you can represent a lot of different hands in hold’em and put your opponent on one of several hands as well. It’s a very complex game. You’re forced to do a lot of guessing, as is your opponent.

Get in There and Gamble
If you want to be a winner—a big winner—at no-limit hold’em, you can’t play a solid, safe game. My philosophy of play at no-limit hold’em is a simple one: Try to win big pots and pick up the small ones (win without a contest). It’s a philosophy that necessitates a gambling style of play. My style.
Over the years, this style has fostered numerous comments from countless players about how “lucky” I am. I’ve been hearing that for years. The simple fact is that it’s not true. Everyone gets lucky once in a while, but no one is consistently lucky. It takes more than luck to be a consistently big winner through the years, as I have done. It is something else. You’ll soon discover what that “something else” is.
I appear to be a lucky player because every time a big pot comes up, I usually have the worst hand. There are good reasons for that. I’m a very aggressive player. I reach out and pick up small pots all the time. I’m always betting at those pots, hammering at them. And I don’t want anybody to stop me from doing that. I don’t want anyone to defeat my style of play.
And if I’ve got any kind of a hand, any kind of a draw, I bet. If I get raised, I don’t quit. I go ahead and get all my money in the pot, if it’s a reasonable amount, knowing I probably have the worst hand and am the underdog to win the pot.

Calling a Post-Oak Bluff
Sometimes I’ll even call a very small bet in a big pot, knowing my opponent might be trying to pull off a post-oak bluff just to get a chance at a draw. But if I’m going to gamble like that, my opponent must have a lot of chips on the table. For example, say I have a 10-9 and, with $10,000 in the pot, the flop comes 8-3-2. With a raggedy flop like that, my opponent—a tight player, let’s say—might try to pick up the pot with a post-oak bluff of $1,200. Well that’s a gutless bet, and I’ll call it trying to catch a jack or a 7, just so I can get an open-end straight draw on fourth street. Of course, I’m hoping to catch a 10 or a 9, and I’m in a good position to pick up the pot on fourth street, whether I improve or not.
The tight player who made that weak bet on the flop is asking me to take his money. And in most cases, that’s exactly what I’m going to do when the next card falls—regardless of what it is. I’m going to make a large bet into that tight player because I feel confident he’s going to throw his hand away and not put his whole stack in jeopardy. As you can probably guess, I never make post-oak bluffs.

Aggression
I’ve built a reputation as an extremely aggressive player. And I don’t ever want to lose that reputation. It’s what enables me to pick up more than my share of pots.
In most cases, my opponents are afraid to play back at me because they know I’m liable to set them all-in. So when they don’t have a real big hand, they let go of the pot, and I pick it up. The accumulation of all those small pots is a big part of my winning formula. It’s the bonus I get for playing the way I do, and it’s the secret of my success.
If I win ten pots where nobody has a big hand, ten pots with let’s say $3,000 in them, I can afford to take 2 to 1 the worst of it and play a $30,000 pot. I’ve already got that pot covered thanks to all the small pots I’ve picked up. And when I play that big pot, it’s a freeroll.
As I said a little while ago, when a big pot’s played, I’ve usually got the worst hand. I’d say that when all the money goes in, I’ve got the worst hand over 50 percent of the time. Obviously, I wouldn’t be able to overcome that statistic if I didn’t always pad my stack by picking up all those small pots throughout the game.
Of course, I’m almost never completely out on a limb in a big pot. Whenever I make a substantial bet or raise, I’ve usually got an out. Betting with an out, that’s what I call it. And it’s the out I have that makes me appear lucky when I’m a dog in a big pot and wind up winning it.
There are other benefits to playing the aggressive way I recommend. You’ll be able to break a lot of players because you’re in there gambling all the time, and because of that, you’ll get a lot of your real good hands paid off. Tight players don’t get their real good hands paid off because they rarely make a move, so that whenever they do, their hand is an open book. And they almost never change gears and start playing loose.
But you’ll be out there betting, betting, betting, all the time. Your opponents will see you’re an aggressive player. They’ll know you’re out there trying to pick up all those pots, so they’ll sometimes give you a little loose action. And since you won’t always be out there with the worst hand, you’ll break one or two of them. After that, they may be scared to get involved with you.
So your style of play will deceive and befuddle your opponents. They won’t know whether or not you’ve really got a hand. They won’t know whether you’re going to set them all-in or not. And anytime you get your opponents in that confused state of mind you’ll have an advantage over them.
Of course, you won’t play every hand aggressively. Occasionally you’ll slow down, and sometimes you’ll completely stop and throw your hand away. You should never start out bluffing at a pot and keep bluffing at it without an out. For example, whenever I raise the pot before the flop I’m going to bet after the flop about 90 percent of the time.
If the flop comes completely ragged, and it doesn’t look like anyone can have much of it, I’m going to bet at the pot and try to pick it up even if I don’t have a piece of the flop. If I get called I’m usually going to give it up—unless I have some kind of an out—even as little as third pair or an inside straight draw. Sometimes, you can keep hammering on certain players and drive them off even when you don’t have an out. But you’re usually better off when you have some kind of escape hatch.
The reason I occasionally go ahead and put in all my money when I know I’ve probably got the worst hand deserves repeating, since it’s so important for you to understand. I do it because I don’t want somebody playing back at me and trying to stop me from being the aggressor. If I allow that to happen, it’ll cramp my style. I’ll no longer be able to pick up all those pots when nobody has a hand. And most of the time, nobody has anything decent. Somebody’s got to get the money that’s left out there. I want it to be me.

Small Connecting Cards
An example will best show you what I’m talking about. Let’s say I raised before the flop with a type of hand that’s one of my favorites: small connecting cards that are suited. I’m in the pot with one player who called behind me. At this point, I put him on a couple of big cards or a medium pair. That’s all right. It’s what I want him to have. Now, here’s what’ll happen if the following flop comes up:

With that flop, I’m going to lead right off and bet. If he plays back at me, I can now be quite sure he’s got two aces or better. So, I’m about a 9 to 5 dog. The pot odds will compensate a little bit for that price, but it won’t be laying me enough to put the rest of my money in. But I don’t want that same guy, who might be a pretty good player, taking a J-10 and making that same play when I don’t have anything. To let his play succeed, I have to throw my hand away and give him the pot. Because I want the pot, I can’t let him succeed. I want him to fear me. I want him to have the opinion I’m going to defend the money I put out there. I don’t want him to have any doubts about that, so I go ahead and put the rest of my money in.
In making that play on the flop, there’s a good chance I can win the pot right there. Because I’m known to play any reasonable hand—and some unreasonable hands in a shorthanded high-ante game—I’ve really made it tough on him. I could’ve flopped a set of trips, two pair, or even the straight. I’ve put him on the defensive and he’s got a lot of guessing to do.
It’s not all that bad if he decides to call me because I’ve got an out. If I make my straight, I’m going to break him. And if I draw out on him, it will look like I got lucky again. Well, I did and I didn’t. When I moved in on him, I was gambling to pick up the pot. When I didn’t succeed because of his call, you might say I got unlucky. What’s more, I am supposed to make my draws once in a while. In fact, in that specific situation I’ll draw out more than one third of the time, by making my straight or backdooring two pair or trips.
A very interesting thing about that particular 7-6 hand is that I’d rather have it than a 9-8. The reason is that when you flop a straight with a 9-8, you’ll frequently find that somebody is on top of you. For example, when the flop comes Q-J-10, an A-K will have you nutted, and even a sucker who plays a K-9 will have you beat. I’ve flopped many a straight with a 9-8, but when a Q-J-10 falls, I’m always real cautious with the hand. Because people play the higher cards more frequently than the lower ones, you’re less likely to be in trouble if you flop a straight with a 7-6 than you would be with a 9-8. I’ll discuss the general category of small connecting cards in great detail a little later. As I previously noted, they’re one of my favorite hands.

Double Belly-Buster Straight
Another of my favorites is a hand where you can flop a two-way inside or double belly-buster straight. It’s one of the most deceptive hands there is, and I especially like it in no-limit. It has all the advantages of an open-end straight, but it’s not as easy to read. Because it’s so deceptive, I almost always raise with it when I can win a big pot.
For example, say you have a Q-10 and the flop comes
A-J-8. As you can see, it’s very deceptive because you can make a straight with a 9 or a king. What’s more, if you catch a king and there’s someone with A-K in the pot with you, you can see all the trouble he’s in.
Since double belly-busters are such good gambling hands, you might find the following quick rule of thumb useful: It’s possible to flop a double belly-buster with any two cards that are part of a straight, such as 7-6, 8-6, 9-6, and 10-6. Also, two cards with five gaps between them such as a Q-6 can also flop a double belly-buster draw. In the supplement at the end of this section you’ll find a complete rundown on all the hands that have double belly-buster potential.
When you flop a double belly-buster draw, you should make careful note of which of your possible straights will be the nuts. For example, if you have a J-9 and the fall is K-10-7, both an 8 and a queen will make you a straight. However, only the 8 will give you the nuts. If a queen falls on fourth, someone with an A-J can beat your straight. So you must be careful—especially in no-limit play—and you must know how to read the board perfectly in order to recognize what hand is the absolute nuts. Practice at home until you don’t make a single mistake. You’ll learn quick enough if you get broke a few times with what you thought was the nuts but turned out to be only the second best hand.
Look again at the example above. A player with a J-9 could easily think he had the best straight when the queen fell until someone showed him an A-J for all his money.
An easy way to determine whether your straight is the nuts is by following some simple guidelines. You’ll have the nut straight if:

(1) The high-end of the straight is made up with the highest card in your hand; or
(2) The high-end of the highest possible straight is already on the board.

Drawing to a double belly-buster is one of few situations in no-limit where you might be drawing to an inside straight that won’t make the best hand. As I noted earlier, inside straight draws can be real good plays in no-limit hold’em because for a few chips you have the opportunity to win a very big pot. But you almost never draw to a single belly-buster straight that will not be the best hand if you make it. They’re long-shot plays, so when you do make them, you want to be sure they’re the nuts.
For example, let’s say you held Q-J and the fall was 9-8-4. Now you might want to draw at that belly-buster, trying to catch a 10 or make a big pair (even in limit, but mostly in no-limit). You know if you catch that 10, you’ll have a cinch hand. But if you held a 6-5, you’d never draw to it with that flop because there’d be two different straights that could beat you if you catch a 7, the 6-7-8-9-10 and the 7-8-9-10-J. If a man makes a straight with you, he’s either got you tied or he’s got you beat. So, you never draw to the dead-end of a single belly-buster.
Before you decide to draw to a belly-buster, you also want to be reasonably certain that your opponent is going to gamble with you if you do make it. I mean, drawing to a belly-buster is a good play, but only if you can win a big pot by making your long shot. So you want your opponent to have the best hand possible on the board. If the flop came 9-8-4, as above, ideally, you want your opponent to have three nines. You don’t want him to have a pair of kings or A-9. You want him to have at least eights and nines, or better. You want him to have a very big hand. Your Q-J would be a very good hand against three nines. It wouldn’t be as good against a pair of nines because it won’t make enough money. Your opponent will release a pair far more readily than he’ll release a set.
So if you can get in real cheap and have the potential to win a big pot, belly-buster straights are good gambles. But you also have to be very selective about the belly-busters you do draw to. You don’t want it to be apparent to your opponent that you could’ve made a straight. In the illustration just used, you might not get the action you want if a 10 falls off on fourth street. The Q-J is actually a weak hand when the flop is 9-8-4. Your opponent might put you on a 7-6 and, when the 10 came, he might be very leery about calling a big bet you made. The straight possibility might even scare him off completely.
But if a possible straight wasn’t so apparent when the 10 came off, you could probably win a lot of money. Let’s say you had the Q? 9?, and the flop was J-8-2. You might want to pick the 10 off there because that would be a very deceptive belly-buster draw. And inside straights like these are the ones you want to draw for to win a big pot because they aren’t so obvious.

Bluffs
If you graduate from limit hold’em to no-limit, you might find yourself doing many things, in addition to drawing to inside straights, that simply won’t work when all it can cost your opponent is another bet.
A good example of a bluff that has a lot of power to it in no-limit, but will rarely work at limit, comes when the board is one card off a straight on fourth street. Let’s say there’s an A-K-Q-J out there and your opponent bets. You’ve got a 10 in the hole, and since there’s no flush possible, you’ve got the nuts. Your opponent bets, you raise, and he plays back. Now, there’s no question he’s also got a straight.
An unsophisticated player would move in on him right there because he knows he can’t lose. But what good is that? He’s only going to get a split.
However, adding some drama and a little acting to your play gives you a chance to win it all. You know you’re going to call his reraise but you don’t have to do it instantaneously. Take your time. Just stall around. Study the board real hard and shake your head several times making it appear as though you overlooked the possible straight. You could even pick up your cards slightly and make him think you’re going to throw them away. Then put them back down and say “Okay, I’ll call it.”
With all your agonizing, he’s got to give you credit for a set. You’ve made him think you’re gambling the board will pair so you’ll make a full. If the board does pair on the end, you bet him all your money. There’s almost no risk to that play. You represent a full and many a time your opponent will throw his hand away. Of course, it’s almost impossible to do in limit because all the guy has to do is call one bet.

Calling a Bluff
As you can see from the play just described, bluffing often involves a lot of art. But there’s science to it also. There’s even science to calling a bluff. The following pot I was involved in will clearly illustrate what I mean.
In a small ante no-limit game early in my career, I was on the button, so I limped in with a J-10 in the hole. There were two players in the pot in front of me. Here’s what the flop looked like:

FLOP

As you see, I had a belly straight draw. Since there was no raise before the flop, I was reasonably sure neither of my two opponents had very strong hands. On the flop, the guy in the first seat made a reasonably sized bet (throughout these discussions, a reasonably sized bet means about the size of the pot), and the player in front of me called it. Both players had a lot of money in front of them, so I called as well.
The fourth card was the 2?. They both checked on fourth street, and so did I. The last card was the 3?. The board now looked like this:

When all the cards were out, the guy in the first seat checked again. After he bet on the flop and then checked twice on fourth and fifth, I figured he had the top pair with a bad kicker. I felt the guy in front of me was drawing at some kind of straight and obviously had missed his hand. Much to my surprise, he made a real out-of-line bet on the end, far bigger than the size of the pot.
When he did that, it looked to me like he was clearly trying to steal the pot. I was also sure I had him high-carded. As I said, I felt sure he was drawing at a smaller straight than I was.
If I was correct in thinking I had been drawing at the highest possible straight, I knew I’d win the pot if I just called. I also knew the other player couldn’t overcall because his hand wasn’t strong enough.
So I called that out-of-line bet, and my analysis proved correct. The player with the pair threw his hand away and Johnny Moss, the guy who over-bet the pot, was drawing to a little straight. So I won the pot with a jack-high.
I didn’t tell you that poker story because I won the pot with a jack-high. And you shouldn’t remember it for that reason. It has a more significant message. I told you I felt neither guy had much of anything and explained why. Obviously, it was more than just a nebulous feel. I had played with both those guys often, so I used a certain amount of reasoning and a process of elimination. And a lot of it was based on recall of previous hands.

Recall
Whenever I use the word “feel,” you should understand it’s not some extra-sensory power that I have. It’s just that I recall something that happened previously. Even though I might not consciously do it, I can often recall if this same play or something close to it came up in the past, and what the player did or what somebody else did. So, many times I get a feeling that he’s bluffing or that I can make a play and get the pot. But actually my subconscious mind is reasoning it all out.
You build up a history of every player you ever played with, I mean everyone that you’ve ever done any serious gambling with. You’ve got some kind of information on them. It’s there, buried in your mind. And you don’t have to concentrate to get it out. When the time comes to use it, you won’t have to force it. It’ll come naturally.
All good poker players have tremendous recall. They reach back into the depths of their minds and remember what a certain guy did in a similar situation. A good player might not realize what he’s doing and he might not know exactly what it is, but he feels when a guy is bluffing and knows he can make a real big play or make a super call. The vibrations are definitely there.
And what it actually is, is a sense of recall. If the same situation or a similar one existed some time ago, a good player knows exactly what to do in this one. It’s usually a stress situation, when a relatively large amount of money is involved, that proves a player’s recall ability.
There’s another kind of feel you can have in a game that doesn’t depend on recall. This type of feel depends on close observation of what’s going on during a particular session. You acquire this feel when you notice that a certain player is really off his game and playing far worse than normal.
This happens all the time. A lot of players lose control and go on tilt after they get one or more big hands cracked. They become unglued, lose their composure. To recoup their losses, they start playing weak hands, and they play those hands badly—very badly.
It’s easy to capitalize on those situations. Let’s say you’re in a game with a high-ante structure, (a subject I’ll cover in greater detail below) and naturally everybody’s playing real fast. You played a J-9 and the flop came A-9-8. Normally, if you got played with, you’d be very concerned about that ace and also your kicker. But in this case, you’re in the pot with a player who’s losing and, from what you’ve seen, he’s playing very badly. You check on the flop, and so does he.
All of a sudden, you get a “feel” that all he’s got is the third pair, a pair of eights. Since he checked, you feel he got something, a small piece of the flop. He didn’t bet because he wants to get the hand shown-down. If he had nothing he would’ve bet to try to steal the pot. And you know he doesn’t have an ace. You know the worst that can happen is that he could also have a 9 and run you down, chase you. Well, what you want is for him to run you down with an 8, which is what you really think he has.
But you feel confident you’re not wrong. If a rag falls off on fourth, you bet. You know he’s going to call you, almost out of desperation because he’s losing. So you make some money on fourth and also on the end. You know he’s not going to show you a hand unless he gets lucky and pairs his kicker.
The very surprising thing about the previous discussion is that the player I was referring to as on tilt is actually a very good player. He could even be world-class. Of course, the
super-stars of the poker world—those who I play against on a regular basis—are able to exercise far more control than the average player. Yet even a real good player has moments when he’s playing considerably off his usual game. So you have to be observant and take advantage of such opportunities when they present themselves. You’ll have many more opportunities to do that against the average player simply because they lose control far more often.
Categorizing Your Opponents
It is also extremely important that you be able to assess the quality of your opponents’ play. You have to play very differently against strong players than you do against weaker ones. This is of crucial importance in no-limit.
Shortly, I’m going to go into considerable detail on this important subject because I’ve seen very good players fail to adjust their strategy when they’re in a pot with a certain type of player. In fact, recently one of the best players I know made such amateurish mistakes that I wouldn’t have believed it possible if I hadn’t seen it with my own two eyes. But before I get into the specific details, I want to give you two general rules to guide you in this matter.

(1) Against a low-grade player: You simply make the obvious play. That is, you don’t try to get fancy when you’re in a pot with a weak player. You don’t try to make subtle moves that’ll be far beyond his capacity to understand or appreciate. In a word, you outplay him.
(2) Against a higher-grade player (someone who could be thinking along the same lines as you): You must mix-up your play. Sometimes you make an obvious play against a strong player—as you always would against a weak player—and other times you go at it another way and make a play that’s not so obvious. Most of the time, you have to put a play on or out-maneuver a strong player.

In a nutshell, that’s all there is to it. And it seems simple and logical enough. There are even very good players who know that that’s what they’re supposed to do, but knowing something and being able to execute it are two different things.
Playing Against a Weak Player
There was a particular player who entered a tournament for the first time and, almost immediately, it became obvious that he was a weak player. He was the supreme example of a calling station, a player who’s next to impossible to bluff.
Even though I had never played against him before, it didn’t take me very long to recognize the type of player he was. I’ve played with thousands just like him throughout my career. So I knew what to do when I was involved in a pot with him. More precisely, I knew what not to do. I was not going to try to bluff him. Not even once.
I quickly decided that if I was in the pot with him, I was going to show him a hand. And, if he got lucky enough to beat me, well, he was going to beat a hand. My mind was made up.
But there were other very good players in this tournament who tried to run over him, tried to force him out of a pot. They bluffed at him constantly and were rarely successful. If he had anything at all he looked ‘em up. As I said, he was the ultimate calling station. He looked enough of them up to finish far higher than he should have. He was probably about a 1000 to 1 dog to finish as high as he did. The reason he did was simply because so many players—and some of them very experienced—just handed him their money. They literally gave it away to him.
What they should not have done is try to bluff him. It takes an idiot, in my book, to bluff at a man who you know is going to call you. You simply can’t bluff a bad player because a bad player will call when he’s got any kind of a hand and pass when he doesn’t. It’s clear-cut. You don’t have to be an expert psychologist to figure out what he’s doing. All you have to know is that if he’s in the pot he’s got something. And you’re not going to get him out of the pot by trying to bluff him.
Above all, you don’t want to gamble with that kind of a player. Forget about that. Show him a hand. You do very fundamental, even obvious things against a bad player—no tricks, no strategic play, nothing fancy. Play straightforward poker against a weak player.
For example, if a weak player raised the pot coming in, then checked it on the flop, and checked again on fourth street, I would automatically bet, regardless of what I’ve got, because I’d know he doesn’t have anything at all. It’s simple to outplay him because his actions tell me whether he’s got something or not. There’s no mystery about it.
I could also outplay him by adjusting my style to his. For example, I noted that I’m always stabbing around trying to pick up pots. I could still do that with a weak player in the pot, but I’d adjust my play because he’s in there. For instance, I might raise him without looking at my hand. Now, here comes the flop and he checks. Well, I’m going to bet at that pot in the dark because I know he probably doesn’t have anything, and I also know he’s probably going to pass. He checked, didn’t he? If he had something, he would’ve bet.
Of course, I might have to make a further adjustment. If he checked on the flop and then called me, I’d give him credit for something. If there’s no straight or flush draw out there, he’s probably got a small piece of the board. If he had a big piece he would’ve bet. If he checks again on fourth and calls me again, then I’d know I’m going to have to show him a hand on the end.
If I’m in the pot with a weak player and I flop a real big hand, say a set of trips, I would check it because I know that if he’d had anything, he would have bet, and I’d be able to break him anyway. Normally, I don’t slow-play that hand. I always lead with it. But against a weak player, I wouldn’t mind giving him a free card if he doesn’t have anything, I want him to improve his hand. I want him to make something so I can possibly break him.
It’s more difficult to outplay a strong player. You can’t consistently do simple things against better players; you’ve got to put a play on somebody who knows what’s obvious. And if I see him do something that’s obvious, like I think he’s trying to pick up the pot, I’ll put a play on him and raise him with nothing because he might throw his hand away.
Since a good player will understand the obvious, I must try to deceive him. I’ll even put a play on more than one good player. For example, if someone brought it in or raised it in an early position and three players just called it, I might make a big raise with nothing, trying to pick up that pot.
Against a good player, you’ll have a lot more tools to work with and many different strategies to use. You’re effectively restricted to a pickax and shovel against a weak player. Never forget that. Don’t try to devise elaborate strategies to use against a bad player. They won’t work against him. Use sophisticated plays against a good player. They’ll work against him.
Another point you should note about weak players is that they come in several varieties. They’re not all like the one I described above. Some are the complete opposite. There are some who check good hands and bet bad hands. They like to bluff, and they do it almost all the time. So, when you recognize a player like that, you keep on checking it to him and let him bluff his money off to you.
Note that I didn’t say to check-raise him. You don’t want to take the play away from that type of player. In fact, years ago, I rarely used check-raising. In the old days it was a weak play, and I used it only occasionally. I’d usually do it when someone seemed to be trying to take the play away from me. Perhaps, I might have checked it and moved in on him or something like that. But I didn’t do it often.
Now that players are much more aggressive, it is easier to check-raise. But even today, check-raising isn’t as integral a part of my philosophy as it is for many other professionals. I do it—you have to keep people in line—but I usually don’t look for opportunities to check-raise.
However, I suppose I encounter more check-raising than the average player because I play so aggressively. If a player makes a hand, he’ll check it to me thinking that I’m going to bet—and he’s usually right. Most of the time, I will. So he checks it to me. And after I bet, he raises.
Surprisingly, if you employ my style of play at no-limit hold’em, you won’t be in constant fear of getting check-raised. By playing aggressively, you might think “Well, they’re probably going to get me this time” every time you bet. Even though you’ll probably encounter more check-raising than most players, you’ll be amazed at how many times your opponents keep throwing their hands away whenever you bet.
It all goes back to my basic style of play. My opponents know that if I’ve got any kind of a hand, any kind of a draw, and they do check-raise me, all of my chips—and theirs—are going to the middle. And because of that, they keep off of me. It stops them from playing back at me.
Not only does it give me, in most cases, an umbrella of protection against opponents playing back at me, and not only does it make my opponents fear me which in turn makes it easy for me to pick up numerous pots without a contest, but it has other advantages as well. I’ve already told you I also get a lot of loose action. This may seem contradictory—how can I pick up pots easily on the one hand and get a lot of loose action on the other? It’s easy to understand when you realize that I pick up pots when nobody’s got a hand. And, as I said, that’s a big percentage of the time. I get this so-called loose action when somebody does have a hand. At those times, all the money is liable to go to the center. And when it does—as you now know—I’ve usually got the worst hand.
But I might also find a hand when I look down. And once in a while, it’s the best hand. When I’m up against another hand at those times, the pot gets to be a mountain. It wouldn’t be nearly as big if I weren’t an aggressive player. I’d never get the action I do when I’ve got a hand if I were known to slow-play hands or do a lot of check-raising. That’s why I rarely do those things.
The reason why being known as an aggressive player and constantly playing that way is the most profitable way to play poker is clearly illustrated by the following situation.
Let’s say I flopped a big hand—a set of trips or even two pair. I’m first to act, and I’m in the pot with someone who raised before the flop. He’s supposed to have a strong hand. He’s probably got a big pair in the hole, bigger than anything that showed on the flop.
In this situation, there’s a principle I always apply in hold’em: always make it a habit to lead into the raiser whenever I flop a big hand.
Most players will slow-play their hand in that spot or hope to get in a check-raise. When they do that, they’re playing it wrong. By betting right into the raiser, you make him think you’re either trying to take the pot away from him or you’ve got some kind of draw or a mediocre hand. Consequently, he’ll almost invariably raise you. At that point you can get all your chips in. And it’s tough for him to get away from his hand because he has so much money already in the pot. The raiser expects you to check to him on the flop. I mean, he knows you know he’s supposedly got a strong hand. He raised coming in, didn’t he?
When most players flop a set with a small pair or two pair with small connecting cards, they do the obvious. They check, waiting for the raiser to bet, and then they put in a raise. That’s the wrong way to play it, because it gives the raiser an opportunity to get away from his hand at a minimum loss. But if you lead into him, he probably will raise, and then there’s probably no getting away from it. He’s all but committed to getting the rest of his money in the pot.
Even if it’s a raggedy flop without a straight or flush draw, you should still make the same play. Perhaps even more so, because with three rags out there, a bet would indicate weakness rather than strength to most players. Since it does look like you’re weak and trying to take the pot away from him, the average player will respond to your bet by raising.
The only risk you take when you play the hand this way is that the raiser might not raise you on the flop because he might not have a hand. However, he might have bluffed at it if you had checked, and you would have won the amount he bluffed.
It’s far more probable that he does have a hand. He was the raiser. He’s represented a hand. He’s supposed to have a hand! Based upon that very reasonable assumption, I go ahead and lead into his hand. When compared to check-raising in that situation, it’s the bigger money-making play, by far. I think it’s one of the strongest plays in hold’em.
If you flopped a set in an unraised pot and it was a raggedy flop, you’d have to play the hand quite differently. Depending on what set you flopped, you might not even play it at all. You’ll see what I mean in a minute. But the concept you should understand is this: In no-limit play, you must be very careful you don’t lose all your chips in an unraised pot, unless you have the nuts at the point you go all-in.
Here’s what I mean: let’s say you and six other players got in for the absolute minimum, that is, you all limped-in for a $50 force, the blind bet. Everybody just called. Nobody raised—so the field wasn’t weeded out at all. Now, a J-4-2 flops. You flop three deuces. In the previous situation—with this same flop—you should lead right into the raiser with your set. He’s probably got an overpair and will raise as expected. But in the present situation, you must play it carefully. Very carefully. You flopped a hand that’s easy to get broke with. There’s nothing in the pot, and you don’t want to get broke in a nothing pot.
The six people in the pot with you tried to flop the nuts for free. And one of them might have the nuts, or close to it. So if one of the players commits all his money when there’s only a few hundred dollars in the pot, you better watch out. Your three deuces probably aren’t any good.
You could be up against three jacks, but that’s not as likely as three fours, since there was no raise before the flop. That’s the hand you should be afraid of.
I’m not saying you shouldn’t play the hand. I’m just saying that you have to play it carefully. Since nobody showed any early strength, you’re not likely to be up against a big pair, but you could be facing another set. Nevertheless, if it’s checked to you, you’ve got to bet it.
But you don’t want to get broke with the hand because it was a nothing pot to begin with. If you get raised, your own judgment in the particular situation will have to prevail. With the third set, deuces, you might want to go on with the hand, but then you might not. With the second set, fours, you can’t get away from it. Someone’s going to have to show you three jacks. That’s all there is to it.

Courage
An important point for you to remember is that in a judgment situation you’re always better off sticking to your first impression. With constant observation of your opponents’ play, you’ll learn how to put them on a probable hand. Once you decide what a man’s most likely to have—especially in no-limit—you should never change your mind. You’ll probably be right the first time, so don’t try to second-guess yourself. Have the courage and conviction to trust your instincts!
Having courage is one of the most important qualities of a good no-limit player. If you don’t have it, you’ll have to restrict your play to limit poker. You need courage in limit too, but not nearly as much as in no-limit.

Limit vs. No-Limit
A lot of limit players—and I’m talking about the very best limit players now—just can’t play no-limit. They don’t have the heart for it. What’s more, they can’t adjust to the complexity of no-limit play, and they find it very hard to go from limit which is essentially a mechanical game, to no-limit, one that takes into account everything. Only very special players can make that transition successfully.
You also have to have a different feel for no-limit play. I mean, you have to be right just about all the time, especially when your entire stack’s at stake.
In limit play, you’re not going to get knocked out of a game by one or two mistakes. You can make several mistakes in a limit game and still win the money if your opponents are making more mistakes than you are. With no-limit, make just one crucial mistake at any time and you can lose all your chips.

Muscle
It not only takes a lot of heart to play no-limit, it also takes a lot of muscle. You need muscle in limit too, but you need much more of it at no-limit. A strong no-limit player can keep slapping you around, just lean on you and keep leaning on you until you topple. Of course, that could happen in limit too, but again, not to the same degree.
The very best players I know are extremely aggressive players and that’s what makes them great players. The more aggressive they are, the better they are. It’s that simple. And I firmly believe that’s what accounts for the difference between a very good player and a truly top player. It’s the dividing line.
There’s not a man alive that can keep leaning on me. I refuse to let somebody keep taking my money, and all the other truly top players are the same way. An aggressive player might do it for a while. But at the first opportunity I get, I’m going to take a stand and put all my money in the pot.
It’s like that little boy who keeps sticking his head up and keeps getting slapped all the time. Well, sooner or later he’s not going to stick his head up any more. So if a guy keeps going on and on and keeps pounding on me, then me and him are fixing to play a pot.
Like me, all the top players know you have to be extremely aggressive to be a consistent winner. You have to bet, bet, bet, all the time. If I find somebody I can keep betting at and he keeps saying “Take it Doyle,” “Take it Doyle,” well, I’m going to keep pounding on him. I’m not going to let up. And that poor guy never will win a pot from me. He’ll have to have the nuts or the nerve to call me.
That’s what most players do. They keep throwing their hand away. They’re weak. They sit down and try to make the nuts on you. That’s hard to do. So you keep whamming on ‘em and whamming on ‘em and you just wear ‘em down. And sooner or later, you’ll win all their money.
Perhaps now, you can see more clearly what I explained earlier. When a big pot comes up, I’ve usually got the worst hand. That weak player finally picks up the nuts and that’s what I usually look at in a big pot. But I’ve already paid for that big pot with all the smaller pots I’ve won, so I’m freerolling with all that weak player’s money and the money of all the others like him.
You can’t do that against a truly top-player in no-limit because he’s fixing to make a stand and play back at you. And that’s the big difference between a merely good player and a great one.
Another important difference is that a real top player can win money with a marginal hand. A weaker player can’t do that. Either they don’t know how, or they’re afraid to put any money in the pot in a borderline situation. They want the nuts or close to it before they’ll jeopardize any of their chips. They don’t want to do too much gambling, so they check a lot of hands that I’d bet for value.

Betting for Value
Betting for value is what it’s all about. For example, if it came down to a tough situation on the end and a tight player had two pair but there’s a possible straight out there, well, that tight player would probably check it trying to show the hands down. In that same situation, as long as I felt reasonably sure my opponent didn’t have that straight, I’d be more aggressive. I want to make some money on the end. I want to get value for my two pair. So I’d bet and try to sell my hand for the most money I thought I could get. I never was a tight player, even when I first started to play. Experience has taught me a lot. Early in my career, I didn’t know how to start at a pot and quit, like I do now.
I don’t have to have the nuts to bet my hand on the end. If I feel like I’ve got the best hand, I’m going to bet it and get value for it. A more conservative player would check it on the end, and he’ll get his check called. So he’ll lose that last bet.
A very big part of winning consistently and winning big at no-limit is getting the other guy in a position where if he makes a bet he’s actually jeopardizing all his chips as opposed to you jeopardizing all of yours. That has always been the key to no-limit play as far as I’m concerned. I want to force my opponent into a decision with all his chips on the line.
For example, if a guy’s got $20,000 in chips and you lead off for $6,000 or $7,000, you’re really betting him $20,000. He knows that if he calls that six or seven, well then, he’s got to go for the rest of it. You’re betting $7,000; he’s betting $20,000.
On the other hand, if he bets me $7,000, the reverse is true. So, I always try to make the bet that puts him in jeopardy, not me. If he’s right and I’m bluffing, he’s going to move in with his $20,000, and I’m not going to call him. So he’ll win $7,000. But if he’s wrong and I’ve got a hand, he’s still going to move in, but now he’s going to get called. And he’s going to lose $20,000. So he’s laying me about 3 to l, his $20,000 to my $7,000. I put the commitment on him. I make him commit himself. I’m not committed no matter what he thinks. That’s the beauty of it. He’s thinking about my bet and wondering how much more he’s going to have to put in there.
It’s an either/or situation. Either I’m bluffing, or I’ve got the nuts. And against me, he knows it could cost him $20,000—his whole stack—unless he throws his hand away.
And you’d be surprised how many times they say “Take it Doyle,” “Take it Doyle.” They just throw their hands away over and over and over again. I mean, even I’m surprised. I think to myself, “Well, he can’t throw this one away.” But I bet anyway. And there goes his hand—chunk! It finally gets to be mechanical with them. And I’ve won another pot.
I’ve stolen so many pots I can’t begin to count them. And most of the time, I’ve actually had to force myself to bet. I’d be playing all night without one decent hand. Yet I’d win every pot because I didn’t bet into the nuts. It goes on and on like that. I pick up a hand, and I’ve got nothing. The flop comes out there, and I’ve still got nothing. So I kind of have to hit myself to bet at it, because there’s a guy I’ve been pounding on and pounding on. And all the time, I’m thinking, “How can he throw his hand away this time?” But I bet and away it goes. Chunk! One more time.
If he takes a stand and raises me, I go back to my basic philosophy. If I’ve got a hand, I’ll go with it, even though I know it might be the worst hand.
By now, you should have a very good idea of how I play no-limit hold’em. I hope this somewhat lengthy introduction gave you a sufficient feel for my style of play, and I hope it will help you to understand how I play specific hands in various situations. I’ll discuss those shortly.
However, when you read those discussions you should realize it’s quite difficult to state exactly what I’d do with a specific hand in a particular situation. So many things are involved. No-limit hold’em is a very complex game.
Most of the things I say are an accurate reflection of what I’d generally do. But I might do something else or even the completely opposite depending on who’s in the pot with me and whether or not I have position on him.
Always remember, no-limit hold’em is a game of position and people. There’ll be a lot of times when only your good judgment will dictate the proper play. Often situations come up where a hard-and-fast rule will prove inadequate. Poker, especially no-limit hold’em, is not a game you can learn to play well in ten easy lessons. A thousand hard lessons might not be enough. There are simply too many variables involved.
Nevertheless, the lessons you’ll learn below will go a long way in helping you to master no-limit hold’em. The general principles and concepts that I discuss will give you a far greater command of the game than almost all the players you could expect to be competing with. I wish I’d known all the general guidelines below when I first started to play. It would’ve made things a lot easier for me. That’s for sure.
But before I get into how you should generally play specific hands, there should be a discussion of the ante, betting structure, bankroll requirements, and other considerations you’ll have to take into account before you sit in on a no-limit hold’em game. So that’s what I’ll do now.

The Ante and Other Considerations
If I had to choose a particular size game that would be close to perfect for no-limit hold’em, it would be eight-handed, also known as a ring or full game. Of course, I prefer to play in a shorthanded game with about four or five players, because in a shorthanded game with a high ante, you’re forced to get in there and play. You can’t just sit there and wait for the big pair, A-K, or even small connecting cards. If you do, you’ll go like Broomcorn’s uncle. So a game like that suits my style just fine. It gives me plenty of room to muscle the game.
A full game with eight players is all right too. That’s just about the right amount of players for a ring game where there’ll be good action. I mean, there’ll be people coming in the pots because they’ll know they won’t have to be looking at the nuts every hand.
However, when that eight-handed game all of a sudden turns into a ten- or eleven-handed game, well, the complexion of the game changes completely. What was once a relatively fast and loose game becomes a thing of the past. The players no longer get in there and play as often. The game begins to screw down real tight.
With eleven players, there are a lot more combinations out there on every hand than with nine players. So everyone stops playing borderline hands and starts waiting for the really good ones. In short, they don’t do as much gambling, and the action really dries up.

Loosening Up a Game
Many poker games are like that, and they stay that way unless something happens to change the character of the game. More than anything else, the something that changes a tight game back into a loose game happens when one of the players starts giving a lot of action. As I’ve said, that’s what I do. I’m known as an action player. It’s an image I’ve always had. Because I give action, I get it.
I’ll get into a poker game and almost from the very first hand I’ll start gambling. I’ll be taking chances—betting, raising, reraising, moving in. That’ll stir up a game real fast. One player can do it. That’s all it takes. And that player’s usually me.
I don’t merely talk loose, I prove I’m loose by my actions. You know the old cliché: “A first impression is a lasting impression.” Well that first impression I create lasts throughout the session, even though I might change gears, say go from loose to tight to loose, several times during the course of a game.
Adjusting Your Speed
Being able to adjust your playing speed is a very important part of being a top player. There are a lot of reasons for this.

(1) You never want to get yourself stuck in an identifiable pattern. You must mix up your play. If you do, you’ll always keep your opponents guessing.
(2) You want to create an image, the image of a loose, gambling-type of player who gives a lot of action. But it has to be the image of a good loose player, not the image of a fool who’s throwing a party, giving his money away.
(3) Since you’ll most likely get off loser if you play as I recommend and start plunging around (playing very loose) almost as soon as you begin to play, you’ll have to gear down and start playing tight after you’ve laid the groundwork for your image. Then you’ll start playing loose again, and you’ll continue to vary your speed throughout the session.
(4) You’ll also want to adjust your speed to the varying speeds of particular players. If there’s a guy in the game who’s speeding around, do exactly the opposite by gearing down and remember to play only solid hands against him. On the other hand, if you notice that a certain player is playing real tight, you can start bluffing at him.
(5) The game itself might dictate the speed at which you’ll have to play. If everyone is playing real loose and all the pots are being jammed, start playing real tight. Conversely, when the game is so tight you can hear it squeaking, you should play loose and pick up all the pots you can.
(6) When players start dropping out of the game and their seats remain vacant, you have to move into high gear. As I said, you can’t sit back and wait in a shorthanded game. If you do, the ante will get you because the good hands don’t come often enough. So you must play, or you might as well quit the game.
(7) And of course, there’s the ante. That’s the main thing that determines how fast you play. Actually, the absolute size of the ante is not what’s important. It’s the relationship of the ante to the amount of money you have. A $10 ante in a no-limit game would be quite high if all you had was $500. But if you had $5,000, that $10 ante would be very low. In the high-ante game, you’d have to play pretty fast. You could slow down considerably in the low-ante game.

The ante and blinds is such an important factor in determining how fast you play, that the trouble and trash hands I later discuss would become big hands if you were anteing high enough. In fact, in the old days, that was the case in the World Championship Hold’em Tournament because of the way it was structured. It started with each player anteing $10, and there was a $50 blind. As the tournament progressed and players were eliminated, the ante and blind got higher and higher according to a predetermined time schedule until it was down to the final two players. At that point, each player anted $1,000 and blinded it for $2,000. If you sat around and waited putting that kind of money in every pot, you’d go faster than Broomcorn’s uncle.
Today’s tournaments are structured to be a lot faster than that. You’ve got to play almost every hand when you’re anteing that high. At the very least, you’ve got to see the flop. So, it’s really not all that surprising I won the 1976 and 1977 World Championships with trash hands. The only thing surprising about this is that the hands were almost identical both years.
In 1976, when I won $220,000, the last pot had $176,000 in it. I won that pot with the 10? 2?. All it had on the flop was a pair of deuces, but I caught two running tens on fourth and fifth. Jesse Alto, a very experienced non-professional who owned an automobile dealership in Houston, Texas, was the man who came in second.
In 1977, the late Bones Berland was the young man who came in second to me. In the last pot with Bones, I had a
10? 2™ and flopped a pair of tens. This time, I caught a 2 on fourth street—but I filled up with a 10 on the end. That last pot was worth $130,000 and I won $340,000 in the 1977 tournament.
Of course, in a normal ante ring game, I’d rarely play those hands. There’s little reason to when the ante doesn’t force you to play. A major exception is when I play a pot for the sole reason of trying to steal it. Then, it doesn’t make any difference what I have. I mean, I could be playing the hand without even looking at my holecards. At such a time, I’d be playing my money, my position, and a particular player. My hand wouldn’t matter. If I was forced to look at it because I got played with, I might find two aces, A-K, or trash.
People have criticized me for losing $580,000 with the Q-8 offsuit in the $25,000 buy-in final event at the Bellagio in 2003. Well, I’ve just explained to you how that happened. I was playing my money, my position, and a particular player—and my hand could have been anything. I hadn’t made a pair the whole day, and I’d had to stay alive by stealing some pots, but on this particular play, my read was wrong.
You’ll almost surely have to get some no-limit experience under your belt before you’ll be able to play a pot completely blind. So, in the beginning, I suggest that you restrict the way you play specific hands to the recommendations I make below. However, it’s important for you to understand that those recommendations are what I would do in a normal or medium ante ring game. In different games you’ll have to adjust your play as previously discussed.
In order to help you determine what constitutes a normal medium-ante game, you should use the following table as a guide.

Nine-Handed Game - Blinds Chart

Ante
Size $
Ante Single Blind Multiple Blinds Buy-In*
1st seat 2nd seat
Very Low $1-$5 $5-$10 $5-$10 $10-$20 $1,000
Low $5-$10 $25 $25 $50 $2,000
Medium $10-$20 $50 $50 $100 $5,000
High $25-$50 $100 $100 $200 $10,000
Very High $50-$100 $500 $300 $500 $25,000

*Twice the minimum buy-ins listed here would be much better. More than twice would be better still.

You wouldn’t want to sit down with less than the minimum buys shown. As the footnote states, you should definitely consider buying-in for more.
Today, when I play in a game with two blinds of $300 and $500, I never sit down with less than $100,000. What’s more, I like to have as much or more money than any other player at the table. If my stacks are not approximately equal to the guy with the most money, then I couldn’t break him, could I?
And I practice what I preach. I start playing fast right away. I’ve always played like that, even when I was just starting out. Back then I’d buy in for a thousand in a small no-limit game, and I’d usually get stuck that first thousand. Then, I’d pull up and start playing tighter, and I almost always got even or won.
About three out of four plays, I’d lose that first thousand, but on that fourth play, I’d get on a winning streak or a rush, and I’d more than make up for those first three losses. I mean, I’d be playing so fast and winning so many hands when I was rushing that I’d literally break every player in the game. Because as you know, whenever I hold a bunch of hands, I usually get action on them.
I’ve never won a bunch of pots watching the other guys play. If I’m making a bunch of hands or striking, I’m in there—I’m not on the sidelines. If you’re going to have a rush, you’ve got to let yourself have one. You’ve got to sustain that rush. And to do that, you’ve got to get in there and play.
It used to be that after I had won a pot in no-limit I would be in the next pot, regardless of what two cards I picked up. And if I won that one, I’d always be in the next one. I’d keep playing every pot until I lost one. And in all those pots, I’d gamble more than I normally would. Nowadays, I still to try to observe this, but I’ve modified it because players are so much more aggressive.
If you don’t play that way, you’ll never have much of a rush. I know that scientists don’t believe in rushes, but sometimes rushes can make you a fortune. There’s only one world-class poker player that I know of who doesn’t believe in rushes. Well, he’s wrong, and so are the scientists. Besides, how many of them can play poker anyway? I’ve played poker for more than fifty years now, and I’ve made millions at it. A big part of my winnings came from playing my rushes.
If you want to take the money off, I mean, make a big score, then you’ve got to play your rushes. It’s that simple. Not that there’s anything supernatural about rushes, it’s how your opponents perceive you when you’re on one that’s important. They are flat-out less dangerous. They pay you off more and challenge you less, and that translates into pure profit.
At this point, you should have a very good feel for my style of play. It should help you to understand and appreciate the things I’m going to say about the way I play specific hands, from before the flop on through each stage of play until all the cards are out.
In all the situations that I’ll discuss below, an important assumption has been made: Unless otherwise noted, the way I’d play a specific hand at no-limit hold’em is how I’d play it in a pot against other top poker players and not the way I’d play it against a weak player.
The reason that assumption has been made is because, as you already know, against a weak player or a drunk you have to play quite differently. All you try to do against a weak player is make the best hand and then extract from him the largest amount of money you can. Just outplay him.

HOW TO PLAY SPECIFIC HANDS

Remember, the recommendations I make below are how you generally should play the hands discussed. That’s the way I usually play them. But you should never fall into a pattern playing poker. I don’t. I always vary my play. I try to mix it up as much as I can. I never consistently repeat my action on any hand. I don’t play like a computer that’s programmed to do the same routine over and over again. The high quality players I play against on a regular basis would easily detect a pattern to my play if there were any. So I never do the same thing with the same hand from the same position against the same player. I’m always changing speeds during the course of a game.
However, for your purposes, my playing recommendations for a particular hand are a good way for you to play them until your opponents learn your style. When they do, you start shifting gears, up and down continuously, until there is no noticeable pattern.
I’m going to break the game down into four major and very broad categories as follows:

I. Pairs
II. Small Connecting Cards
III. Borderline Hands
IV. Trash Hands

How to play your hand when you have a pair in the pocket is going to be discussed first. That category will be sub-divided and discussed as follows:

a. Big Pairs and Big Slick: A-A, K-K, and A-K
b. Q-Q
c. J-J down to 2-2

I’ve grouped an A-K with a pair of aces and a pair of kings because it’s a very strong hand. As you’ll learn, I would rather have A-K than A-A or K-K. I’ll discuss each of the hands as I would play them in a nine-handed game from an early position (first three seats), middle position (next three seats), and late position (last three seats). A medium-ante game is assumed, unless otherwise noted.

A-A and K-K
Pre-Flop Play
Early Position. With a pair of aces or kings in an early position before the flop, I would probably just call the blind or limp in, hoping that somebody raises it behind me so I can reraise.

Middle Position. In a middle position, if nobody in the early seats came in, I would play them the same way. But if somebody in the early seats did come in, I’d put in a raise of about the size of the pot.

Late Position. In a late position, I’d obviously raise with them and hope that somebody trailed his hand around to me, that is, slow-played his hand in order to reraise me. If he did, I’d play back of course, and I might move in depending on the circumstances. If I did play back with two aces or two kings and got about half my money in the pot before the flop, there’s no question that I’d get the rest of it in on the flop, regardless of what came. Nothing could stop me. If my opponent didn’t set me in on the flop I’d move it all-in myself, because there are too many ways I could outguess myself, and I’m not going to try. If I get either of those big pairs cracked, well, I’m just going to have to lose my money.
Conversely, a rare situation could exist where you’d consider throwing away two kings before the flop if you got raised. It’s a hard hand to get away from, but if a real tight player, one so tight that he probably wouldn’t make that kind of play unless he had two aces, moved in on you, then you might want to throw them away. Of course, you’d have to be almost certain about your man before you do that. One way I make this rare decision is to put myself in my opponent’s position. I ask myself, “If I were him, would I reraise with two queens or less?” If the answer is no, I throw the two kings away.
I’m going to discuss how to play a big pair on the flop in a moment. But this is a good place to note that when you have two kings and there’s a single ace on the flop, it’s a complete judgment call as to whether or not you should go on with your hand. If you put your opponent on an ace, that’s the end of the pot right there. If not, you play your two kings as if you had the best hand. Here are two particularly relevant hold’em probabilities:
(1) In a nine-handed game, when you have two kings, the probability that no other player has an ace is about 20 percent. Put another way, a player will have an ace about 80 percent of the time.
(2) If a player is holding two unpaired cards lower than kings, an ace will flop about 18 percent of the time.

The Flop
Regardless of your hand, the flop is where you’ll make your most crucial decisions. It’s the key point in the hand. It’s where you put people on hands, decide what they’ve probably got. Usually, everything after the flop is more or less cut-and-dried.

Playing with No Help on the Flop. Of course, you put people on hands before the flop too, but on the flop, you’re in a much better position to determine what a man probably has by the way he calls, whether he’s drawing to a straight or flush and so forth. I play a pair of aces or kings very cautiously from an early position when there are three cards that’ll make a straight or a flush on the flop. This is especially true if there are two or more people in the pot with me. The guys that called behind me are liable to have anything. In that position, they’ve either got a hand that could break me or I’ll win a very small pot if I bet. So in an early position, a bell rings reminding me not to bet when I see three to a straight or flush on the flop and I’ve got aces or king in the pocket. Consequently, I immediately start playing that hand slow, and usually I just check in a front position.
If I’m in a late seat and somebody in the early seats had trailed in, I might go ahead and bet once. If I got called, I would immediately become defensive again with that hand. Anytime there are three cards to a straight or flush, I play the hand with extreme caution.
The quality of the possible straight that’s out there also has a big influence on the way I’d play that big pair. If it came
9-8-7, 10-9-8, or J-10-9 and I’ve got two people in the pot with me, I immediately give it up. Almost any two cards that those two players have will fit into those flops somehow. They’re either going to have a hand that’s already got me beat or they’ll be drawing to a hand that would make my hand no better than an even money shot.
If the flop comes 10-9-8 and one of your opponents has a Q-J, he’s got the straight made. If he’s got a J-10, he’s got a pair with an open-end straight draw. He could catch a 7, 10, jack, or queen. There are thirteen cards in the deck that will beat me, namely four sevens, four queens, three jacks, and two tens, and he’s got two shots at them. That makes his hand as good as mine at this point. In fact, he’s almost exactly even-money to beat me, so I don’t want to put myself in a position where I could get broke. I don’t always give up the pot in that situation. I just play extremely cautiously. I don’t just charge in and try to win the pot right there.
If just a J-10 falls, say the flop is a J-10-2, well, there I’d really play my two aces fast, because any combination of big cards would give my opponent some kind of hand. For example, a
K-Q will give him an open-end straight draw; an A-K will give him two overcards and a belly-straight draw; and an A-J, K-J, Q-J, A-10, Q-10, or K-10 will give him a pair. So I’d go ahead and play my two aces in that situation. If he’s got jacks and tens or better, well, more power to him. If you know your player, you’ll be able to figure out what hand he’s likely to have. You have to be logical in putting your opponent on a hand.
I’m not as leery of a three-card flush on the flop as I am of a three-card straight. With a three-card flush, there aren’t as many possible hands that could beat me—although it’s possible that your opponent has a pair and a flush draw if he’s in there with you.
The first thing I’d do would be to see if either one of my two aces or kings matched the cards out there. If three hearts fell and I had two red aces, I would immediately play that hand. It’s a big hand. But if I had the two black aces, or another hand without the A?, I might be a little more hesitant to play it.
But if I did have the A?, I’d play the hand fast on the flop. If I get called, I’m in a position to win it anyway. I know where the nuts are. That’s one of the most important things about no-limit hold’em. If you can avoid it, you never want to get your money in dead.
For example, you don’t want to be drawing for a flush when there’s a pair on the board. Your opponent could have a full house. And you don’t want to be drawing to a straight when another man could have a flush. If the board comes three hearts and you’ve got an open-end straight draw, you don’t draw at that straight. You throw your hand away. All the top players try to keep from ever getting their money in completely dead.
If a pair and a rag flop and I had a pair of aces or kings in the pocket, I’d bet at that pot from an early position. If I got called, I’d proceed cautiously. I mean, when the next card was turned, I’d check it to him. If he bet, maybe I’d call it or maybe I wouldn’t. It would depend on what I felt that he had. I’d know he’s got something that he likes.
For example, if the flop is 6-6-2 and I bet and he calls, he’s telling me he’s got some kind of hand. He’s probably got a pair in the pocket, anywhere from sevens to tens, or else he’s got three sixes or three deuces. So I’d use my judgment at that point, and I’d be cautious again.
If there were a couple of players in the pot in front of me and one of them flopped a set of sixes, he’d probably check it to me. That’s what most players do in this situation, check a set into the raiser. But as you know, that’s the wrong way to play it. A strong player would know that the right thing to do is lead into you.
If it was checked to me and there wasn’t a straight draw on the board—say the flop was 7-7-2—I might check it as well and give a free card. I’d do that for two reasons:

(1) If he didn’t have a hand, I’d want him to help his hand enough to continue playing. For example, if a jack or queen fell off on fourth street, it might pair him.
(2) I’d want to eliminate the possibility that I’d get broke if he does have a 7.

But if the flop was 6-6-2, I would bet because I wouldn’t want a 3, 4, or 5 falling off and making somebody a straight. In brief, you don’t give free cards if that free card could break you. If there’s a possible straight or flush draw on board, you don’t give a free card.
If I had two aces with a 6-6-K flop and it was checked to me, I’d probably check it back. If he’s got a king, he’s going to play it on fourth street, because by checking, you’ve made him think he’s got the best hand. Plus, if he does have a 6, as before, you might be able to hold your losses to a minimum. A flop that’s
6-6-5 is a lot different, because there’s the possibility of a straight draw.
What it all boils down to is that with a pair of aces or kings, you’re waiting until you get into what you think is a favorable situation before you really play a big pot. You’re not looking to play a big pot if there’s only a small chance you’ll have the best of it or one where you’re a big underdog.
In general, with those big pairs on the flop, you play them a little more aggressively from a late position than from an early position, but you should be aware that someone might be checking the nuts to you, such as three sixes in the examples used. You never worry about that. I’ve heard people say, “Well, I was afraid to bet because I was afraid he’d raise me.” Never worry about getting raised. You have to go ahead and play. If it happens, it happens, and then you worry about it. Don’t cross that bridge until you come to it.
You can’t play winning poker by playing safe all the time. You must take chances. You must gamble. And you have to feel aggressive to play aggressively. That’s my style of poker. And it’s a winning style.
I’ve re-stated my general philosophy of play at this point because I’m discussing the play of a pair of aces or kings in the hole. In many cases, I play them slowly, but I don’t slow-play them. That is, I play them cautiously. This is contrary to my usual style of play and to the way most people play them. Most players feel that aces or kings are so hard to come by that when they do get them they want to win a big pot. So they play them real fast. That’s usually wrong, but there are exceptions that I’ll discuss below. The fact is, with a pair of aces or kings, one of two things will usually happen:

(1) You win a small pot; or
(2) You lose a big pot.

The reason is that your opponent is not going to get a lot of money in the pot unless he can beat your big pair or has a straight or flush draw. In the latter case, as you’ll see below, I’m going to make him pay to draw to his hand.
I also play two aces or kings slowly in the rare instance that a set of trips flops, say three sevens or three jacks. But this time I do it for somewhat different reasons. In this case, I want my opponent in the pot to improve his hand or catch up with me. So I check it, but just one time. I want to give him a free card so he can catch a pair or get a chance to bluff at it. It’s tough to win anything in that spot by leading off unless you catch somebody with a pair in the pocket.
Of course, there’s a small chance you could run into quads, but anyone who made that hand will let you know it by the way he puts all his money in the pot. It takes experience to recognize something like that, but it’s just like any other situation where somebody’s betting the pure nuts at you. You have to use judgment to evaluate it. After a while, you recognize it. As always, it boils down to reading people.
The one situation where I stand to lose a very big pot with a pair of aces or kings is when there are two to a straight or flush on the flop. For example, say there’s a J-10-2 out there. If somebody bet at me, I’d move in a lot of chips. I could win the pot right there. If not, my opponent is really going to pay to draw to his hand. If I were first to act, I’d check, hoping I’d get the chance to raise it. This is one of the few times I check-raise.
If I get called, I’ll probably put my opponent on a straight or flush draw. Of course, on fourth street I’ll go ahead and bet again if a meaningless card or blank falls. Again, this involves a lot of good judgment, because my opponent might have been fortunate enough to make some kind of hand that would beat my two aces, such as jacks and tens. In that case, I’d go ahead and pay him off because, as I said earlier, I’m not going to try to out-guess myself.
If the board fell completely ragged, say a 10-6-5, I would bet from any position. As in all the hands I’ve discussed, there’s always the chance that someone flopped a set. But again, I’m going to cross that bridge if and when I come to it. In this situation, I’d know if my big pair was beat, especially if I had raised with my hand from an early position before the flop. All good hold’em players would interpret that as a sign of strength. I mean, the first thing you usually give a man, especially a weaker player, credit for when he raises is a big pair. So if it comes a
10-6-5 and I had raised from an early position, the other players will think that I have a strong hand, possibly a big pair, which I’ve got. Then when I bet on the flop and get raised by somebody in a late position, it gets back to evaluating people again. You’ve just got to know your players. He’s representing to you that he can beat a big pair. If he’s a good, solid-type player, what else can he have besides a set of trips or possibly two pair? So you make up your mind right there whether or not to go ahead with your two aces or two kings.
Of course, it’s possible that he has a pair of queens or jacks in a back position and didn’t raise you before the flop, but that now on the flop he’s decided to test you, because he’s got an overpair. You might want to call his raise one time if it’s not too big a bet. The next time, check it to him and see what he does. If he bets again, he’s usually there.

Playing with Help on the Flop. Up to now, I’ve discussed how I’d play a pair of aces or kings on the flop assuming I didn’t flop anything that helped my hand. Now I’ll discuss the situations where I get some help.
If I flop a set, I never slow-play it. There is one exception to this rule, which I’ll discuss below. But for the most part, I almost always come right out and bet, and I don’t make just a nominal bet. I make an extra-large bet because you’ll only win a big pot if an opponent flops something with you, puts you on a bluff, or tries to run you down. So, I really come out smokin’ right there.
Earlier, I said that when you have a pair of aces and a single ace flops, there’ll always be the possibility that the next card off will make someone a straight. For instance, look at the following situation:

FLOP A

With a single ace on the flop and anything 5 or under, there’s always a draw to a 5-high straight. As in Flop A, if a deuce, trey or 5 falls on fourth street, it could make someone a small straight.
The same thing applies whenever there’s a single ace on the flop with any card 10 or above.

FLOP B

With Flop C, a king, queen, or 10 on fourth might give someone an ace-high straight. If there’s no draw to a straight that includes an ace, then there’ll be a draw to a medium straight because there’d have to be a two-card combination of the other four cards, namely a 6, 7, 8, or 9, as in the following example:

FLOP C

The straight possibility is more obvious with something like Flop C because there are seven different straights that can be made. If anyone has a J-10, J-8, 10-8, 10-6, 8-6, 8-5, or 6-5, they could make a straight with the next card off.
You should always keep this interesting discovery in mind whenever you see what appears to be a raggedy flop with an ace in it. The threat that someone could make a straight will always be present.
So when you flop a set of aces, you immediately go to betting, and you bet a large amount to prevent somebody from drawing at an inside straight cheaply. A good player will know it’s worth it to take a cheap draw at a belly straight, and if he makes it, he can break you.
However, if you flop a set with two kings you could possibly give a free card if it comes ragged and there’s no straight or flush draw. For example, say a K-8-2 falls. Now, you can give a card with that flop because you’d have the nuts as long as any card other than an ace, 8, or deuce fell. An ace might give someone three aces, and an 8 or deuce could possibly make someone four-of-a-kind. Realistically you shouldn’t worry about quads, so you really want an 8 or deuce to hit the board on fourth street.
In the rare instance when you flop quads, say four aces, you’re happy to have them, but you really don’t have a very profitable hand. You’ve got the deck crippled. There’s nothing left that your opponents can have. When you flop a hand that big, you just have to check along and maybe try to win a small bet on the end. Or, if you’re extremely fortunate, you might get somebody to try to bluff at it. They just might try to pick up the pot by representing a hand. You could get lucky that way; but most of the time, you just play it very slow and take what you can get, meaning that you always bet on the end from any position.
Here’s another situation where I almost always check: Say I flopped the highest possible full house, known as the big full. That’s what you would have with two aces if the flop was A-3-3, or with two kings if it came K-7-7.
If you do have the big full, you’ll have some leverage, so you could give them a free card in most situations (see below for the exception). After you check it once, you bet on fourth, hoping that somebody hit something there.
Whenever you’ve got a hand that’s so big you’ve got the deck crippled or one that’s very unlikely to get beaten, you should play it very slow on the flop for two reasons:

(1) You want to give your opponents a chance to bluff.
(2) You want to give them a chance to catch something if they don’t bluff.

With a pair of aces or kings there’s a chance you could flop a straight or flush draw. It would almost always be a gutshot straight draw, with the exception of a Q-J-10 when you had kings. In any case, if I flopped a straight draw, I’d be cautious with my hand. I could easily be beat at that point because any flop that would give me a straight draw could easily make my opponent two pair. I wouldn’t fool with that hand. But if I’ve got the two red aces and three diamonds flop, well, as I noted earlier, that’s a very big hand. I’d play that hand from the hip, and I’d be willing to put all my money in with it.
You should always remember that the flop is practically the whole game in hold’em. That’s where your major decisions will be made. The play on fourth street and fifth street is pretty basic by comparison.
For example, on the flop, you put your opponent on a particular hand, and all your thinking follows from that. If you think he’s drawing at a club flush, you bet. You must make your opponents pay to make their draws. If the club doesn’t come on fourth street, you bet again. Obviously, if the club comes and you think your opponent made his hand, you check it. If you think you’re beat, naturally, you check it. And if you think your opponent is drawing, you bet. That’s the whole thing.
On fifth street, also called the river, if it looks like your opponent has missed his hand, there’s usually no reason to bet any further. So you just show your hand over, or you check it and give him a chance to bluff.
That’s no-limit hold’em in a nutshell, but as you know, it’s a far more complex game than that. As you continue reading, you should be aware that my advice is intended to provide you with some general guidelines. I keep emphasizing this because it’s so important that you understand it. There’s not a single play that I’ll always make with a particular hand. I’m liable to play every hand differently depending on the circumstances. The standards I have guide me in a general direction, as they should you. But sometimes, even I don’t know exactly what I’m going to do until the situation comes up. Whatever my first feeling or impression is at the time, I’d go with that.
For example, I said I’d check my pair of aces one time if there were an open set of trips on the flop. On fourth street, if a man made a big bet, or if I bet and he moved-in on me, I’d probably go ahead and pay him off. If a man’s lucky enough to flop quads when I’ve got two aces, he’d have to show me— unless I’ve got a lot of money in front of me and there’s not too much money in the pot.
Let’s look at a specific example, just, remember that no matter what I say now, I might do just the opposite if the situation calls for it. That depends on a lot of things, especially the guy in the pot with me. What do I know about him? So it’s back to people again. Nevertheless, here’s what I might do.
Let’s say there’s $20,000 in the pot. I’ve got $70,000 on the table. My opponent has $20,000, and he moves in on me. In that case, I’d probably pay him off if I knew him to be a player, as opposed to a rock.
However, if my opponent also had $70,000 and over-bet the pot by moving in his entire stack, well, then I’m not sure what I’d do. As I said, I’d go with my feelings. I’d look at him and then I’d decide. To start with, if he made a move like that I’d turn my hand face-up on the board. And I’d watch him real close. I’d want to see what his reaction was when I turned the two aces up. It would take a strong man not to show some kind of emotion. And from the emotion I saw, I’d judge whether he had quads or not. Then I’d react according to whichever way I felt.

Fourth and Fifth Streets
As I noted, you continue to bet your big pair on fourth street when it rags off and it doesn’t look like it completed the straight or flush draw that showed on the flop. If your opponent wants to draw again, you make him pay for it.
If you flopped a set, you should also continue to bet on fourth even if it does look like someone might have completed a straight. You can’t worry about it because you don’t know which straight it is, if it was made at all. Just disregard any straight card and go ahead and bet.
But if a third flush card fell on the turn, then I’d probably check it. If someone bet, I’d call it, thinking that I’m probably beat but trying to make a full. I mean, I wouldn’t know for sure that I was beat, but I’d call knowing there was a strong possibility I was. And I’d call a pretty big bet.
If the man moved all-in on me in that spot, I’d probably give him credit for the flush. Then whether or not to call is a matter of simple mathematics. Ten cards out of the forty-five left would help my hand, assuming the last ace is still in the deck, as are three each of the other three cards on the board that could pair and make my full. That means it’s 35 to 10, or 3 to 1, that I won’t improve my hand. If the pot’s laying me more than 3 to 1, I’d call. If not, I’d throw my hand away.
Of course, that formula only applies when you feel very strongly that your opponent has the flush made. If you think you could have the hand wrong and your opponent might have the second set of trips or some other hand, then you might call if the pot was laying you less odds. You could accept a smaller price because you have some doubts.
So much depends on your judgment in situations like that. This is especially true on the end. If I didn’t make my full there and I was forced to call another bet, it would be completely up to my judgment.
When I discussed how I’d play my big pair when I flopped a full, I said that I’d almost always check it. I’d make an exception, though, if two of the cards on the flop were suited, or maybe even two to a straight. In that case, I would not check on the flop—I would bet. I’d be trying to get a man in there drawing to a flush and hoping that he makes it so I can break him. And if a flush card did come on fourth street, I’d bet, expecting and hoping to be raised.
I’d play the hand similarly if I had flopped a set and the board paired on the end, making my full and at the same time making a possible flush for somebody. Whenever you’ve got a full and a three-flush comes, it’s exactly the situation you’re looking for. You go ahead and bet—even an extraordinarily big bet—and you can break your opponent. You should not, by the way, bet as much with a three-card straight out there because your opponent may not have the nut straight. He may even be drawing. So in either case, if you’ve got him dead, you want him to play his straight if he made it or draw at it. And a very big bet might scare him off.
In the case where you flopped a set and the board pairs on fourth or fifth but there’s no possible straight or flush out there—say the board is A? 6? J? J?—you should lead with your full. Don’t slow-play it. In fact, you should make a big bet, bigger than the size of the pot.
There’s a good possibility that your opponent was calling you on the flop with the second pair or possibly the third pair. So when the board paired, it might’ve made him a strong hand, and you’d be in a position to break him. He’d probably play back if he made trips when the board paired. Also, knowing your aggressive style of play, he might think you’re trying to represent his hand, and you might get a good play because of that.
But if a flush draw was out there on the flop and the pair on fourth didn’t complete the flush, well, then I’d make a small bet, smaller than the size of the pot. I want him to call so he’ll have an opportunity to make the flush on the last card.
But what if you don’t make a big hand with two aces or kings? You’ll have to play them very carefully in certain instances on fourth and fifth streets. For example, if there were three rags on the flop and then the board paired on fourth or fifth, I’d definitely slow down. This is not the same situation as when a pair came on the flop. When the pair shows after the flop, the possibility is much stronger that it helped your opponent. He’s already called you on the flop, indicating that his cards fit into the community cards. His call clearly meant that he had something, so I’d be cautious again in that situation.
You are facing a somewhat different situation when there are four rags out there and the board pairs on fifth street. Exactly what I’d do depends on which card was paired and whether I had bet on the flop and on fourth. If the top card or possibly the second card paired, I’d suspect I might be beat. They’d be the two most dangerous pairs. If I had bet on the flop and on fourth street and the third or fourth highest card paired, I wouldn’t be concerned.
Another time you should not be at all concerned is when the flop is say, 8-8-5 and then the third 8 falls on fourth or on the end. You just don’t worry about quads. So actually your hand got stronger on fourth street. Before the third 8 showed, there was the nagging possibility your opponent had trips. That’s far less likely now, and he’s probably in there with an overpair.
A very tough situation could exist on fifth when there are four to a flush or straight, and you don’t have any of it. With a big pair in that spot, it’s back to judgment again. You have to evaluate what you think your opponent was drawing at and whether or not he’s got one of the cards that would complete the straight or flush.
You should never bet in that situation. If he’s first and he checks, you should just show it down. If you are first, you’d check it. If he bets, well, you’re back to people. You’d just have to evaluate your player.
That situation brings to mind a play I often make. I’ve played a lot of pots against tight players when I’ve made a very weak call on fourth street, hoping the last card will make a four-card straight or flush on the board so I could represent the straight or flush by making a big bet. For example, my tight opponent has raised before the flop and I feel he has a big pair in the pocket. The situation might look like this:

My opponent bets on the flop, and I call. The next card is the 2?, and if my opponent bets again, I’ll call—not because I think I have the best hand, but because of the tremendous bluffing opportunity I’ll have if the last card is a 3, 4, 8, or 9. Any one of those four cards will mean the board is one card off of a straight. I’ll almost certainly win the pot if, as in the example, a 4 fell on fifth and I represent the straight by making a substantial bet on the end.
There’s also a chance that I’ll catch a 10 or 7 on the end. I’d win a nice pot in that case as well, so I’m justified in calling on fourth street. I do a lot of gambling like that on fourth and on the end. And they’re good gambles because I know a tight player wouldn’t jeopardize all his money when one card would beat him.
It’s not only tough for a tight player to make a call for all his money in a situation like that, it’s tough for anyone to do it. But if you know your opponent, it does make it easier. If the straight or flush is made on fourth and fifth streets, a backdoor job, then you may want to reconstruct the play of the entire hand and try to determine whether that particular player would have gone as far as he did to make the hand. Of course, a lot of times a player will literally back into a hand like that. For example, he may have started with a small pair on the flop, picked up a straight or flush draw on fourth, and got there on the end without really trying.
With two aces or kings, you’re going to have to use a lot of judgment when all the cards are out and your hand never got better. You’d have to go back to what you originally felt your opponent was drawing at on the flop and on fourth street. If you thought he made what he was drawing at on the last card, well, obviously, you’d check it, whether you were first or last to act. If you were first and you thought he was drawing at a hand and completely missed it, you’d still check. But this time you’d be doing it to give him an opportunity to bluff at it. If you were last and it looked like he missed his hand then he checked it to you, you’d just turn your hand over to avoid being wrong in your judgment. He’s not going to call you if he missed his draw. But if you put him on the wrong hand to begin with, you could get raised.

A-K
Before the Flop
A-K vs. A-A or K-K. I’ve already mentioned that I’d rather have A-K than either a pair of aces or a pair of kings. A lot of players will probably find that surprising. But it’s not. You’ll soon see why.
Of course, I know that an A-K would never outrun A-A or K-K if you played them against one another hot and cold. An A-K couldn’t even beat a pair of deuces. I know from experience.
Once, on a proposition bet, I took the deuces and two other guys took the A-K. The proposition was to play the two hands against one another hot and cold. We simply dealt out five cards to see which hand would win more times. It was an even-money bet, and we bet $500 a hand. I won several thousand dollars before they quit. They weren’t convinced the first time, so we did it two or three more times. They’d lose some money and quit. They’d go away, do some homework, come back, and then we’d do it again. And I’d beat them again.
But I’m not talking about playing hot and cold here. Now I’m talking about playing poker. An A-K is a better hand than two aces or two kings for two very important reasons:

(1) You’ll win more money when you make a hand with it.
(2) You’ll lose less money when you miss a hand with it.

And I can’t think of two better reasons to choose an A-K over the very big pairs.
You can make more money with an A-K because it’s a drawing type of hand as opposed to a made hand, like two aces or kings. I mean, you don’t have anything with an A-K unless you hit something, so you can get away from it real easy. You’re not tied on to it like you might be with a pair of aces or kings. And that’s why you’ll lose less money with it.

Furthermore, when you have A-K and you pair the ace or king on the flop, if your opponent is playing something like two connecting cards, it’s much harder for him to make his hand than it would be if you had a big pair. For example, say you had two aces in the pocket, your opponent is playing a 7-6, and the board came 9-8-5, or any three cards that could help his hand, such as a pair and a draw. That one extra card considerably improves his chances of cracking your aces. On the other hand, say you have A-K, your opponent has 7-6, and the board comes A-9-8. In this case, he hasn’t made anything yet because you’ve paired one of your holecards and now there are only two cards that will help him. Here’s the exception to this rule: say the flop is three to a big straight with maybe two to a flush, like:
A? J? 10? or K? J? 10?. In this case, the ace or king helps both you and your opponent. Later on, we’ll discuss why A-K is also a more flexible hand as far as how you can play it.

Suited vs. Offsuit. In the discussion to follow, the difference between the two hands is sometimes ignored. That is, I’m going to suggest playing them the same way. But you should always remember that A-K suited has more value than A-K offsuit and it can always be played a little stronger.
Anytime the cards are suited it’s a somewhat stronger hand than when they’re offsuit. This is especially true with A-K because you can make the nut flush. There’s another big difference between A-K suited and A-K offsuit: with A-K suited it only takes three cards to make a flush. True, you can make one of two flushes with A-K offsuit, but it takes four cards to make either one. That’s a lot harder to do. And even if you make the flush with the king, you might not have the nuts.
Flexibility. The reason why A-K is more flexible than A-A or K-K is that you can play an A-K in the lead or you can play it slow to raise with it. Also, I’d play A-K from any position for a reasonable size bet. And, on occasion, I’d get all my money in before the flop, as you’ll see below.

Playing from Early Position. Specifically, in an early position, I’d raise the blind, bring it in, for whatever the normal bring-in is for that particular game. If I was raised, I’d probably call, although I don’t like to call a raise with A-K, as most players do. I like to raise with it.

Playing from Middle Position. If I were in a middle position and someone else had brought it in, I’d just call with A-K. I wouldn’t raise because I’d probably be raising just one man. I’d want at least one more player to come in.

Playing from Late Position. In a late position, I’d probably raise with it, especially if I were on the button.

Moving All-In. There are times I might even move all-in with an A-K. Let’s say I brought it in from an early position, and a couple of people behind me just called. When it gets to the guy on the button, he raises. I’d think he was trying to pick up the pot since the two people behind me showed weakness. He’s probably thinking the only person he had to come through is me, so I might move all here.
Or if I were on the button and three or four people were already in the pot, I might move all-in, trying to pick the pot up. At that point, I’d know that if I got called I’d probably be a slight underdog to a pair.

The Flop
As long as I don’t help my A-K on the flop, I’m going to play the hand the same way regardless of whether or not the flop might’ve helped someone else. For example, if three rags, a pair, three to a straight or flush, or anything that does not help my hand flops, I play A-K quite simply. Barring one exception that I’ll go into later, here’s what I’d do:

(1) If I had been the bettor to start with or if I had been the raiser, I’d bet from any position.
(2) If I had called with A-K, I’d check.
(3) If there was a bet in front of me, I’d pass.

As I’ve already said, I play almost all my hands that way because if I was the bettor or raiser before the flop then I’ve represented a hand. So I’ll bet on the flop regardless of what comes. I’ll do it nine times out of ten.
You might have noticed that this is quite different from the way I’d play two aces or two kings. With either of those pairs in an early position, I’d check it if there were three to a straight or flush on the flop. Remember, I hear a bell ringing in that situation that reminds me not to bet. So if I’ve got a hand, like a pair in the pocket, I play it slow. But if I’m bluffing, I go ahead and play it fast, meaning I’ll take one shot at it.
I do that because I know for sure I’m not going to go any further with an A-K if somebody plays back at me. If somebody plays back when I’m holding two aces or two kings, I’ve got a decision to make. But when I have nothing, I can bet A-K with confidence because I’m gone if I get raised. I just throw my hand away because there’s nothing for me to think about. Now you can see why you’re less likely to lose a big pot with A-K than with two aces or two kings.
When there’s nothing on the flop that’ll help me and I do go ahead and play the hand, I’ll make a reasonable bet, somewhere in the neighborhood of the size of the pot. But as always, there are exceptions. On rare occasions, I’d revert back to the same philosophy I use with aces and kings. For example, if the fall was a J? 10? 9?, I’d never bluff. I wouldn’t even fool with the pot if only two of those cards were suited. You know somebody’s going to have something. Here again, you have to use your judgment. It’s an extreme situation.
This also explains why I’ll bet on the flop 90 percent of the time but not every single the time if I played my hand strong before the flop. There are times when you know somebody must have flopped something. And bluffing at a pot in that situation will rarely succeed. So you just give it up.
If I get some help on the flop by catching an ace or a king, I’d make a reasonable bet at the pot from any position. The only time I might check-raise in this situation is when I had called in a middle position before the flop and the original raiser before the flop was behind me. When someone plays back at me in this situation I’ll either move in or release my hand, depending on what flopped. In order for me to move in I’d have to think my opponent was drawing to his hand. For example, if the flop came A? 10? 9?, I’d put him on a flush draw or maybe a straight draw, and I’d move in. Of course, if my opponent flopped three nines, he’d be in an ideal position to win a lot of money. It would look to me like he was drawing at a straight, flush, or both, and if he was lucky enough to have flopped a set, well, there’s nothing magical I could do. I’d just have to go ahead and pay him off.
On the other hand, if it came off ragged, like a K? 8? 2?, I might release my A-K, thinking that he possibly flopped a set.
If a pair of aces or kings flopped, giving me trips, and the other card is not one that’ll give someone a straight or flush draw, I might check-raise. But I probably wouldn’t because I like to lead with it. It’s a very strong hand and as long as a pat hand, like a straight or a flush, can’t be dealt off on the next card, I might give a free card in this situation so my opponent would have a chance to make something on fourth street. But I’d only give a free card if I were last to act. If I were first to act, I wouldn’t. I would lead with that hand.
If I flopped two pair, aces and kings, I’d play them almost identically to trips. It’s almost the same hand.
The important thing to remember is that anytime there’s a possible draw on the flop, you should almost never check—you should almost always bet.
In the extremely rare case when I flop quads, I don’t have any alternative, there’s nothing else left, so I have to check it. If I bet, I could catch a man with a pair of queens or jacks, and he might accidentally pay me off. But realistically, I’d check it and hope that a 10, jack, or queen falls on fourth street and pairs someone. Then I’d bet hoping someone calls me with a full.
If a Q-J-10 flopped—giving me the nut straight—and I were the raiser, I’d lead again. Only this time it would not be a reasonable bet; it would be an abnormal size bet. I’d over-bet the pot when that flop came because somebody figures to have made something, like a smaller straight, possibly trips or two pair, or a pair and a straight draw. That’s the type of hand most players move in with. So I’d probably get him to bet all his money, and he’d be almost dead.
If I were holding A-K and had called before the flop, I wouldn’t slow-play it. I’d raise because the original raiser figures to have a hand that would fit the Q-J-10 flop. He could have two aces or two kings, three queens or three jacks, or a pair of queens with an ace or king kicker. He’s liable to go all the way to fifth street if he has any one of those hands, and he’d get all his chips in the middle.
If the flop came J-10-2 and I have a belly-straight draw and two overcards with an A-K, I’d call a reasonable bet. I’d really be trying to catch a queen, because if I caught an ace or king, I’d have to be careful with it. An ace could make someone else a stronger hand than my own, say a straight or two pair.
But if I flop two of my flush cards when I have A-K suited, I have a very powerful hand. At that point, I’m a favorite over any overpair, with the exception of a pair of aces or kings. I’d lead with that hand, of course, and I’d also lead off and bet if I actually had a flush with A-K suited. I would not check-raise with my flush because my opponent doesn’t figure to have made much on the flop. But he might call me with one pair, or he might accidentally have made a small flush. He might think I’m drawing to a flush, especially since I’m an aggressive player, and he might call me all the way through with just one pair.

Fourth and Fifth Streets
If I’m holding A-K and I make a pair on the flop, I’d play my hand on fourth and fifth streets almost the same way I’d play with a pair of aces or kings in the pocket. If I think my opponent made the hand he was drawing at, I’d check. If I don’t think he made it, I’d bet.
However, I would make an exception if I thought I had my opponent out-kicked. That is, I might keep betting with A-K if I put my opponent on a hand that’s a little bit worse than mine. For example, if I think he might’ve paired aces or kings with me but that he’s got a smaller kicker, I’d bet the highest amount I think he’ll call, hoping to sell my hand. I wouldn’t try as hard to sell a pair of aces or kings in the pocket because he might’ve been drawing to beat them. If I’ve got A-K however, there’s a good chance he’s got the top card, an ace or king, paired with me but that my kicker or side card is higher.
The important point to remember is that unlike A-A or K-K, A-K is a drawing-type hand. It’s therefore a much easier hand to get away from than the very big pairs.

Q-Q
I’ve put a pair of queens in a separate category for the simple reason that it’s a hand that deserves special treatment. You’ll soon see why.
When I get two queens in the pocket, I play them very carefully. I try not to play them too strongly from any position. Unless a good situation arises, I don’t want to move in before the flop with two queens. A good situation would be one where I’m in a very late position, possibly on the button, and four people have called a raise in front of me. Here, I might try to shut them out by moving in. I’d use the combined strength of my pair of queens and my position.
If you’re up against two aces or two kings with a pair of queens, you’re about a 4 to 1 underdog. And if you’re up against A-K, you’re only a little better than a 6 to 5 favorite. When people go all-in before the flop they usually have one of those hands. So if you go all-in before the flop with two queens, your money is in a lot of jeopardy. If you get called, you’re probably up against
A-A, K-K, or A-K, in which case you’ll be a big dog or just a small favorite. There are better spots to get all your money in.
That’s not to say two queens don’t have a certain amount of value. They do. They’re considerably better than an average hand. But for the reason I just mentioned, I seldom raise back with a pair of queens from any position. But I will raise the blind a reasonable amount with two queens from any position if nobody else raised in front of me.
In a middle position, if somebody raised in front of me I’d just call, as I would with any pair. I’d just call with them in a late position, too. I wouldn’t reraise, except in the situation mentioned above.
I also play two queens very slow on the flop, hoping to catch a third queen. If either an ace or a king comes on the flop, I’d play the hand as slowly as possible. If someone bets with any authority, I’d probably give him the pot. As long as an ace or king doesn’t fall, I’d play two queens almost exactly the way I’d play two aces or two kings, and that includes the play on fourth and fifth streets.
In addition to the times when an ace or king flops, I’d play queens differently from two aces or kings when there’s a flush draw on the flop. In that case, I wouldn’t be eager to get all my money in. A man with a flush draw could also have an overcard, such as an ace or king. If he did, it would make his hand almost as strong as my Q-Q, as opposed to two aces or two kings against only a flush draw, either of which would be about a 9 to 5 favorite.
If you keep these differences in mind and make the right adjustments to your play, your approach with two queens on the flop, fourth, and fifth should be similar to your approach with aces or kings. In fact, you can play all pairs in the pocket in very much the same way, as you’ll see.

Pairs Other Than Aces, Kings, and Queens
I’m going to refer to all the pairs from jacks down to deuces as small pairs, except when I name a particular pair. However, it should be obvious that the bigger the pair, the more valuable it is. And that principle extends all the way down to the very small pairs. That is, a pair of fours is better than a pair of treys for the simple reason that when the flop is 4-3-2, if someone flopped three fours he’d be a huge favorite, about 22 to 1, over someone who flopped three treys.
Furthermore, I mentally separate a pair of jacks, tens, or nines from the other small pairs and play them a little stronger. I do it simply because they are bigger pairs, and it’s not unusual for three rags to fall. If that happens, you’ll have an overpair. But if you’ve got two fives or two sixes, it’s likely that the flop will have at least one overcard. And with an overcard out there, your hand is kind of dead, so you don’t want to get too much money involved. Again, the higher the pair, the better, but I play them all as if they are small pairs.
Before the flop, with any of the small pairs except jacks, tens, and nines, I’d limp in. If somebody raised it from an early or middle position, I’d call it. I wouldn’t reraise. I’d almost always take a flop with any small pair, hoping to flop a set so I could break somebody.
With a pair of jacks, tens, or nines, if somebody raised from an early position, I’d probably just call. But if it was raised from a middle or late position, I might reraise if I felt the raiser was weak. The reason I might do that is because the probability is good I’ll have an overpair on the flop. In that case, I’d play nines, tens, and jacks just like I’d play two queens. The same strategy would apply.
However, I want to note a special exception I’d make in a very unusual situation. One of the reasons I like to play the small pairs from any position is because they give me an opportunity to slow down and not appear to be overbearingly aggressive when it might work against me. They also give me a chance to show a little respect for a particular opponent.
As you know, if I raise a pot before the flop, I’m going to bet on the flop about 90 percent of the time, no matter what it is. So if I raised the pot with two nines, I’d bet on the flop nine times out of ten. But let’s say I’m in the pot with a guy I’ve been pounding on and pounding on all night long. And that guy’s a real good player who I know is getting very tired of me pounding on him. I also know I’ve probably got him beat. But rather than bet him out of the pot, I’m going to purposely slow down against him. An example will best show you what I mean and explain why I do it.
Let’s say I’ve got two nines and I raise my opponent before the flop. He calls. The flop comes 10-2-3, and he checks it. I check along. Another rag falls off on fourth street. He checks again. Now, I’m reasonably sure my two nines are the best hand. But I’m not going to bet it. I’ll check along with him to show him some respect. The board’s awful looking and I’m pretty sure he doesn’t have any of it. I’m also quite sure that if I bet I’m not going to get called. So I don’t bet.
It has nothing to do with feeling sorry for the man because if I thought there was a good chance he’d call me, I’d surely bet. But instead of pushing him out of the pot once more and getting him hotter than he is, I check along with him to cool him off a little. Remember, he’s a real good player. And although I’m quite sure he won’t call me, I’m not so sure he won’t play back and put pressure on me when I’ve got a hand that can’t stand much pressure.
What’s more, if he doesn’t put some kind of play on me in this pot, he could do it at any time. If I keep pushing him out of every pot, sooner or later he’s going to stop sticking his head up, and I won’t be able to slap him anymore. Then he’s going to make me guess. I don’t want that. I don’t want him to start getting aggressive. That’s the hardest player in the world to beat, a guy who you bet at and who’s always playing back at you. That’s exactly the kind of opponent I don’t want to play against. I want all my opponents to be docile.
So it kind of cools him out when I just show down a hand. He knows that I know my two nines are the best hand. But by not betting them, I show him some respect. And because I showed the hand down, I’ve got him back to thinking that when I bet I’m either bluffing or I’ve got a hand I’m going to go with. He’s back to guessing again. And that’s exactly where I want him. I don’t want to antagonize him to the point that he starts making me do the guesswork. It serves a lot of purposes to slow down in a situation like that.
A short time later, I might pick up another pair of nines, tens, or jacks in a very late position or on the button, and I might raise with it again. This time, he might play back at me. If he does, he’d get the pot. I’d give the pot to anyone who reraised me before the flop.
I’d never stand a reraise when I have a small pair before the flop. I won’t take any pressure with them. If someone puts a play on me, I throw them away. But if I don’t get reraised, I’m back to my basic style of play. If I were the raiser, I’d go ahead and bet on the flop. Just about any flop. If I raised with two tens and a 7-3-2 flopped, I’d bet for sure since I’ve got an overpair. However, the only time my pair is of any real value is when I flop a set.
Nevertheless, I’d still bet if I was the raiser, even if three overcards flopped. Even if I was sure a guy had a bigger pair on that flop, and even if I was almost sure I’d get called, I’d still bet. I’d be giving him the courtesy of a bet because there’s an outside chance I could pick that pot up. And it wouldn’t be a small bet. It would be a reasonable bet. He’d be looking for me to bet, and I don’t want to disappoint him. It would hurt my table image.
I’ll do that 90 percent of the time. In this case, I’ll take one stab at the pot and if I don’t get it there, I’ll try to check it out from there on. I’d make an exception if I put a guy on a draw. In that case, he’s going to have to pay to make his hand. If I got raised, I surely wouldn’t go any further with the hand.
I play small pairs cautiously and try to win small pots with them. I won’t put a lot of chips in the pot unless I flop trips. And when I don’t make trips with a small pair, whenever I bet, I’m bluffing from then on.

Playing Small Pairs with No Help on the Flop
If I had called a raise before the flop and the raiser bet on the flop, unless I flopped a set, I’d probably surrender the pot. That’s especially true if an overcard flopped. So right there, you can see the strength of being the raiser. He made me lay down my hand. That’s why I like to be the raiser.
When you don’t help your small pair on the flop, it’s important points to remember these points:

(1) If you just called before the flop, you’re through with them, and you don’t put any more money in the pot from then on.
(2) If you raised with them, you should generally try to win a small pot by betting on the flop. But if you get called, you don’t want to bet again on fourth and fifth, and you should try to play showdown without any more betting from that point on—unless you think your opponent is on a draw, in which case you continue betting.
(3) If you get raised, you throw away your hand.

Playing Small Pairs When You Flop a Set
It’s a different situation entirely when you flop a set. That’s what you played for. And you should play them fast. That’s what I do, in almost all cases. I don’t always raise with them, but I never check them. Needless to say, if I was the raiser and I flopped a set, I immediately bet right out. As you know, I wouldn’t need a set to do that. However, I would make an exception if I was in the pot with a very weak player, and he was the only opponent I had. I’d check in this case.
Say I had called before the flop, then I flop trips. If someone checks it to me and there are people behind me, I’ll always bet.
As you know, one of my favorite plays in hold’em is to lead right into the raiser with trips or even two pair, especially when I think he’s got a big pair in the hole. I over-bet the pot right there, and if the raiser has what he represented, a big pair, he’ll almost invariably go ahead and move in on me.
I’d make that play when I’ve got a small pair, say threes, and the flop is 10-7-3. I lead into the raiser, thinking he’s got an overpair in the pocket. But a better flop would be one with a face card, say Q-10-3. Now the raiser’s got to have some kind of combination with a flop like that. If he’s got two aces or two kings and he’s any kind of a player, he’s got to raise. If he’s got A-Q, he’ll probably raise with that too. If he’s got K-Q he’ll probably call. If he’s got a straight draw he’ll call, and it’s possible that he’ll raise. So I lead right off into him. If he’s fortunate enough to have my hand beat, well, again, there’s nothing magical I can do about it. I’ll have to pay him off.
If someone had called in front of me and bets on the flop when it comes like A-8-3 and I put him on a pair of aces, I’d probably play my three threes slowly. I wouldn’t want to take him out of the lead.
Another time I start over-betting the pot on the flop is when I make the underfull, such as when the flop comes 9-9-4 and I’ve got two fours in the pocket. Well, I start making big bets right there because the only way I’m going to win any money with my hand is by catching somebody with a 9 or catching somebody with a big pair who calls or even raises me. I want to be sure there’s enough money involved so I can win a big pot. And, to be sure of that, I’ve got to lead with my hand.
Note that you play the underfull different from the way you’d play the big full. If you remember, you play the big full by checking on the flop because you’d have the deck crippled. In this case, you want to give a free card to your opponent so he can catch up.
Are there times when you might release a set on the flop? Yes, but they’re rare. It’s very hard to turn this hand loose. However, there is a situation in which you might save some money. Say you have a small set, and you bet on the flop. There’s a man in a late position who didn’t raise it before the flop, so it’s unlikely that he has a big pair in the pocket. Now, he makes a very strong play after the flop. I mean, he moves all-in and puts your entire stack in jeopardy. At that point, you might be able to determine that he’s got a set, and you might be able to get away from your hand. But it’s very difficult. In a high-stakes game, I almost never do it.
If you flop a set in a raised pot, it’s practically impossible to get away from it. If the pot wasn’t raised, conceivably, you could put a man on a bigger set than you’ve got. But if the pot was raised originally, it’s just impossible to release a set.
If I raised it before the flop, then flop a set and get beat, well, my opponent is going to win a real big pot from me. If we don’t get it all-in on the flop, we’ll surely be all-in after fourth street.

Small Connecting Cards
Before the Flop
This is the hand I’m looking for when I play no-limit hold’em: small, suited connecting cards, such as 7? 6?, 8? 7?, and
5? 4?. That’s the kind of hand I want. It’s my favorite. And when I get it, I want my opponent to have two aces or two kings and to believe that he should play them slow. If he does, he’ll give me the opportunity to get a flop. And if I do, I can break him.
Exactly such a situation occurred in the 1977 World Series of Poker. It was definitely the most important and memorable pot of the tournament, bigger and more important than the pot I played with Bones, which I mentioned earlier. Not only did I win it, but I eliminated two very tough opponents. Here’s what happened:
At this stage of the tournament, the ante was $200 and there were blinds of $300 and $600. Junior Whited had the big blind for $600. Buck Buchanan limped in for the six hundred. “Sailor” Roberts passed. Bones was next, and he made it $3,500 to go. I called, and so did Milo Jacobson. When it got back to Junior, he went all-in for $11,300. Buck was now looking at two raises: Bones’s $2,900 and Junior’s $8,400. He called, as did Bones. And so did I. Milo passed. It was a big pot already and destined to get bigger.
The flop was 5? 7? 7?.

FLOP

Fourth street was A? and fifth street was 4?.

4TH St. 5th St.

Junior was already all-in so Buck was first to act on the flop. He moved all-in with a huge bet. Bones passed, so it was up to me. Buck could’ve made his move and shut me out before the flop. He would’ve picked-up $26,500 had he done so. Now it was too late. I had him. There was no doubt in my mind about that. So I asked the dealer to count down his bet. It was $45,400. I shoved in four-and-a-half 20-chip stacks of $500 grays and four $100 black chips. I was the only one who had any chips left so we all turned our hands over.

Buck had K? K?, Junior had K? Q?, and I had 7? 6?. As you can see, when all the cards were out, the pot was mine. It was the only time in the tournament that two players were eliminated in the same pot—and two very tough ones at that.
In order to win that $142,500 pot, I had to gamble almost $12,000 with those small connecting cards before the flop. I’d do it again. I always do it when there’s an opportunity for me to win a real big pot.
Buck and Junior had almost exactly the hands I thought they had. And when Buck made his move on the flop, I was certain he had a pair of kings or aces. He couldn’t have had anything else.
If Buck had played his hand the way I recommend, he would’ve won a relatively small pot. As it was, he lost a big one, which is too often the case with two aces or two kings. If you recall, I stated earlier that with a pair of aces or kings in an early position before the flop, I would probably limp in, hoping somebody would raise it behind me so I could reraise. Buck got the first part right. If he’d followed the second part and raised Junior, I never would’ve played my hand.
That’s the whole thing about the small connecting cards. I’ll come in with them in an early or middle position. I might come in for the first bet or, as you’ve seen, even the second if I think I can win a real big pot. I probably won’t raise with this kind of hand because I don’t want to get shut out of the pot. If I raise and somebody else reraises, I probably won’t be able to play it. Or if I have to call a double-raise cold, I probably won’t be able to play it there either. There are always exceptions, but in general, I play the hand in order to get a flop with it.
For the most part, you don’t want to put a whole lot of money in the pot with small connecting cards before the flop. It’s best to take a lot of flops with these hands. You want to get a flop, hoping to make a little straight, a little set of trips, a little two pair, and so on.
With any two cards to a straight flush, connected or not—except for the top and bottom cards of a straight-flush, such as the 8? 4? or J? 7?—I’d come in from any position. In a late position, I’d raise with them. When I come in with this hand in an early or middle position I’m really looking to get raised. In fact, I’m hoping someone has a big pair in the hole and raises behind me. Then I can put a relatively small amount of additional money in the pot, and if I get a flop, I can break him.
The beautiful part about having the small connecting cards is that if I don’t get any help, I throw them away. If the flop comes 9-9-2, for example, I don’t get involved with a 7-6. I’m through.
Normally, I wouldn’t want to get more than 5 percent, maybe 10 percent, of my money involved before the flop with this type of hand. I’d only get as much as 20 percent of my money in with that hand if I was rushing. I wouldn’t do it unless I was on a streak.
There are also times when I might raise from early or middle position with something like a 7-6. I noted that I generally just call. But if the tempo of the game were just right, I’d raise in an early or middle position.
For example, if I were winning a lot of pots, I’d do it. I said that I usually play the next pot after I win a pot, regardless of what position I’m in. And when I play that pot, I usually raise it. Also, if the game had tightened down to the point where everybody was playing the nuts, I’d shoot it up with a couple of small connecting cards.
Of course, you always try to keep from getting reraised with that hand. So, the ideal situation is when you think your muscle will keep anyone from playing back and will make your opponents think you’ve probably got big cards or a big pair.
I raise with this hand in a late position because I don’t think I’ll get reraised. Also, since nobody’s raised in front of me, I’ll be able to use some deception. I usually don’t raise in an early position because I’d have to go through six or seven players without getting reraised. With a lot of top players in the game, that’s not likely. Also, I like to be in the lead, and if I make something with it, I can take charge. So with players behind me, I usually call with it.
In this situation, I don’t have to maintain my table image by betting on the flop when I’m the raiser. If I just called before the flop and somebody else raised, I very seldom try to pick up the pot or bluff into the raiser. The raiser commands respect. So when I miss that hand completely and somebody else raised it, well, it’s his pot. That’s why I generally like to be the raiser.
I don’t like to raise with small connecting cards because when somebody has the hand I want him to have, such as a big pair, he’s going to raise me back. That’s one more reason I usually limp-in with them. When I limp in with this hand in an early position, I’m actually playing it like I would two aces or two kings, so there’s also a bit of deception there. And if somebody raises in a middle or late position, I can pretty well put them on a hand—big cards like A-K, K-Q, or a big pair. That’s what I’m looking to do. I want to be able to put somebody on a hand so I know what I’m trying to beat.
If you play in the style I recommend, very aggressively, you’ll have to adjust your play in a small game. You’ll probably discover that you get reraised more often when you raise in a small game than you will in a big game. That’s been my experience.
Here’s why: if I’m in a game where there’s not much money on the table—say, everybody has $5,000 or $6,000—and I raise it $1,000, well, a guy with big cards is going to move in on me. It happens all the time in a small game. And when I’ve got a 7-6 or a 9-8 and someone bets the rest of his money at me, I can’t call it. When I can’t win anything if I get a flop, I’m not going to take two small connecting cards and try to beat two kings, A-K, and so forth. In a case like that, I throw my hand away. And because of that, I have trouble winning in a game where there’s not much money on the table.
But it’s a totally different story in a big game. If I raise it $3,000 or $4,000 and the other guy and I have a lot of chips on the table, he’ll be a little more hesitant about raising me now because he knows there’s a very good chance I’ll play back. The guys I play with know that when I put my children out there, I don’t like to let them drown.
But even if I do get reraised in this situation, it’s all right. In fact, it’s what I want. If he raises me $7,000 or $8,000 and I’ve got small connecting cards, I’ll call now. If we’ve both got $250,000 in front of us, then I’m only putting in about five percent of my money. And it’s worth it, because now I’ve got a chance to win something if I get a flop. I might be able to break him.

The Flop
Playing When You Miss Your Hand Completely. If I called in an early position with small connecting cards and I miss my hand completely, I give the pot up. I don’t go ahead in that situation with that type of hand. I just surrender. The first loss is the best loss in a situation like that. But of course, if I was the raiser, I would go ahead and bet at the pot. As long as there wasn’t something frightening out there like the Q? J? 10?, I’m going to bet. And most of the time nothing frightening will be out there.
If I was rushing and had a 7? 6? in an early position, I’d probably raise it before the flop. Then, if the A? A? K? flopped, I’d bet right out. A flop like that wouldn’t frighten me. Why? It’s simple. My opponents don’t know that I don’t have A-K, A-Q, K-K, or any hand that would benefit from that flop. They don’t know what I’ve got. In fact, if I raised in an early position on the pre-flop, they might think I have a hand with big cards.
If I had raised it from a middle position before the flop, I’d bet, unless someone bet in front of me. In that case, the pot is his. I’d know my opponent has something, and when I’ve got nothing with this kind of hand, I’m usually not going to try to make any great play, although occasionally I will bluff at it.
If I was a caller before the flop in a middle or late position and it was checked to me on the flop, I’d check along. As long as I didn’t make anything, it would probably have to be checked to me twice, on the flop and fourth street, before I’d make a bet, which would be a bluff.
Of course, if I had raised it before the flop from a late position, I’d almost always bet, particularly if it was checked around to me. I’d bet even if the flop was A? A? K?, as noted before, and it was probable that one of my opponents had an ace. I’d do it because I don’t want my opponents to get out of the habit of checking to me. Since I was the raiser they expect me to bet. So I go ahead and make a courtesy bet for them. When I make that bet, I’m trying to do two things:

(1) Win the pot right there. And I will many a time because my opponents get into the habit of throwing their hands away.
(2) Maintain my aggressive image. As long as I do, they’ll continue to check it to me.

That’s the way I pick up all the pots I do. Of course, if I get check-raised, I’m out immediately. That’s the risk I take. But a guy really has to have a hand before he’ll put a play like that on me. So when he does, I let him have the pot. But they miss their hands more often than they make them. Because of that, I pick up more pots than I give up.

Fourth and Fifth Streets
Playing When You Miss Your Hand Completely. If I didn’t improve on the flop, I wouldn’t be in there on fourth street with small connected cards unless I was the bettor or the pot was checked to me and I checked it as well.
If someone had called my bet after having checked it to me on the flop, I would immediately put him on some kind of hand. If I thought he was on a drawing hand and it looked like he missed it on fourth, I’d bet again. If I thought he had a made hand—regardless of how weak I thought it was, even as weak as the third pair—I wouldn’t try to make him throw away his hand on fourth if he called me on the flop and had, therefore, already committed himself to the pot. For example, say the flop was a K-8-2 and I tried to pick it up but got called. Well, then I’d try to check it out all the way through. At that point, I’d be giving up the pot at a minimum loss.
And, once again, if I thought my opponent was on a drawing hand, like two cards to a straight-flush, and I get check-raised after making another stab at the pot on fourth, I’m almost always going to give it up.
I’m never going to call a bet when I miss my hand completely, but in an extreme situation, I might play back at a guy who I think is putting a play on me. For example, if I was completely convinced a guy was trying to take the pot away from me, I’d re-play at him. But I’d have to feel strongly, about it before I’d jeopardize a bunch of chips in that spot.
My play on fifth street would be just like my play on fourth. If I’m still betting at the pot, I’d have to continue because it’s almost impossible for me to win in a showdown. Assuming I didn’t pair on the end, I’d have only a 7-high. Since I’d put my opponent on a draw on fourth and that’s why I bet there, I’d have to feel that he didn’t make it when all the cards were out. I’d also have to feel very strongly he wouldn’t call my last bet. Naturally, if I felt like he completed his hand, I’d check.
This is a tough spot on the end, but you just can’t leave all your money out there without one last stab at the pot. The key to what you’d do on fifth is very much based on your opinion of why your opponent called you on fourth. You’d have to feel pretty sure he was drawing, or you could get yourself in a lot of trouble.
You might find it difficult to continue betting your hand when you know you don’t have anything. You may think it takes a lot of courage to do that, and it does. But it’s really just good poker. You’ll discover, if you use my system of play, that your opponents will be scared to give you free cards whenever they’ve got a hand, because they know you might be drawing at an inside straight and betting with it. They know an aggressive player is liable to show them anything. Consequently, when they get a hand, they want to shut you out right then. They bet because they don’t want you in the pot drawing at them.
So there are really two good reasons to play aggressively in this situation:

(1) If your opponents do have a hand, they’ll show you right away. They don’t want to keep giving you free cards.
(2) Your continuous betting makes them throw away borderline hands so you can pick up the pot when they don’t have anything.

Quite simply, an aggressive player has by far the best of it.

Playing When You Make Something. I’m now going to discuss how I’d play small connecting cards when I flop something with them. The hand I’m going to use as an example throughout this discussion is a 7? 6?. You’ll learn how I’d play when I get:

(1) a poor flop (slightly helpful);
(2) a fair flop (moderately helpful); and
(3) a good flop (very helpful).

Poor Flop
When I’ve got a 7? 6? and a Q? 6? 2? falls, I’d consider that a poor flop to my hand, and I’d play it similarly to the way I’d play if I got no help. However, there’s one big difference. Depending on my opponent and, more importantly, how much money he had on the table, I’ll gamble with the second pair—a pair of sixes, in this case—or even the third pair as long as the guy I was up against was sitting on a lot of checks. I’d do it even if I knew he had a pair of queens. If I thought I could break him if I caught another 6 or a 7, I’d call a reasonable bet and might even put as much as 10 percent of my money in the pot. I’d surely do it if I thought I could win a gigantic pot.
I might even raise. I’ll always consider raising, whether I have caught a small piece of the flop, a pair of sixes in this case, or completely missed my hand. But that has nothing to do with the value of my hand. I’d do it because I detected a weakness in somebody or to take advantage of my position. Another difference in the way I’d play this hand when I got a little help on the flop and none on fourth or fifth is that I’d continue to bet on fourth if I was the original raiser. You’ll recall that even if I missed this hand completely, I’d bet it on the flop as long as I was the raiser. But if my bet on the flop was called, I’d try to check it out from then on, unless I thought my opponent was drawing.
Now that I’ve gotten a little help on the flop, however, I’d bet again on fourth despite the fact that my bet on the flop was called. I don’t like to keep betting when I’m on a complete bluff, but I do like to keep betting when I’ve got an out. In this case, I know that if I catch that other 6 or a 7, I’d likely have a stronger hand than my opponent. So I wouldn’t show any weakness with my hand on fourth street. I’d go ahead and make a reasonable bet.
If I still didn’t get any help on fifth street, I’d probably stop betting. If my opponent was drawing and he didn’t make his hand, I’d know that my pair of sixes is more than likely good, so I’d check. And if they aren’t good, there’s no sense in losing any more money with them.
If I happen to get some additional help on fourth, such as a 7, well, then I’d make an oversized bet, one that’s larger than what’s in the pot. I’m always out to win a big pot, and now I’d have a hand to do it with. I wouldn’t try to sell my hand for a small amount of money. I’d make a very big bet on fourth, and a very big bet on fifth.
If I didn’t catch that 7 until the end, then I might try to sell it on fifth street for whatever I thought I could get.
Whether I caught the 7 on fourth or fifth, I’d play a hand this way only if I was the original raiser coming in and I stayed in the lead by betting on every turn of the cards.
Assuming I was a caller coming in and had checked and called on the flop, I’d play the hand differently if I caught a 7 on fourth street. If there was a lot of money in the pot, this is another one of the few times I’d check-raise. I wouldn’t want to take my opponent, the original raiser, out of the lead, especially if I know the size of the pot will make him bet again on fourth and since he’d have no idea the 7 helped me. He’d surely try to shut me out, and when he bets, I’d raise him. I’d want to win the pot right there, because if a queen or deuce comes on the end, the board will pair, killing my two pair.
If I caught a 6 on fourth street, my strategy would be different still. The two sixes on the board would look very threatening, so my hand would be harder to conceal than if I caught a 7. So, even if I had been a caller up to this point, there’s a good chance I’d take the lead and bet when the 6 hit. And even though the raiser should see that I might have three sixes, he might also think I am just representing them. If you didn’t have a 6 in the hole, this would be a very good opportunity to bluff at the pot.

Fair Flop
Now I’ll discuss how I’d play that 7? 6? if I got what I’d call a fair or moderately helpful flop—any three cards that gave me the top pair, an open-end straight draw, or a flush draw.
I play flush draws extremely slow because they’re so obvious. When two of the same suit flop, I see so many players who are drawing to a flush move in on a guy after he bets. Occasionally, I do it too, because my philosophy is to protect my money and bet whenever I can. But it’s usually a very obvious play. Most players will put you on a flush draw in that situation.
For that reason I like a straight draw better, and I play it fast. If I get that straight draw, well, I’m ready now. I mean, really ready. The battle is on. If I was the original raiser, of course, I’d bet on the flop. If I got raised, I’d play back and move all my chips in. If somebody bet in front of me, I’d raise ‘em.
If I wasn’t the original raiser, I’d check-raise. If the guy who raised it before the flop bet after I checked, I’d raise with most or all of my chips. I’d be the aggressor at that point and nobody would be able to take me out of the lead from then on.
As I said earlier, most decisions are made on the flop. I mean, that’s where you steal pots. So I’d play my hand this way because this is a situation where I typically steal a lot of pots. I’d be bluffing with an out. I could win the pot right there. If I got called, I’d have a good draw—an open-end straight, which I’d make about 33 percent of the time—and a small chance to backdoor two pair or trips.
Now, say the flop comes 6-4-2 or 7-4-2, giving me the top pair. In this case, I’d play it cautiously. I’m not going to fall in love with that hand, but I’ll gamble a little with it. In other words, I’d check to the raiser, and then I’d probably call. If I were in a late position and hadn’t raised originally, I’d call if somebody bet. But it would be a weak call, meaning that I probably wouldn’t go any further with the hand if I don’t get any help on fourth and somebody bets at me again.
One of the reasons I’d call on the flop is that my pair might be the best hand. Just because the other guy raised it originally doesn’t mean he has a big pair in the pocket. So there’s a possibility that I’ve got the best hand right now. I’d learn more from his play on fourth street. If I didn’t help my hand and he bet again, I’d get rid of it pretty fast. I wouldn’t invest a lot of money with that hand without any help.
But the main reason I’d call on the flop is the possibility that I could win a big pot if I improve my hand and beat a strong hand, such as two aces or two kings. And I check rather than bet because I might have the best hand and I don’t want to get shut out by betting and being raised. Then, I’d have to throw my hand away. By checking, I could call a reasonable bet and try to catch a card. If I did improve on fourth, I’d play it from then on just like if I took a poor flop but got some help on fourth.
A good or even a great flop to a 7? 6? would be a pair with a straight or flush draw, two pair, trips, a straight, or a flush—even though it’s a small one. With any good flop to small connecting cards, I play the hand as if it is complete, even if it’s not. I’d lead with the hand in an early position, and I’d raise in a late position. I’d play the hand to get all my money in the center to start with.
Even if I flopped a pair with a draw, I’d use the same strategy since I’d have two chances to win it:

(1) I bet or raise and my opponent throws his hand away; or
(2) I improve and my bet or raise is called.

If you follow my advice here, you’ll be in some jeopardy, even when you get a very good flop. But you’re almost always in some jeopardy, so you can’t worry about somebody having the nuts all the time. If you did, you would never get to play a pot.
For example, if you and your opponent both flopped a flush, yours will likely be the smaller of the two, and you’d be dead. In hold’em, there’s no way you can draw out when it’s flush-against-flush, unless you’re drawing to a straight flush. But assuming you can’t get a straight flush, you’ll just have to lose your money, because you’ll almost always have to pay your opponent off. It’s one of the hazards of the game.
You could also flop the ignorant or low end of the straight. But this is also hazardous, since your opponent could turn a bigger straight. And again, if your opponent bet anything within reason, you’ll have to go ahead and pay him. For example, if the flop was a 10-9-8 and somebody moved all-in on you, you’d be down to judgment. You’d have to know your opponent, and a lot would depend on how much is in the pot and the amount he sets you in for. If you’ve got $1,000 in the pot and he bets you $50,000 more, well, perhaps, you wouldn’t go for it and you’d throw your hand away. But if you’ve got $1,000 in the pot and he bets you $2,000 more—all your money, or all his money—then you’d surely pay it off. If you’re beat, you’re beat. That happens a lot, by the way. And it’s why hands like K-9 and J-7 are considered trash and shouldn’t be played in a normal ante ring game.

Good Flop
If I’ve caught good on the flop, I’ll already be committed to the pot, so I’ll bet on fourth street, as long as I am first or it is checked to me. But as always, there are exceptions.
For example, if you flopped a diamond flush and another diamond came on fourth street, your hand would be almost ruined. All you’d have is a 7-high flush. At that point, you must check your hand and hope to show it down. If you can’t show it down, you’ve got to throw it away if there’s any kind of betting.
Or, if you flopped a straight and the board pairs on fourth street, you could be in trouble. Usually, that shouldn’t stop you because if a man had flopped a set or two pair, he would’ve raised you. So if he made a full when the board paired, you’d have to pay him off. Another hazard.
As you continue to use my system of play, you’ll discover the many advantages it has. The situation above is a good example. If the flop came 5-4-3, giving me a straight, my opponent would’ve let me know on the flop whether or not he had a hand, such as two pair or trips. If he’s a good player he would, because he wouldn’t want another card to fall that might be one card off of a straight. He knows if an ace, deuce, 6, or 7 comes on fourth, he’s going to have to give the pot up. He knows I’ll bet in that case, even if I don’t have the one card that’ll make the straight.
For that reason, all good hold’em players do most of their gambling on the flop, not on fourth and fifth streets. Occasionally, you’ll see a big pot played after the turn, but in the majority of cases, all the money goes in on the flop. That’s why the flop is the most crucial point in the game.
Earlier I stated that it’s quite inconceivable to me that anybody could get away from their hand if they flopped a set of trips in a raised pot. At that point, I was talking about a hidden set, a pair in the pocket and one on the board. It’s a different matter entirely when the pair is on the board and I have one of the matching cards in the hole. I’ve released a lot of sets in a situation like that. For example, say I have a 7-6 and the flop is 7-7-2. I bet and get called. There aren’t really very many hands someone can call me with. So it’s easy to release a set in this case, because when you get a lot of money involved you know the guy who’s in there with you probably has a 7 also. This is especially true if he’s the aggressor.
So you have to evaluate your kicker. I mean, what’s it worth? The conclusion I usually reach is that it’s not worth very much. If I really think he’s got a 7 then I know the best I could hope for is a tie. Of course, I’m talking about a good player, and it’s much more likely he’s got me beat. He’s probably in there with a 7 and a higher card that he could’ve flopped a straight with, such as an 8-7, 9-7, or 10-7. Another possibility is that he’s got a high card, such as an ace or king, that’s suited. He might have a 7-6, like I do, or a 7-5, the only likely hand I could beat. But it’s almost inconceivable that he’s in there with a 7-4, 7-3, or 7-2, although this last one would give him a full.
So when I got down into the hand and I gave him credit for the other 7 because he was showing a whole lot of speed, I couldn’t continue playing my 7 with a small connecting card. And I’d release that set quite readily. I’d do it real quick.
When I have a set like that with a different kicker, I make another evaluation. If my kicker was slightly bigger, say a 9 or 10, I’d probably play it. If I had a suited ace or king, then I’d definitely go ahead and play it.
Of course, there are times when I might not release my hand after flopping a set with that 7-6. For example, say I raised with the hand before the flop, and everybody checks it to me on the flop. Then I bet, and one of my opponents plays back (check-raises). In this situation, I might go ahead with my hand, figuring that the guy is trying to shut me out. It’s possible that he is playing back with an overpair or some other hand that he might not have raised me with before the flop.
On the other hand, say I held a 7-6 in late position and had called a small raise before the flop. Now, if the flop comes 7-7-2, I would not give the raiser credit for a 7. And I’d probably play my hand real fast trying to win a big pot.
Whenever there’s a raise before the flop, there’s a chance you can win a big pot. But in an unraised pot, it’s hard to win a big one. Previously, I noted that you don’t want to get broke in a nothing pot. I’m reminding you of that now because you might be tempted to try and win a big pot when you flop a set with small connecting cards in an unraised pot. You shouldn’t. If I don’t have anything in the pot to protect, I never jeopardize very much money without a real good hand. I don’t go out of my way to win nothing pots.
Another important part of my playing philosophy I want to remind you about is this: You should constantly be trying to get as much value for your hand as you can. And the way you do that is by betting. That should be clear by now. You become a big winner at poker by betting, raising, and reraising—by playing aggressively. Of course, there are times you have to play defensively, when an aggressive strategy would be wrong because it could get you shut out of a pot. But in general, you want to be aggressive.
That means you can’t let every card that hits the board threaten you. As I said, if you’re always worrying about somebody having the nuts, you never will get to play a hand. This applies to all the hands I’ve discussed, but it’s especially meaningful when it comes to playing small connecting cards when you get a good flop. That’s what you’re playing them for in the first place. So when you make something with them, you want to get value for them. So you should always apply this principle: If you’re going to call, you might as well bet.
You should do that at all the stages of play, but it’s particularly important on the end because you’ll get paid off with hands that aren’t what you thought they were. I mean, there’ll be many times you’ll put your opponent on a hand completely different than what he’s got. I’m not Kreskin, and neither are you. You might think a man is drawing to a flush, but maybe he’s got a pair, just one pair. He might have been running you down with a lot less than you thought he had. So, when a flush card hits the board on fifth street, it may not have helped him at all. I mean, you’ll know he’s got something when that flush card comes, either the flush you thought he was drawing at or some other piece of the flop. Or maybe he’s got two pair and you’ve got a straight. You really don’t know what he’s got. But you’ve got a good hand with your small connecting cards, so you’re going to pay it off anyway. Therefore, you might as well bet.
The only time I make an exception is when the board pairs on the end. Then I’ll check it, and may or may not call, depending on how I feel about the situation. But assuming that doesn’t happen, if I’ve made a real good hand with my small connecting cards, I’d go ahead and bet.
Although there are times when I might be a little concerned because I don’t have the nuts, there will also be times when I do have the nuts. Naturally, in that case, I’ll do whatever I think will get the most money in the pot. If I thought my opponent had a strong hand, I’d make a big bet. If I thought he had a weak hand, I’d try to sell my hand by making a smaller bet. I’ll have to use careful judgment here, judgment about what I think he’s got.
My decision on how much to bet depends on whether I made my hand early (on the flop) or late (on the end).
If I made my hand early, I’m not going to try to sell him anything. I’m going to try to break him.
If I made my hand late and I haven’t been charged a lot of money to make it—say it was checked on the flop, there was a small bet on fourth, and I made the nuts on the end—well, then I’m not going to try to break him because he probably won’t call a big bet. I’d try to sell my hand for whatever I thought I could get for it.
Those of you who are new to no-limit hold’em may not be able to appreciate how strongly I feel about the small connecting cards. And those of you who are experienced players are probably quite surprised. But that’s where it’s at, in my opinion. You have to use your good judgment when you play the small connecting cards. When you play them right, they’re big money makers. And that’s what no-limit hold’em is all about.

Borderline or Trouble Hands
You should commit to memory the list of trouble hands I list below. I call them trouble hands because that’s exactly what they are, and I only play them in borderline situations.

Before I get to the list, it’s important that you realize that trouble hands aren’t necessarily unplayable if:

(1) They are suited; and
(2) They are dealt to me in a shorthanded game, one with four players or less. In a later section, I’ll go over why in a shorthanded game, these trouble hands are actually big hands.

But in a ring game, these are hands you can lose a lot of money with, so you should play them cautiously. You don’t want to jeopardize much money with them.

Trouble Hands (only when offsuit)

A-Q A-J
A-10 K-Q
K-J K-10
Q-J Q-10
J-10 9-8

I call these borderline hands because I’d question calling a raise with them. If they’re suited, I’ll call a raise with them and take a flop. If they’re not suited and I’m out of position, I won’t call a raise. By out of position I mean that I’m in a middle position and a man in an early position came in raising. I’ll pass these hands in that spot.
If I’m in a late position, the pot’s been raised, and another man calls, well, then I’ll usually call with them—but, I’ll hear another bell ringing when I do. This time, that bell will be reminding me to play my hand with extreme caution, unless I get an excellent flop to it.
The reason why you have to be so careful with every one of those hands is that you might be up against a hand where you’d be almost dead. Most players consider A-A, K-K, or A-K to be the best raising hands, so there’s a good possibility the raiser has one of those three hands. True, you can’t always assume that, but it’s always in the back of your mind. So, if you’ve got A-Q, A-J, or A-10, and you’re up against A-A, K-K, or A-K, you’ve got a terrible hand.
It’s extremely hard to win a big pot with these hands when you’ve called a raise. They’re definitely trouble hands. You’re much more likely to lose a big pot with them than you are to win a big pot. Even when I make a pair with them on the flop, I play them extremely cautiously, or about the same way I’d play a pair of aces or kings in the pocket.
For example, if I played a K-Q offsuit and the board came
K-4-2, I’d be in a lot of trouble if the raiser’s got one of the three big hands I think he might have. He’d have two aces, three kings, or a pair of kings, like me, but he’d also have an ace kicker.
Or, if I played a 9-8 and the flop was Q-J-10, I still wouldn’t be too excited about my hand. Although I flopped a straight, it’s the ignorant end of the straight. In addition, it is vulnerable to the high end of the straight, which would be made up by a very strong hand that everybody plays, A-K.
Something else you have to think about with the trouble hands is that when you flop a straight draw, it’s not as easy to pick up pots with them as it is with other, stronger hands. You’ll remember that when I flop a straight draw with small connecting cards, I play my hand real fast because I have two shots to win the pot. I can win the pot right on the flop because with small cards out there, it’s less likely anyone else flopped a hand. And, if I do get called, I’ve still got a second shot to win it if I make my straight.
But let’s say I’m holding K-Q and the flop comes J-10-5, giving me a straight draw. It’s highly likely somebody else caught a piece of that flop as well, and I’ll be less likely to pick the pot up if I bet. So I don’t have two shots to win it anymore.
The same line of reasoning applies if you are holding K-Q and the flop comes Q-J-10, giving you the top pair and a straight draw. It’s still not a good hand because if somebody has an A-K, the best you could be drawing for is a split.
Even when you flop a very good hand like two pair or trips, you could be in jeopardy. If the flop was K-K-2 to your K-Q, you could once again be in big trouble if someone’s got A-K. The difference here is that you probably won’t be able to get away from your hand and you’ll have to go ahead and lose a lot of money.
The important point to remember about the trouble hands is when you do get a flop to them you don’t want to get heavily involved. Just try to play the pot as cheaply as possible.
A minor exception to the above rule is when you flop a straight, as would happen if you are holding Q-10 and the flop is K-J-9 or J-9-8, for example. However, even when you have the nuts, as in this case, there’s a chance you could lose the pot. If a queen fell on fourth, with the K-J-9 flop, you could lose to an
A-10. And with the J-9-8 flop, you could lose to a K-10. So, you’re not completely safe with some of these hands even when you flop the nuts.
For the most part, trouble hands, suited or offsuit, should be played the same way: slowly. However, trouble hands suited are much stronger hands than trouble hands offsuit, and if you flop a flush or a flush draw with a suited trouble hand, you can show some speed. For example, if you had the K? Q? and the flop was 10? 7? 2?, you’d have a real big hand. Not only would you have a flush draw, but you’d also have two overcards. Or, if you had the 9? 8? with the same flop, you’d have a straight and a flush draw. Either situation would present a good opportunity to check-raise somebody if you were in an early position. If you were in a late position and somebody led into you, you could raise them. At that point, you’re be back having two shots to pick up the pot. You might win it right there, or if you get called, you’d have a good hand to fall back on.
Trash Hands
With the exception of an ace or a king with any suited card, I consider any hand I haven’t already discussed to be a trash hand. I put A? 8? and K? 4? in the same category as the small connecting cards and I play them approximately the same way. For example, if the flop was 9? 6? 2? and I had the A? 8?, I’d have a flush draw and an overcard. If I was in the pot against two queens, I’d be about even money to win it. So I’d play my hand like I would if I had two small connecting cards that were suited, say the 9? 8?. That is, I’d play it fast and try to win the pot on the flop, because once again, I’d have two shots to win.
But that’s where I draw the line, with an ace or a king and another suited card. But when it comes to queens on down, if the two cards don’t connect, I consider them trash hands—even if they’re suited, such as Q? 4? or J? 6?.
Hands with non-connecting and offsuit cards such as J? 5?, 10? 3?, 9? 4? are obviously garbage. But so are offsuit hands that a lot of people play because you can flop a straight with them, such as K-9, Q-8, J-7, 10-6, 9-5, 8-4, 7-3, and 6-2. I don’t play these hands because even if I got the best flop I could to them—other than a full house—I could get broke by running into a bigger straight. Consequently, I never play a hand when I have the top and bottom cards of a straight, except when I’m in position.
I always make exceptions when I’m in position, even with the trash hands. For example, if I were on the button with a hand like A-8 offsuit, I might call a raise before the flop if enough people, say four, were in the pot in front of me and I didn’t think there’d be any more raises. I might call a small raise and take a flop with a trash hand because it’s a good percentage play. I’d be trying to make a full, trips, or two pair. But if I don’t get a real good flop to the hand, I’ll throw it away. I won’t get involved and burn up a bunch of money with one of those trash hands. I’m not going to call any bets on the flop. I’ll be raising or I’ll be gone.
If I were in position, I might even raise with a trash hand. More than that, I might play it fast after the flop, too. Say the guys in the early positions threw their hands away, and someone in a middle position limped in. Well, if I were on the button, I’d be in position, and I’d raise it regardless of what two cards I have. And if it was checked to me on the flop, I’d bet regardless of what flopped.
Obviously, I wouldn’t be playing my hand because of its value. Trash hands have no value. I might as well be playing with two blank cards in this situation because all I’m doing is playing my position and my opponent. Since he limped in, I’d assume that he’s got a weak hand to begin with, and if he misses the flop, I’ll be able to pick the pot up.
Other than the exceptional situations discussed above, trash hands are just not playable.

SHORTHANDED PLAY

A lot of times, you’ll be playing in a full or ring game, and before the night is over, you’ll find yourself playing shorthanded. As I already mentioned, you have to be able to change gears in this situation. You should play in the same basic style—aggressive—but you should realize that all the hands increase in value. This is particularly true of the big cards. And, in a shorthanded game, all the trouble hands become playable from almost any position.
In a shorthanded game, position is probably the most important thing. The reason is that you get to look at more cards and have to play more hands than you would in a ring game. You play your position more than your cards in a shorthanded game.
For example, when your game gets down to four-handed play, you need a better hand in the first two positions than you need in the last two. When you raise on the button, the other man has to act first, and that puts him at a big disadvantage. When the other man has to act on his hand first, it’s a great equalizer.
So in a shorthanded game you’d play your position using the same theories you would in a full game, but keep in mind that the values of the hands go up a few notches. The trouble hands become better hands because you don’t figure to be up against A-A, K-K, or A-K nearly as often as you might in a ring game.
You play more like you would with big cards. In a shorthanded game, the bigger your cards are, the better hand you’ll have. For instance, in a ring game, you might play two aces or two kings a lot slower after the flop because there could be a lot of people taking a flop to beat those big pairs. Whereas in a shorthanded game, two aces or two kings is a mountain of a hand and you can play them real fast after the flop. Consequently, these big pairs are much more valuable hands than they are in a ring game. What you’re trying to catch in a shorthanded game is big cards in position.

INSURANCE

The practice of taking insurance is not as common today as when I wrote the original Super/System, however you still see it sometimes, and you should have a general idea of what deals are profitable.
Many times when you’re playing no-limit hold’em a player will have all his money in the pot before the flop, on the flop, or even on fourth street. Since there are still cards to come and since no more betting can take place (if it’s a head-up situation), both players will generally turn their hands over so that insurance can be considered. I say generally, because there is no rule that says you must turn your hand over, but such a request is rarely, if ever, refused.
Insurance is a side bet that’s usually made between the two players involved in the pot or between one of the players involved and an insurance man who may or may not be an active player. The player with the hand that has the best potential to win the pot is offered or asks for some insurance as a way to protect his investment in the pot. But unless a mistake is made, it’s always a bad bet. As it is in life away from the poker table, the insurance man won’t be giving away anything. When he lays you a price on your hand, he’ll be getting the best of it. The price you’ll be getting will always be considerably less than the true price your hand is worth. The difference between the true value of your hand and the actual price the insurance man is willing to lay is his vigorish, also known as his edge or commission. I use the phrase “best potential to win the pot” because the best hand on the flop doesn’t always have the best winning potential. For example, if the flop was 7? 5? 4? and you had the 7? 6?, you’d be about a 2 to 1 favorite over an opponent with a pair of kings, say, the K? K?.
There are twenty cards in the deck that could win for you with two shots to catch any one of them. Your straight-flush draw gives you fifteen wins, and the three sixes and two sevens that are still in the deck give you five more wins. Of course, the assumption here is that your opponent’s hand doesn’t improve.
Through the years, I’ve heard a lot of discussion about whether you should or shouldn’t take insurance. My advice is to lay the insurance, but don’t take it because the best potential hand always has to take the worst of it. For example, if you’re a 3 to 2 favorite, the best you can usually get is 13 to 10 or maybe 7 to 5. So why take it? That’s the advantage you’re looking for to start with. If you take insurance, you’re giving up your advantage. You can’t argue with mathematical facts when you have the best of something. If you can lay 7 to 5 on a 3 to 2 shot, you should do it. But you shouldn’t take 7 to 5 when you’re a 3 to 2 favorite. However, I can understand if a man on a short bankroll considers taking insurance. I guess it would be okay to take the worst of it so you could stay in action. But if your bankroll allows, don’t take insurance—lay it.
I used to talk about a related subject with a very big and successful gambler I’ve known for many years. He said, “If a man came in and offered to lay me 10 to 1 on the flip of a coin for all the money I had in the world, I wouldn’t take it.” He said he just couldn’t liquidate everything he’s got, all of his property and his cash. He wouldn’t risk losing it all, which would be worth several million dollars. He wouldn’t do it even if he thought he could get hold of a few more million.
But I’d do it. I surely would. I’d just have to. I couldn’t pass up the opportunity to take 10 to 1 on an even money shot. I’d do it because I have enough confidence in myself that I’d be able to come up with more millions if I lost.

A FINAL WORD

Of course, I’m sure you understand that all the numerous possibilities have by no means been exhausted. No-limit Texas hold’em is a highly complex game. It’s hardly possible and certainly not practical to attempt to discuss the enormous variety of situations that could occur. And as you now know, there are certain questions I wouldn’t be able to answer definitively because many times, even I don’t know exactly what I’d do until I’m faced with the problem. Regardless of what other books or other players teach, there is no magical formula for how to play poker. As I’ve said, at such times, I go with my feeling, which is really a rapid analysis of conscious and subconscious thoughts.
Nevertheless, I’ve given you a lot of white meat, sophisticated techniques and strategies that are known only to a few world-class poker players. The average player has never had access to the kind of information you’ve just read. First of all, nothing as comprehensive as this has ever been written about no-limit hold’em. Even if it were, unless it was written by someone who has played and consistently won at a world-class level for many years, it would not be worth much. In fact, it could even be harmful. Having no information at all is better than having bad information.
You should do quite well at no-limit hold’em now that you know almost as much about the game as I do. The rest is up to you.

HOLD’EM SUPPLEMENT

The following tables are contributed by Richard Englesteen.

DOUBLE BELLY-BUSTER STRAIGHTS

There is a fourteen-card straight continuum since aces may be used in a big or little straight.

A 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 J Q K A
CHARTS 623 - 627

COLORFUL NAMES OF
VARIOUS HOLD’EM HANDS

A-A.........................................................................American Airlines
A-K..........................................................................................Big Slick
A-Q.............................................................................Doyle Brunson*
A-J..................................................................................................Ajax
A-10..................................................................................Johnny Moss
A-8...........................................................................Dead Man’s Hand
3-A.................................................................Baskin-Robbins
K-Q............................................................................Marriage
K-J.....................................................................................Kojak
K-9.................................................................................Canine
K-8...............................................................................Kokomo
K-7..............................................................................Columbia River
K-3........................................................................................King Crab
Q-J......................................................................................Maverick
Q´-J©..................................................................................Pinochle
Q-10...................................................................................Goolsby
Q-9....................................................................................Quinine
Q-7.............................................................................Computer Hand
J-6..................................................................................Railroad Hand
J-5....................................................................................Motown
5-10..............................................................................Woolworth
10-4......................................................................Broderick Crawford
10-3..................................................................................Weinberg
10-2.............................................................................Doyle Brunson*
9-8.....................................................................................Oldsmobile
6-9....................................................................................Joe Bernstein
3-9........................................................................................Jack Benny
2-9.........................................................................................Twiggy
8-8............................................................................Little Oldsmobile
8-5.......................................................................................Finky Dink
3-8...................................................................................Raquel Welch
7-6..........................................................................................Union Oil
5-7........................................................................................Pickle Man
7-2........................................................................................Beer Hand
6-3.........................................................................................Blocky
6-2...................................................................................Ainsworth
4-5.......................................................................................Jesse James
3-5...................................................................................Bully Johnson
2-4........................................................................Lumberman’s Hand
3-3...............................................................................................Crabs
6-6-6.......................................................................................Kotch
4-4-4....................................................................................Grand Jury

*The reason there are two hands named after me is because of what happened in the 1976 and 1977 World Series of Poker. In both years, I won with a 10-2. The A-Q has long been called “Doyle Brunson” in Texas because I try never to play this hand.