OK so after a weekend full of poker, I'm back at you today with Part III to Hot Hand #1, which if you'll recall takes place early on in a Pot-Limit Omaha tournament on full tilt (I may have mistakenly reported it as pokerstars originally, but same difference). Recall that after the flop, I held the nuts to the board with a 2-card inside straight, I bet the pot and found one caller. Then the turn card brought me a higher straight, but now the second-nuts instead of the stone nuts. I posed the question to you as to what you would do in this situation:

In the end, the commenters are fairly evenly split between checking here and betting out here. Those who advocate checking seem to cite the flush draw and the higher straight possibility out there as reasons to try to wait until the river to decide whether or not to commit fully to this pot. Those comments in favor of betting most often cited the need to protect my hand and to find out some information about what my opponent was holding. For my part, as I said in Part II of this post, I think the check on the flop warranted some consideration, despite my holding the nuts at the time, because the pot was so small on the flop that even a pot-sized bet was likely to get called by the drawing hands out against me. However, in this case after the turn card, I simply cannot bring myself to think I'm behind here. I think part of any winning Omaha strategy will require sometimes betting/raising the pot when a scare card falls, or just generally when one is not sure that he or she is holding the best hand. I have played enough poker, and enough Omaha, to know that, for me, I don't want to be that guy who checked the flop with the nuts, then checked the turn or made seeing another card cheap again with a possible higher straight draw and a flush draw out there, and ended up giving the cheap cards away that beat my nut hand from early on.

As I mentioned as well in the last post, especially in a draw-heavy game like Omaha, I just don't think that giving opponents inexpensive chances to draw out on me when I have the nuts is the right way to play this game. On the flop with a pot of only 60 chips, maybe, but now with 180 chips in the pot I know I wanted to bet hard, but the 180 chips is a still fairly small, fairly callable amount, and I want to get this guy out of the hand right now if possible. And, I was convinced after his flop call that he would bet out whatever hand he was calling with before if I checked it to him now. So I checked to him, with the intention of checkraising the size of the pot if he bet, and he did not disappoint me, betting 180 chips or the full pot. I quickly checkraised him to 720 chips, sticking with my strategy as I felt fairly confident I was ahead, and wanted to price this guy right into mucking his hand now before the river came and wrecked my hand. Yes, I know my opponent could have AQ and be ahead of me. But, when he has already called a pot-sized bet on the JT7 flop, I just don't see how I can reasonably put him on holding AQ. After the fact that is easy to do, but at the time, given his potbet-call on the flop, it certainly seemed far more likely than not that he was not holding AQ, and therefore I went ahead and checkraised the pot here.

And that's when he checkraised me the size of the pot. Right back at me.

Now what do you do here? This guy has just basically put his tournament life on the line with this bet. Yet, the only thing that beats my hand currently is AQ, and to call my pot-sized bet on the flop like he did with AQ would mean chasing just an inside straight draw on this board, along with possible flush draws. So, do I do like many of the previous commenters have suggested, and assume I'm beat and just fold the second-nuts here? Or do I call, which basically amounts to putting us both allin on this pot? What's the best move here?

I'll be back with the conclusion to this post shortly, but would love to get your comments on this, the most crucial part of the hand where I'm either sticking with my strong hand, or I'm succumbing to my opponent's aggression here on the turn card. And speaking of pot-limit Omaha tournaments, last night I final tabled one on full tilt -- I have a full writeup on my blog right now if you're interested in the details.

Yesterday I posted a question which was emailed to me by Dave Westbay regarding opinions on how a particular hand should have / could have been played. We had a number of responses in comments, and I received a large number of emails regarding the topic as well. I'm going to post my original response to Dave which was sent to him earlier in the week. As usual, I have a bit of a different take on the subject than most people, but I think it is good that we don't all agree. There certainly isn't only one style of play in poker, and by exploring different views we can expand our own thinking process. Here is what I wrote to Dave:

I don't totally disagree with how you played the hand - you had a high pocket pair and reason to believe he may be bluffing, but personally I would have played it different.

I have a few rules for myself. One is - (unless I'm very shortstacked) I will never CALL an all-in raise from someone else that will cause me to be (virtually) all-in unless I am absolutely sure I have the best hand - and I wouldn't feel that with JJ. I would, however, raise all-in myself with JJ, depending on position and other factors.

You need to be the one that is in control of the situation, not a caller to someone else's controlled situation. Fact is - it doesn't matter what he held. By raising all-in he was representing AA, KK, QQ, or AK - none of which you could (at least initially) beat except possibly the AK. The fact that he was a loose player doesn't matter in this situation - even loose players get good cards sometimes. With as many chips left as you had, I know that you would have been able to find better cards, or at least better position.
        
If someone were to say that going all in with Q-8, even suited, was not a good play on the villian's part, I would have to somewhat disagree. Let me clarify though - the reason I dont necessarily agree is because we simply dont have enough information about the table, players, and chip stacks to make that call. The actual cards semi-suck, yes, and he was in early position which is dangerous....but what we dont know is if he had reason to believe he could bully the table at that stage of the tournament, or how many chips the other players at the table had in comparision, or how tight/weak everyone was, etc. If he felt that he could simply bully the (rather significant) blinds, then it wasn't as terrible a play as may appear on the surface. Calling all-in with Q-8 suited would be a much worse play, but taking the lead and betting with it isnt quite as bad if you know all the other factors in play.
       
That all said though, I would never make the play the villian did, personally.

What it all comes down to is this: every single time I play a tournament, I ask myself if making a particular call/play is worth risking my tournament life over. The answer is almost always no. In this case, my answer would have been a definitive NO - especially since the blinds just passed and you would have prime postion for doing some bullying of your own. 

Just my opinion though!

Thanks to everyone for stating their thoughts on this subject. If anyone has another hand that they would like opinions on, feel free to email me via this link.

The following is a hand that reader / fellow poker blogger Dave Westbay ran across recently, and has been the subject of debate among a group of us. I'd like to see what you all think - would you have done the same in this situation? I will post my response to what I would have done with this hand in a follow up post after I hear back from some of you. 

I'd like to get some feedback on a hand I played tonight, to see what you all think. Here are the details, as best I can remember them. 

I'm playing in a live Amateur Poker League tournament. No money, no prizes on the line, but this is the Venue Grand Championship, and the winner goes on to the Regional tournament. It's toward the late stages, with blinds at T500/1000. I have T8900. There are still more than 16 players in the tournament. I post the small blind, and I pick up JJ. UTG folds, next player goes all-in. His chip stack looks about equal to mine. It's folded to me. I think for a long time, but I'm probably not thinking about everything that I should be. The player who went all-in has played a lot of pots and shown several marginal hands, so I think he could have pushed with a less than premium hand. He might be trying to bully the rest of us out. 

I should be actively trying to put him on a range of hands to see how they compare to mine, although I wasn't doing so at the time. If he's got two unpaired overcards to my Jacks, I'm ahead but not by much. If he has a bigger pair than mine, I'm way behind. If he has a lower pair than mine, I'm in front. It's going to cost me pretty much my whole stack to call him. Although I know he could have an overpair to me, I think he doesn't; he probably would have just raised instead of pushing, to keep some of us in the pot. If he doesn't have the overpair, then I am no worse than a coin flip. If I win this hand, I will have a huge stack. Finally, the chance to double up big becomes too much of a temptation, and I call. It turns out that I have him covered by 900. The BB, who has already posted 1000, calls with her last 1000. After we figure out the side pots, we turn our cards over. The villain has Qh-8h. BB has AJo. I'm ahead but BB has one of my Jacks. 

The flop is rags and no one pairs. The turn is a Q. The river is another rag and the villain takes the huge pot. 

My question, to myself and everyone else, is, should I have folded preflop? Since it took virtually my whole stack to call, I may not have been getting the right pot odds to put my tournament life at stake and make the call with that medium pair. Any higher pair would have been a much easier call. I feel like my decision wasn't a complete donkey move, but if I had folded I would have had a lot of chips to play with. As it was, I busted out just a few hands later. I'm not really looking for someone to say, "Hey, that wasn't such a bad play," just so I can feel better. I want to learn from the plays that I make, be they foolish or brilliant or somewhere in between. 

Please leave your responses in the comment field below, or email me directly via this link. Please note - any comments that are emailed may be reprinted in a follow up post.

(Reprinted with permission)

'LordOdie' submitted this question: 

I have been playing on pokerroom for a while now.  When I read all the different blogs, I see mentions of lots of different sites, but never pokerroom.  They seem to have more tourney's and players, but if all the 'pros' stay clear, should I too? 

There isn't really a simple answer for this.  I started playing at PokerRoom years ago, but only for play money, I never deposited real cash there. I moved over to Ultimate Bet for a while, mostly just due to the promotions they were running at the time. 

Eventually I started playing on PokerStars, and that is where I prefer to play now, though I have accounts at more than five other sites. 

I checked this afternoon, and PokerRoom had 17,000 players currently at tables, PokerStars had 44,000, and PartyPoker had 55,000. That is a big difference when you are looking for game selection and tournament options. 

I will throw this question out to the masses though. Where do you play, and why? If you avoid a certain site (like PokerRoom, for example) what are your reasons?

If you have a question of your own, please feel free to submit them in comments or through this link. It may take a few days for a response, but we will answer as many as possible. 

(Thanks, LordOdie)

Thanks to Matt W. for this question: 

What is the best poker simulation training software out there? I have seen Poker Academy and the Wilson software but they can be pricey. Does anyone know of a good free alternative or recommend one that won't break the bank?

I think it is best that this question goes out to everyone who has ever used poker simulators. Everyone seems to have a different opinion on products they have tried, so it would be interesting to hear a variety of responses from actual users. 

If you have used a poker simulator, please answer in the comments section or email me here as to which you prefer, why, and how much it costs to purchase. I will sum up the responses later in the week. 

If you have a question of your own, please feel free to submit them in comments or through this link. It may take a few days for a response, but we will answer as many as possible. 

(Thanks, Matt)

Thanks to Dave W. for this question:

Do you think that playing in play money games has much value in improving your play? I started on play money tables and only recently started playing for low-stakes real money (my first was the $20 Hurricane Katrina benefit tourney). Rather than risk any more real money, I would like to hone my skills at the play money tables. Do you think there is a huge difference in play between the fake and the real money games?        

Thanks for the question Dave. Like most things in poker, there is not one definitive answer for this. Most of us started on play money tables, and I actually revisit them often even now, simply for practice against a different set of players. 

I can't say that the players at these tables are necessarily worse, but they are often less experienced. This will actually benefit you in the long run. As your skills increase, your tolerance to loose, possibly wild play will also build. 

Low limit poker for real money doesn't really vary much from the play money tables. Again, a large number of players tend to play any two cards, so if you sit back and be very selective about which hands you get into, you will have the opportunity to scoop some large pots. 

Though it can be extremely frustrating playing against these loose, wild players, they are the ones that eventually allow us to make money in the game. We tag them as fish, and simply sit back and wait for a chance to strike. 

All that said, the most important thing you can do to improve your game is practice, practice, practice. I personally don't think it matters where you get your experience, as long as you are constantly building on what you have learned and focus on increasing your skills. 

Take each level very slowly, and don't move into real money until you feel comfortable. Once there, play from the bottom up. Start for as low of limits as you like, and increase your levels only when you feel ready and have the bankroll to support that decision.

(Thanks, Dave W.)

Thanks to Dave for this question: 

I have played numerous online STT and MTTs and best finish was 2nd.  My brother and I tried our first live tournament in Atlantic City.  We both made the final table out of 205 entrants.  He won and I took 8th.(Lost to my brother with JJ vs. K10.  He hit the K.)  Was this a fluke or has my online experience really made me a contender on the live circuit?

First of all, congratulations, those are pretty impressive results, especically for your first live tournament.

Since I am predominantly an online player (mainly just due to logistics) I have asked myself this question many times. Online experience can certainly prepare you for many aspects of live play, however it isn't enough to rely on. It is easier to answer this showing the positives and negatives of what you learn - and don't learn online:

(These are just a few - there are many others)        

In online poker you play a tremendous amount of hands per hour, which allows you more room to switch gears. You can decide if you want to play aggressive or tight because you have the luxury of waiting for prime spots. In live play, the pace is much different. You get way less hands dealt to you in each round of blinds, which doesn't allow you as much room to mess around - at least at the beginning. 

When you play a lot of online poker you will notice betting patterns, trends, and even some online tells. However, this is nothing compared to live play. It is much harder to learn the art of reading people, and you can be certain that there are many players who can see right through you. 

It is hard to pass judgment on another player, especially without seeing them play live, however to answer your question I will say this: Online experience has certainly helped your game. It isn't (usually) enough for you to be a true contender on a consistent basis, but it will provide a strong foundation for you to build on. Was is a fluke that you placed at the final table and your brother won? Possibly. However, rather than focus on the fact that you may or may not have got lucky then, keep building on your experience online and off, read as much as you can about the subject, and be willing to trade in your old ideas for new possibilities. Soon you shouldn't have to wonder, you will clearly know where you stand. 

If you have a question of your own, please feel free to submit them in comments or through this link. It may take a few days for a response, but we will answer as many as possible.

(Thanks, Dave)

I received this question from a reader named Jim:

I have been playing poker for over a year now, and I have had a problem with my tournament play. I play lower buy in events ($1 to $10) and conventional poker just doesn't seem to work for me. You have maniacs in the beginning of these tourneys pushing Ace rag or worse trying to chip up, and by the first break if run into a cold deck (which I have been recently) you are one of the shorter stacks and are relegated to coin flip situations anyway. How do you adjust your game to this? Or should I just save up until I can deposit a bankroll that will get me into the higher buy in events, where the play is a little more conventional. Any advice you have would be appreciated.

I'm going to answer the second part of that, first. Unfortunately, no matter what levels you play, you are going to find these maniacs. They are at the $100-$500 events almost as often as they are at the $1-$10 events, so saving up to deposit more of a bankroll is not going to help this particular problem. Many people have a misconception that the higher the level, the better the players are - it usually isn't true. The ironic thing is, no matter how frustrating they may be, these are the types of players you actually do want sitting across the felt from you. 

Rather than trying to avoid them, which isn't possible, you basically have two options. 

The first is to tighten up your game even more and only play prime hands or positional opportunities against them. When you are in a hand and have the best of it, you are going to get paid off in a big way since they can't seem to keep their chips out of most pots. Most of the time, these maniacs just end up knocking each other out in the first hour of a tournament, so by playing tight and smart, you will outlast them anyways. Even if you are a bit short-stacked, you are better off continuing to play tight rather than allowing yourself to land in coin flip situations. Protect your chips (no matter how few) until you know that you are making a smart play. 

Second, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em

Now I am not saying you should become a maniac yourself, but knowing when to switch gears and become aggressive is important in poker. One of the best books I have read about this subject is Killer Poker Online, by John Vorhaus. He fully details how to play strong, smart, aggressive poker, and may be able to help you recognize some of these opportunities. 

Remember that cold decks happen in poker, but eventually the cards will turn in your favor. Many players make the mistake of trying to jump levels/entries to combat their losses, but in the long run they just end up losing more. Stick to the levels you are currently comfortable with, and wait out the losing streak.

(Thanks, Jim)

The object of Pai Gow Poker is to beat the dealer. All players and the dealer receive seven cards, which they will use to construct two separate hands - one with two cards and one with five. These hands are ranked using standard poker rankings. 

The two-card hand is called the Low Hand or the Front Hand. The highest ranked two-card hand is AA.  Since only two cards are used, straights and flush hands are not possible to get. The five-card hand must always be equal to or higher in rank than the two-card hand. 

The five-card hand is called the High Hand, or the Back Hand. The highest possible five-card hand is five aces, which is formed by using the 53^rd card in the deck, the joker. 

The joker can be used as an Ace, as the missing card in a straight, flush, straight flush or royal flush. The joker can not be used to form pairs, three, four, or five of a kind, with any cards other than aces. 

In order for the player to win, his two-card hand and his five-card hand must be higher in rank than the corresponding two and five-card hands of the dealer. If the player does win both, he will win the amount of his wager, less a commission (usually 5%), which goes to the house. If the dealer and player each win one hand, it is a tie, and if the dealer beats both hands, the player loses the full amount wagered.

Reader Question:

Is there a 'best' way to play the low-limit games of no-fold'em limit hold'em so prevalent online? I've found that by tightening up my starting requirements I can be profitable, but at the cost of playing very, very few hands. An alternative is to loosen up in late position and join the throngs of limpers with Ax-suited in an effort to flop a flush / flush draw, but the variance involved is off-putting. Any thoughts? Or should I just focus on no-limit games and blast away?

CS:  Low-stakes Limit Hold'em online can be a frustrating experience. To be profitable, the easy answer is to simply tighten up and only play premium cards and premium position. This isn't usually enough action to keep the casual player's attention though, and quite bluntly - it can be very boring. 

I would never recommend that anyone loosens up his or her starting requirements, but you have to define what you want out of online poker. Do you want to play primarily for excitement, for profit, or for just the fun of the game? 

If you play just for fun and aren't serious about making a long-term profit, then by all means play whatever cards you choose, though I personally find that the game is much more fun when you win. If you are playing for excitement, then you would probably enjoy the small-stakes NL games, as they are certainly never dull. 

However, if you are serious about the game and are playing to build a bankroll or even to support yourself off your earnings, then adjusting to the dull, tight play is mandatory if you want to play Limit Hold'em successfully. Maybe mix it up by playing a different game now and then (i.e. Omaha or Stud) and throw in the odd NL game to add to your game roster. This will help break up the monotony of folding hand after hand, session after session.

If you have questions of your own, or would you like to reply to the above question, let your response in the comment area below.

It is time again to send in your questions regarding poker, a hand you played, advice on where or when to play, or about handling a certain situation at the tables. Our first question/response can be found here.

Send us any questions that you may have and our team will give our answers, as well as post the question to the other readers. 

Also, if you have learned something that has proved to be vital to your game, feel free to share that as well. Poker is a game that takes a lifetime to master, and there are times that we could all use some support. Often there is no right answer, but through debate with others we may learn to see other facets of the game. Don't hesitate to reply with any question/comment you may have.

Often, you will hear someone say that they were justified in drawing to a straight or a flush, based on pot odds.  This may sound mystical to the beginner, but it is really a simple guide as to whether or not to play your draw after the flop or turn.

Consider this scenario:

You are playing Limit Hold'em, and limp into an un-raised pot in late position, holding QJ of spades.  There are two limpers ahead of you, the small blind calls and the big blind checks, resulting in a 2.5 BB (big blind/big bet), or 5 SB (small blind/small bet) pot.  The five of you see a flop of Kh Td 3c.  The small blind bets out and the big blind calls.  The early position limper folds, and the player to your right calls.  You are last to act, and have a decision to make.

You must now compare this ratio to the likelihood of you making your straight.  Any Ace or Nine will give you the nut straight, and there are four of each that haven't been seen, so you have 8 cards which will make you a winner.  There are 47 unseen cards at this point (you've seen 3 on the flop and 2 in your hand), so the odds against making your hand on the next card are 47:8, or roughly 6:1.  Since the odds of you making your straight are better than the pot odds, you are correct in calling the flop bet.  You do so, and now there are 9 small bets in the pot.

Let's imagine that the turn card is the 6 of spades.  This card is a brick - a card that likely doesn't help anyone's hand.  Once again, the small blind leads out, but in this round the bet size doubles.  Because of this, it's often easier to divide the number of small bets in the pot after the flop by two, and work with big bet units.  So, our 9 SB becomes 4.5 BB for ease of calculation.  The bet by the small blind brings this to 5.5 BB, and the big blind calls as well, making 6.5 BB in the pot.  The player to your right now lays down his hand, and you must again decide whether to continue drawing.  Your odds of drawing your straight card are almost identical to what they were before - there are now 46 unseen cards, and 8 of them still give you the nuts.  46:8 = 23:4, or 5.75:1.  This is still better than your 6.5:1 ratio to call the bet, so you can call and see the river card.

What happens next, strangely enough, is immaterial.  Your decisions have already been made.  If you make your straight on the river, you will have the nuts, and at worst will split the pot.  If the river card misses you completely, you have an easy fold against any betting.  Only when you pair your Q or J on the river do you have a difficult decision - against one bettor, it may pay off to call, but if there is a bet and a call ahead of you, the likelihood that somebody has paired the K is too great - lay your hand down and save a bet.

An important tip to keep in mind is that an outside straight draw has 8 outs, while a flush draw has 9 outs.  In either case, 6:1 is close enough to calculate your drawing odds on the turn, and 5.5:1 will work for the river.  While this discussion has avoided other factors like the rake, redraws to flushes, and the like, it is all you need to know to start calculating pot odds with confidence in drawing situations.  Just remember to apply your knowledge at the table - your results will improve greatly.

Going on tilt is a state of mind that sometimes occurs while playing poker, causing you to play differently than you normally would. Many people only think of it as being a result of bad situations, bad cards, or bad beats, but it can also be the result of good situations and it is important to recognize both.  

When you have played strong, tight poker, only to lose pot after pot to players that call with any two cards, you may start to loosen up your starting requirements and play less-than-stellar cards yourself. This is one of the beginning stages of going on tilt - you have adjusted your game plan to suit those around you, but by doing this you are only strengthening their game and weakening yours. Often this leads to an all-out tilt where you can no longer recognize playable hands, and find it impossible to win a pot no matter how you play. If you begin to feel this way, it is extremely important to take a break for a few minutes, or even for a few days. Once you start thinking that you have to play more to make up for your losses, it is time to wrap that session and start fresh when your head has cleared. 

Another form of tilt is not as recognized, but it can be just as detrimental to your game. I discussed this in a previous post, but it bears repeating. If you win a tournament, take at least a short break between games, or you may be distracted by your elation. You are unlikely to focus on the cards properly until you have 'come down' a bit from the high of winning. When you are on a good run, a lucky streak, and or/winning consistently, you may begin to play over-confidently and start to think that you can't be beat, leading you to play cards that you normally wouldn't. This is also a state of tilt - though it doesn't seem like it at the time.  

Remember that you will always have both good and bad sessions in poker. Any time you begin to play emotionally rather than practically, acknowledge the approaching tilt and take a break for a while.

The past few days I have discussed the four stages of tournament play. Today, we have reached the Final Table.

My intention is not to tell you how to play tournaments, specifically the final table, but rather to give you an indication of what to expect. Making it to the final table can be both exciting and terrifying, especially your first time there. Your heart is beating a mile a minute, and it can be hard to focus on the task at hand. 

Your ultimate goal is clear - to win the tournament. However, there are still a number of steps you must take before you can walk away as the winner.

Once at the final table, every move begins to count more than ever before. If you play too weak, the other players WILL notice and will try to run you off pots and blinds. If you play too aggressively, well...there are certainly players and Pro's that believe you can't be too aggressive at a final table - this is a matter of opinion. I'm not going to argue that point, but I will caution you on a few things:

All the players are tired after playing for (usually) over four hours. Chances are they are feeling impatient and want the tournament over with, so may be making moves with lesser cards. Again, the blinds are huge at this stage, so you (and the others) don't have as much freedom to wait for premium hands. That said, if you are pushing aggressively with KJ or something similar, their loose call with A-rag could be enough to seriously dominate you. It is important to play smart against the short stacks. They are liable to push with just about anything to regain some chips, and in many ways are more dangerous than the chip leaders. 

Finally, the best advice I received after winning a tournament was: walk away. You are on a high, your decision-making abilities are affected, and worst of all - you feel invincible. You aren't. Though this is a great feeling in every other aspect, it is detrimental to your poker game. Resist the urge to buy in to another tournament right away, and take a moment to enjoy your victory. You have earned it.

The past few days I have discussed the first two stages of playing in a MTT.  Stage One, The First Hour and Stage Two - Making it to the Bubble.  

Stage Three - In the Money.  The first time you make it into the money on a multi-table tournament, it is pretty exciting. Now is not the time to celebrate or get careless though, here is where the real work begins. 

The first thing you must do is take a look at your stack size.  If you have a domineering chip lead, you have the luxury of either sitting back and waiting for prime hands, or you can become the table bully, scaring other players off pots. Either strategy works well, so know which suits your style of play best and use it.

If you are short-stacked, the ever-increasing blinds begin to matter more than ever. You may want to start choosing hands and pushing, since many players will be tightening up at this point and are likely to fold. Your other option is to wait for the best hand possible, though it could take several orbits to find one, and it may not be all that great when it does show up.

I play my most aggressive poker in this stage. Since my table image to this point in the game is usually fairly tight, I tend to switch gears and play a lot more pots. There isn't (usually) a lot of difference in pay between 200^th and 30^th, so I am willing to take more risks to bring myself closer to the final table.  It is crucial to watch the other player's stack size though, and pick your battles. Torment the smaller stacks and leave the larger ones alone unless you are very sure your hand will beat them.  It isn't worth battling it out with someone that can take you out with a single hand when you aren't 100% sure.

Tomorrow:  The Final Table

Yesterday we discussed the various stages of tournaments, and covered Stage One - The First Hour.  You can read it here. 

Stage Two - Making it to the Bubble. Once any rebuy opportunities have ended and a good number of (possibly weaker) players have been eliminated, your next goal is to make it to the bubble. Usually this is the top 10% of the field, so in a tournament of 2000 players, approximately 200 players will be left.

I consider this one of the most important stages to learn. Obviously, making it to the money is important to your bankroll, but learning to play this stage well will make you a better player overall. It takes a lot of time and practice to learn how to outlast hundreds (or thousands) of other players.

This is the marathon stage. Action usually slows down and you have to train yourself to pay close attention to what the other players are doing, whether you are in the hand or not. Even online, it is possible to pick up tells from the other players, and if you are watching closely they become quite clear. Watch the cards and how the other players react. Are you at a very aggressive table, where more than three or four players are involved in a lot of pots, or are most people folding to a single raise? Use this information to your advantage and learn to play the players and your position, rather than the cards you are dealt.

Your main objective in this stage is to make it into the money, but also to accumulate enough chips to enter the next stage in good position. Keep in mind, these are all floating goals, your master goal is always going to be to win the tournament, however this helps keep that from seeming like an overwhelming task. Think of it like this. If your goal in life is to become a millionaire, you don't just go out and become one, that would be (virtually) impossible. You would come up with a plan and follow each step until you eventually reached that goal over years of hard work. Tournament poker is no different. Break the game down, set small goals, and always keep your master goal in sight.

Tomorrow:  Stage Three - In the Money

Yesterday I asked if anyone had a poker-related question for us.  We will do our best to answer each one as well as ask for feedback from other readers. We have received our first inquiry:

Question:  I have a limited bankroll (about $500), and I'm thinking of consolidating it into one site - which would you recommend, and why? (Deposit bonuses would be a prime consideration for me). Thanks!

CS:  I get asked this question often, especially when someone wants to try online poker for the first time. Though I can't choose a site for you, I can provide some general guidelines. There are a lot of options, so we have to narrow down what you are looking for in an online site first. 

Since you mentioned deposit bonuses would greatly influence your decision, let's look at a few of the newer/smaller sites - Noble Poker, Full Tilt, and Titan. All three sites offer a 100% match bonus on your initial deposit (to a maximum of $700, $600, and $500 respectively). As far as deposit bonuses go - it doesn't get much better than this. 

However, before you throw your money into any one site, it is important that you go to each website and see the requirements for clearing the bonus. If you are only able to play online four or five hours a week, it could take you months to clear even a portion of your bonus. Also, some bonuses have a shelf life, and can expire before you have finished clearing them. 

Another factor to consider is this - the sites that are offering 100% deposit bonuses usually have a much smaller field of players. Will you be able to find enough games running to clear your bonus when you are able to get online? It could be detrimental to your bankroll if you have to play a higher level than you are ready for, just to clear some bonus dollars.  Conversely, if there are only low-limit games running, you will have to spend much longer clearing the same amount of bonus. 

Some of the larger sites such as Party, Empire, and Poker Stars also have a bonus incentive program, though the offer is usually around 20-25% instead. Though this is a lot less money, it may be more realistic for you to clear, and since the sites are so large you will have a much better spread of games to choose from.

Another factor I would consider is the actual game interface. Some are very cartoonish, while others are quite realistic. This is the site that you will have to look at as you check and bet, so be sure that it is pleasing to your eye and not a cause of distraction. Some sites also only offer certain games, so if you want to play Omaha or Stud in addition to Hold 'Em, make sure the sites spread these before signing up.

Personally, I would split the bankroll between two different sites. Take advantage of one of the 100% deposit bonus sites such as Noble, Titan or Full Tilt with half the bankroll, and use the other half to deposit into a larger site. This way you will always have a good choice in games to play.  However, if you are serious about consolidating into just one site to earn the maximum deposit bonus possible, research the number of players on each one, check out the game interface, and make sure they spread the games you are interested in playing before signing up. 

Readers:  Which site would you recommend?  Please submit your responses, as well as any additional questions in the comment field. 

Do you have a question regarding a hand you played?  Are you a beginner looking for advice on where or when to play? Are you a seasoned player curious how others would handle a certain situation at the tables? Send us any questions that you may have and our team will give our answers, as well as post the question to the other readers. 

Poker is a game that takes a lifetime to master, and there are times that we could all use some support.  Often there is no right answer, but through debate with others we may learn to see other facets of the game.  Don't hesitate to reply with any question you may have.   

Whether you play online or live, a bankroll is simply defined as an amount of money that you use exclusively for playing poker with. The money initially comes from another source, (your bank account, credit card, or through winning a free tournament), but your goal is to increase the bankroll through successful play rather than redepositing. 

To determine how much to start with, you must know how much you are willing to risk. After all, not everyone is successful at playing poker. Find an amount that you are comfortable with losing, and will not affect any aspect of your life if it is gone for good. The biggest mistake is thinking that you can always add more if you lose the starting amount. Though true, the goal is to increase your roll without ever having to add additional funds. Poker is a skill game, though luck does come into play often. Over the long run, smart, slow play should increase your bankroll gradually. 

Next you must know what your goals are. I have a friend who keeps $300 online as his bankroll, and withdraws anything over that amount once a month. He does not have any desire to play higher limits, therefore sees no need to build upon his starting amount. Most of us are greedier than that, or at the very least we get impatient and want to play the higher levels. If you move up before your bankroll allows such a change, you are at risk of losing it all. Is playing higher stakes your goal, or is it to make a few bucks on the side? 

Many professional players and authors of poker books recommend having a bankroll three hundred times larger than the big bet of the level you are playing at. So, with a $300 bankroll, you should be playing $0.50/1.00 limits. This (should) be enough to outlast those long losing streaks that are unavoidable, regardless of how good you are at the game. 

Though I know these rules clearly, I sometimes find myself getting bored with my current level of play and every now and then will test the fates at a (much) higher level than I should be playing. I am lucky I never lost a significant amount during these times, and was always able to get myself back on track after going down a few dollars. When I play at a level that is too high for my bankroll, I begin to play scared. It affects every aspect of my game. Now when I feel I want a change, I try to drop down a level for a day or so, and when I return to my normal level I get the same satisfaction as though I had moved up instead. 

There seems to be a lot of advice about analyzing your hands and calculating your odds before the hand. Has anyone given any advice with examples about how to analyze what you did incorrectly?

--Sharon

You've definitely hit upon a key element of improving your game. Calculating outs is one thing, but going over each decision point within a hand is crucial to finding weak spots. Besides going over your own hand histories, which can be downloaded and saved from most online poker sites, you can find someone who's opinion you trust to discuss your hands with. I'll often email a copy of a particularly tough hand to a friend and ask what he would've done in the same circumstance. You can even modify the hand history to hide the opponent's cards, so your poker adviser has the same information you had at the time you played the hand.

Of course, if you can't find a friend, you can always rely on the kindness of strangers. You can post your hand history or specific question to a poker forum such as 2+2 or rec.gambling.poker. The upside: There's no shortage of people willing to share their opinion and expertise. The downside: There's no shortage of people willing to share their opinion and expertise. You may have to evaluate each piece of advice for what it's worth. Also, before posting, take some time to search and read through previous posts, to see if your question has already been asked and answered, and to get a sense of the most useful way to format and ask about your situation.

By finding a community that you can turn to for advice, you can develop your poker vocabulary and improve your poker play. Try finding face-to-face colleagues first, but failing that, log on to the message boards and start talking.

Got questions? We've got answers. Send in your poker-related queries to ask.pplayer@gmail.com.  We read them all, and select the best to appear in our question-and-answer column, Ask pPlayer.