The Poker Lab Rat

New bill to stop implementation of unworkable UIGEA regulations 

New legislation - H.R.5767 - introduced by House Financial Services Committee chairman Barney Frank and Republican presidential aspirant Ron Paul, if approved, will effectively curtail the further operation of the UIGEA.

According to a statement from Frank and Paul, HR 5767 introduced this week seeks to prohibit the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the Treasury secretary from “proposing, prescribing, or implementing any regulation that requires the financial services industry to identify and block Internet gambling transactions.”

Both Congressmen claim the UIGEA unduly infringes upon personal freedoms. “The ban on Internet gambling infringes upon two freedoms that are important to many Americans: the ability to do with their money as they see fit, and the freedom from government interference with the Internet,” Representative Paul said.

And on the same subject but from a different source, it is great to hear the professional players getting stuck into this crazy political situation:

According to a recent article in April’s Bluff Magazine, four proposed bills are currently “floating through” Congress that could help legitimize online poker in the United States. Howard Lederer (on the board of directors of the Poker Players Alliance) is quoted as saying that he “believes that poker players will get some tangible results by the end of next year”.

Howard Lederer, Chris Fergusson, Barry Greenstein, Chris Moneymaker, Annie Duke, Andy Bloch and Vanessa Rousso were among the top professionals as members of the Poker Players Association, that met individually with about fifty members of Congress.

Roussou is quoted as saying “I found that the majority of Congress people are actually misinformed on what poker is. They see the old image of smokey backroom gambling.”

“When politicians see a losing proposition, they will abandon it”, Lederer said. “Once we accomplish some sort of national regulatory framework for online poker, I don’t think the PPA is going anywhere. You look at the National Rifle Association or Christian Rights groups, and once they have success they don’t just disengage. I would imagine poker players will be active for some time to come.”  (The PPA has a membership over 900,000 members - and you can join too!) 

“The bottom line is if poker isn’t a game of skill then I’ve been getting lucky for 36 years” Robert Williamson III

The Poker Players Alliance (PPA) is an American nonprofit Interest group formed to “to speak with one voice to promote poker, and to protect the players’ rights. The PPA aims to get laws such as the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 overturned either through political or judicial means.

If you’re US based and looking for a good safe online poker room, check out the latest comparison of the top poker sites for Americans at PokerLabRat.com. 

In my last tip I wrote about running bad and the effect it can have on your mental state. Now I’m living it. If you’ve been following my $0 to $10K Challenge, you know it took me about nine months to turn $0 into $100 and another nine months to turn that $100 into $10,000. Even though I hit my goal, I decided to keep playing and rapidly built up to $28,000. Three months later I was down to $9K.

Obviously, I was on a very bad losing streak, but it wasn’t due to bad beats. I just kept getting my money in bad; every time I had Queens, my opponent would have Aces - every time I had AQ, they would have AK. That’s just how it goes sometimes, but getting your money in badly doesn’t always mean that you’ve done something wrong.

For example, if my opponent gets all his money in pre-flop when he’s got Kings and I’ve got Aces, does that mean he’s a bad player because he got his money in poorly? Or that I’m a great poker player because I got my money in well? Obviously the answer is no – if our roles were reversed I’d be the one going broke. We both played the hand correctly; the fact that he was behind doesn’t mean that he played it wrong. He was simply unlucky to get dealt Kings when I was dealt Aces.

Focusing too much on getting your money in good can actually be a part of playing badly overall. I hear a lot of people complain, “I always get my money in good, but I keep losing… I can’t believe it!” Most of these players just don’t remember the times they’ve gotten lucky with the worst hand. But some people actually do get their money in well a majority of the time. It may be hard to believe, but these people are experiencing the right percentage of hands they’re going to lose – it’s just that these losses result in the players getting knocked out of tournaments because they are playing too tight.

Suppose I’m playing heads up and I’m only going to go all-in with Aces, Kings or Queens. My opponent is pushing me around by raising every single hand and moving in on me with any two cards. Finally, I get a pair of Aces and he moves in again. Even if I win the hand, just think about all the chips he’s taken away from me while I was waiting for my high pocket pair.

If I’ve lost 1,000 chips to him before I put my last 1,000 in the pot - even though I have my money in good - I’m only going to win 1,000 chips back. So, I’m actually employing a poor strategy by waiting for hands that don’t come around often enough because even if I win this hand, I’m only going to break even - and there’s no guarantee that I’m going to win. Plus, the chips my opponent is putting into the pot have been accumulated from all the folding I’ve been doing, so he’s now freerolling even though he’s behind in the hand.

Great players are going to get their money in bad once in awhile, especially if they’re playing against someone who’s playing way too tight. However, they’re actually going to make money over the long run because of all the small pots they win when their opponents are unwilling to challenge their raises without a strong hand. What this means is that if you try too hard to get your money in good all of the time, you’re susceptible to being bluffed and are going to lose more often over a long period of time.

Losing stings, especially when it seems like you’re getting your chips in badly with every hand you play. Still, if you keep your calm and avoid going on tilt, it’s possible to weather a rough patch without making drastic changes to your game. Keep your focus on playing well. Even if you do find yourself “getting your money in bad” from time to time, you’ll end up a winner in the long run.
Chris Ferguson

Chris plays online poker exclusively at FullTiltPoker.com. You can join him at a table!

PS: Have you checked out the latest software upgrade at Full Tilt?

Full Tilt Poker released two major changes to their poker room late Feb 2008: the addition of Tournament Dollars (T$) & an Auto Top-Up feature for cash games. You can trade in your T$ to enter other tournaments when you win a satellite entry into one you can’t/don’t wish to play in - or eventually cash them in for $.

There were also a couple of smaller additions, including the addition of a “Sit Out Next BB” box in ring games & the ability to view Player Notes in both the Main and Tournament lobbies. All very useful stuff.

For more info on FullTilt Poker read the latest March poker room review on Full Tilt here at PokerLabRat.com.

Players from around the world are welcome at FullTiltPoker, including Americans!

In 1964, Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart tried to define what may or may not be considered obscene under US law. In the end, he determined that no definition existed, but that when it comes to obscenity, “I know it when I see it.”

The same holds true when you’re talking about running badly at the poker table. You may not be able to identify what’s going wrong, but you know its happening. As far as I’m concerned, there’s no single definition or criteria for “running bad” because it means something different to everyone. For some players, it’s posting 10 or 12 losing sessions in a row. For others, it’s losing a dozen coin-flips during a single session. “Running badly” depends on the individual and on the metrics they’re using to judge their performance.

Whatever the definition is, the fact remains that everyone runs bad at one time or another. What separates successful players from those who go bust is how they handle themselves and their bankrolls when their cards go dead. For me, running bad doesn’t mean having a few losing nights or taking a few bad beats over the course of a session. That’s variance and it’s an inevitable part of the game. In my mind, running bad is something bigger that happens over the long term.

If you’re not sure whether you’re really running bad or not, start by stepping back and analyzing your results over a statistically significant timeframe. If you see a consistent pattern of losing sessions over a matter of weeks or months, then it’s likely that you’re having some real problems with your game. The key to getting back on track is figure out what’s actually going wrong.

For many players, running badly is a vicious circle; they suffer a few losing sessions and begin to tilt, which leads them to alter their playing styles in order to change things up. Soon, they do actually start playing badly, which leads to more losing sessions, and a continuation of their downward spiral. They lose because they’re running badly and they’re running badly because they’re losing.

If you look at your game and believe that you’re actually playing well but are just getting unlucky, then maybe you are. Aces get cracked by lower pairs. Sets get beaten by flushes, and hands get drowned on the river more often than you might think. My advice in these situations is to walk away from the game for a while. Take a break, regroup, and come back when you’re mentally refreshed and are ready to start playing again. Don’t, however, begin changing your game to compensate for bad luck. Focus on the fundamentals, look for good starting hands, and try to play the most solid poker you can. In time, your luck will change.

Whatever you do, however, don’t try to step up in levels in order to try and recoup your losses. I’ve seen many players go bust at times like these because they’re too focused on trying to rebuild their bankrolls by gambling rather than by playing smart poker and moving down to play at a lower level. Think about it; if you’ve been losing, chances are that you’re playing on a smaller bankroll than normal, which means that you’ll be risking a higher percentage of your remaining funds by playing at higher stakes. With a smaller cushion behind you and more of your bankroll at risk, it doesn’t take long for things to go from bad to worse and for you to lose everything you had left.

On the other hand, by moving down a level or two, you’ll be risking less in the short term while you try to rebuild your bankroll. Sure, the pots you win may not be as big as those you win at higher levels, but weighed against the odds of going broke, it’s a trade-off I’m willing to make. What’s more, by moving down, I may only have to play at a lower level for a month or two to recover my losses whereas if I go broke after moving up, it could take me a year or more until I’ve recovered. That’s a pretty persuasive argument if you really value your time.

While I can’t tell you whether you’re really running badly or not, I can tell you that your mental state does impact your game. If you’re feeling good, chances are you’ll play well and, if you’re not, chances are you won’t. Rough patches are part of the game and learning how to handle short-term adversity without losing your confidence or your bankroll will make you a better player in the long run.

Chris Ferguson

Chris Ferguson plays online exclusively at Full Tilt Poker - join him at a table sometime soon!

Check out how we rate Full Tilt Poker in a detailed poker room review here or compare FullTilt Poker with other top rating US player friendly online poker rooms.

Poker wouldn’t be poker if players didn’t get to exorcise their bad beats in public afterwards. Here are some examples of bad beats – those unlikely little twists of fate - from WSOP play. (This posting courtesy of Australian owned & US-friendly online poker room, CarbonPoker.com)

Doyle Brunson versus Jesse Alto (1976)
Brunson won a big pot, he called a raise from the steaming Alto with 10s-2s to see a Ah-Js-10h flop and called a bet on the flop. When the 2s fell on the turn, Brunson moved all-in with two-pair, but Alto already had that on the flop with A-J in the hole, and it took the 10d on the river to seal it for Brunson (he also won a year later with the 10-2, making two pair on the turn to beat his opponent’s flopped two pair).

Hal Fowler versus Bobby Hoff (1979)
Hoff raised with A-A and Fowler called. When the flop came J-3-5 rainbow, Hoff bet half of his remaining chips and Fowler called again. The turn fell a seemingly innocuous 4 and Hoff bet the rest, only to be called by Fowler who had stayed the whole way with 7-6 off-suit and got a lucky straight!

Chris Ferguson versus TJ Cloutier (2000)
When the two great players got heads up, Ferguson had a 10-1 chip lead, but Cloutier chipped away, and eventually managed to take the lead away from Ferguson, who went slightly on tilt after suffering such an onslaught.

Cloutier sensed it was time to go for gold, and moved all-in with A-Q after a raise from Ferguson. The move paid off, as Ferguson made a slip and called with A-9. A flop of 2-K-4 was no help, nor was the turn, (another K). However the river came a fateful 9 to seal the victory for Ferguson.

TJ Cloutier was philosophical afterwards: “He thought he had to beat me in a major pot, so he just decided to go with the hand. Obviously, Chris thought that if he caught the Ace, he’d have a hand, but he was in horrible position…and you know what? O saw that nine coming before the dealer even peeled it off. It was as though I was looking right through the deck”.

“Should I quit my job and play professionally?”

“Should I drop out of school and just play poker full time?”

 I get these questions all the time and I always give the same answer: “Unequivocally, absolutely not. No way.”

Clear enough?

If you want to explore being a professional poker player, you have to start out doing it part time. Spend your off hours thinking about poker and studying the game. Read and play and learn.

Before you even think about quitting your job to play full time, you should be making more money at poker than you are in your current employment. Don’t think that one big tournament win provides all the evidence you need that you’re ready to play professionally. You should be showing consistent profit over a period of at least six- months. Only at that point should you even entertain the idea of becoming a full-time pro.

Even then, you should be wary about taking such a step. Poker is a great pastime, and playing it casually is a lot of fun when you love the game. But when you become a pro, you have to play poker five or six days a week. In time, playing cards will start to feel a lot like a job. I happen to love every occasion I get to play, but for many people, it can become a grind.

On the tournament circuit, you can play well and still go months - or even years - without a big cash. In ring games, the hours can be brutal. When you’re a cash-game pro, you want to be playing when the other players are off their game. This means you should start late, when people are getting tired and gambling a little more than they should. So you might play from 11PM through the morning, and sleep most of the afternoon. Keeping these kinds of hours can be difficult for those who want to maintain a more traditional social life.

Another risk is that you may not play enough. It can take a lot of self-discipline to put in enough hours at the table. With no boss on your tail, you might find it tough to put in the hours that you need at the times that are most profitable.

Before you make drastic changes to your life - before you even ask the questions posed at the start of this article - you should know that poker will work for you. You should have long, profitable periods that serve as evidence of your abilities. You should have put in enough hours to know that you can really enjoy the game, even when it becomes the center of your professional life. You should know that you can endure some long, tough, unlucky stretches.

If you’re really sure you’ve got what it takes and poker does become your career, I look forward to meeting you at the table.

Chris Ferguson

Chris plays exclsively online at FullTiltPoker.com. Join him at a table soon! US players are still welcome…

Read our comprehensive review of FullTiltPoker online at PokerLabRat.com here or compare FullTilt to the other top poker rooms still welcoming US Players here.

“I had a losing streak there and had to go down to $5/$10. That was tough.”

I’m almost a year into an experiment on FullTiltPoker.com. I’m attempting to turn $0 into a $10,000 bankroll. With no money to start with, I had no choice but to start out playing Freerolls. Starting out, I’d often manage to win a dollar or two, but I’d quickly get busted and have to start over again. It took some time but, after awhile, I was eventually able to graduate to games that required an actual buy-in.

Even today, people don’t believe it’s really me when I sit down at Full Tilt’s small stakes games. They ask what I’m doing down here, and often tell me stories about how they turned $5 into $500 or $100 into $1,000. Usually, these stories end with the person telling me that they went broke. There’s no surprise there. These folks tried to quickly build a bankroll by gambling. They’d play in a game that was beyond their bankroll and, if they happened to win, they’d move up to a higher limit and risk it all one more time. Inevitably, they’d lose a few big hands and go broke.

For me, this experiment isn’t about the money. It’s about showing how, with proper bankroll management, you can start from nothing and move up to the point where you’re playing in some pretty big games. I know it’s possible because I did it once before, turning $1 into $20,000.

To ensure that I keep my bankroll intact, I’ve adopted some key rules:

• I’ll never buy into a cash game or a Sit & Go with more than 5 percent of my total bankroll (there is an exception for the lowest limits: I’m allowed to buy into any game with a buy-in of $2.50 or less).
• I won’t buy into a multi-table tournament for more than 2 percent of my total bankroll and I’m allowed to buy into any multi-table tournament that costs $1.
• If at any time during a No-Limit or Pot-Limit cash-game session the money on the table represents more than 10 percent of my total bankroll, I must leave the game when the blinds reach me.

I think a lot of players would do well to apply these rules. One great benefit from this approach to bankroll management is that it ensures you’ll be playing in games you can afford. You’ll never play for very long in a game that’s over your head because, when you’re losing, you’ll have no choice but to drop down to a smaller game. You can continue to sharpen your game at that lower limit until your bankroll allows you to move up and take another shot. These rules also prevent you from being completely decimated by a bad run of cards.

Dropping down and playing lower limits is difficult for a lot of players. They view it as a failure and their egos get in the way. Many want to remain at the level they’d been playing and win back their losses. But this can lead to some pretty severe tilt - and that can go through a bankroll in a hurry. I know that dropping down was difficult for me in my run from $1 to $20,000. When I first played in the $25/$50 game, I lost. Sticking to my rules, I dropped down to the $10/$25 game. I had a losing streak there and had to go down to $5/$10. That was tough. After playing $25/$50, a $5/$10 game was boring to me.

But I had the discipline to stick to my rules, and that motivated me to play better at the lower levels. I really didn’t want to lose any more because I knew the consequences: I’d have to play even lower and work even harder to get back to where I’d been, which could take as long as a month. If you ever find yourself bored or frustrated playing at the lower limits, you’re obviously not playing well. Take a break from the game. Often, stepping away can give you a fresh perspective and heightened motivation to play well when you return.

There are a couple of more tips I’d like to share regarding bankroll management. First, you should never play in a game that is beyond your bankroll simply because the game seems to be soft that day. It’s never soft enough to risk money that puts your bankroll in jeopardy. The other point is that you should avoid playing in games that are at the top of your bankroll limits, when a lower game offers more opportunity for profit.

I’m confident that by sticking to these sound bankroll management rules, I’ll make it to my $10,000 goal. These rules are sure to help you as well, as you pursue your own poker ambitions. So, if you want to start your own quest - or play against me while I’m continuing with mine - come open a free account at FullTiltPoker.com and look for me online. But hurry, because I’m hoping I won’t be in the lower limits for too much longer.

Chris Ferguson

“One essential element of playing winning poker is forcing your opponents to make difficult decisions.”

I often get asked about my playing style. Rather than answer the question myself, I’m more interested in what my opponents say. And I’ve heard it all: “You’re too tight.” “You’re too loose.” “You’re tight aggressive.” “You’re too passive.”

Actually, I never hear that last one, but I’ve heard all the others, which makes me believe I must be doing something right. Loose, tight, aggressive - my style is that I’m all of the above, depending upon the circumstances.

One essential element of playing winning poker is forcing your opponents to make difficult decisions. That’s why raising is almost always better than calling - because it forces an extra decision on your opponents. To take this a step further - you’ll win more money by forcing your opponents to make decisions when they are out of their comfort zones.

Here are some examples:

Your opponent is on your left, playing too tight before the flop. You want to punish him for this. The best way to do that is to raise more often, and be more aggressive. Either you end up stealing a lot of blinds, or he adjusts his play.

If you get the blinds? Great! If he adjusts? Better! It’s the best outcome you can hope for. If he starts playing more hands pre-flop, you now have a real edge. Anytime your opponent changes his pre-flop playing style, he’s going to run into trouble later in the hand. A guy who usually plays nothing but very strong hands isn’t going to know what to do with weaker holdings on the turn and river.

If a tight opponent raises in front of you, wait for a stronger hand to call. By playing tight when you are acting behind your opponent, you avoid losing money to his stronger hands. Again, if your opponent catches on, you’re forcing him to play more hands up front, and you can outplay him after the flop.

What about the guy who plays too many hands? If you’re acting first, you want better starting hands than normal. Most of the value of a marginal hand comes from the chance that your opponent will fold immediately. If your opponent has never seen suited cards he doesn’t like, the value of your marginal hand decreases because it’s unlikely he’s going to lay his hand down. He may win more pots preflop, but this is more than offset by the extra money you’re going to make when you do see a flop with your stronger hands.

If a loose opponent raises you, you can call — or even raise — with weaker hands, and raise with hands you’d ordinarily just call with. By taking control of the hand, you can pick up more pots later. Again, you are daring him to change his style. If he doesn’t, you’re getting the best of it. If he does, he’s a fish out of water, prone to making mistakes later in the hand.

It’s important to have a lot of tools in your arsenal. First, it’s helpful in being able to adjust to your opponents and force them out of their comfort zones. Additionally, it will enable you to take advantage of your own table image when you have already been labeled as a tight or loose player, and to adjust accordingly.

For example, Gus Hansen and Phil Ivey are known as extremely aggressive players. The only way they have been able to survive with that image is by being able to adjust to different opponents and to slow down occasionally, when appropriate. I have seen this happen sometimes just before an opponent starts reacting to their aggression. They are somehow able to sense what is happening, and change their games accordingly. Other times, they won’t adjust much, and force their opponents to try and beat them at an unfamiliar game.

To best take advantage of this, pay attention! To everything. All the time. Not just when you’re in the hand, but especially when you’re not in the hand. Every hand your opponent plays gives you valuable information about how he thinks, and how he’s likely to play hands in the future.

If there’s an expert at your table, watch how he plays. See what hands he expects to work, think about how he plays them, then try incorporating it yourself. See how he pushes weaker players out of their comfort zone. Paying attention is one of the best ways to learn, and a great way to move up the poker food chain.

Chris Ferguson

Chris like many professional poker players plays online at FullTiltPoker.com. You can meet him across a table - he’s friendly and seems to enjoy poker room chat - even with players who are still trying to master the game!

“Poker is like real estate. The three most important factors in deciding how much to raise are: Location, location, location.”

I never get tired of saying it: If you’re the first to enter the pot in a No-Limit Hold ‘em game, never call. If you aren’t prepared to raise, throw your hand away.

Why, you ask? Simple. By raising, you put pressure on the blinds and the other players at the table, making them consider just how strong their hands really are. Chances are that by raising, you’ll force marginal hands to fold before you even see the flop, limiting the number of players you have to beat through the rest of the hand.

OK, with that out of the way, the next obvious question becomes: How much should I raise?

To that, I say; it depends. First off, you shouldn’t allow the strength of your to hand affect the size of your raise. A tough poker game is like real estate. The three most important factors in deciding how much to raise are: Location, location, location.

You always want to make your opponents’ decisions as difficult as possible. In choosing the size of your raise, you want to give the big blind a tough decision between calling or folding if the rest of the table folds around to him.

Raising from early position is to advertise a very strong hand - one that can beat the seven or more other players who still have to act. Since you are representing such strength, it doesn’t take much of a raise to convince the big blind to fold. Also, since your hand is so strong, you actually don’t mind a call from the big blind anyway. The real reason for a small raise is that you have so many players acting after you, any of whom might wake up with a monster and re-raise you.

When you raise in late position, you’re representing a hand that can beat the two or three remaining hands. This gives you a lot more freedom to raise with marginal hands, but your raise must be bigger or the big blind can call too easily. Another reason to raise more from late position is that you’re trying to put pressure on the big blind to fold, not call and, more importantly, you don’t have as many remaining opponents who can re-raise you.

One of the most common mistakes in No-Limit Hold ‘em is coming in for a raise that’s too big. In early position, you want to keep your raises at about two times the big blind. With four to six players to act behind you when you’re in middle position, raise to about two and a half big blinds, and raise to about three times the big blind from late position.

If you’re representing a big hand by raising from early position, it stands to reason that you’ll only get played with by huge hands. Why risk four, five or more bets to win only one and a half bets in the blinds when you’re often going to be running into monsters along the way? If you’re holding A-Q rather than A-A and a player comes over the top, you can lay it down without having risked much.

Some beginners raise more with their strongest hands to build a bigger pot or raise less with these monsters to get more action. Instead, I recommend that you play your starting hands the same way no matter what you have. With A-A or A-J, raise the same amount so you’re not telegraphing the strength of your hand to watchful opponents. An exception would be if you know your opponents aren’t paying attention and you feel sure that you can manipulate them.

These numbers need to be modified if there are antes. You should generally add about half the total antes to any raise. Your early position raise should be two big blinds plus half the total antes, and three big blinds plus half the antes for your late-position raises.

There are many loose live games these days. If you find yourself in one of these games and you can’t steal the blinds with a normal raise, tighten up your starting requirements slightly and make larger raises. If this raise still can’t take the blinds, don’t tighten up anymore, but choose to raise an amount that you expect to get called once or twice behind you. Since your opponents are playing too loose, take advantage of it by building bigger pots when you think you’re getting the best of it.

The last exception is when you’re short-stacked. If making your typical raise means putting over a quarter of your stack in the pot, just go ahead and move all in instead. Betting a quarter of your stack before the flop commits you to calling just about any re-raise or, at the very least, it gives you a very tough decision. Moving all in here instead of raising less forces the tough decision on your opponents and eliminates one of your tough calling decisions. All of which brings us back to my first principle: Avoid being the one to just call.

Chris Ferguson

Chris is a member of Team FullTilt and plays online exclusively at FullTiltPoker.com. Get to known more about him and other top professionals by joining a table soon. (Tables and tournaments with a pro seated are highlighted RED in the poker room lobby)

We’ve given in to popular demand and called on a couple of top poker professionals to answer the question “Which are the best poker books to read to improve your play?”

It should be noted, however, that many pros are not big fans of poker books. There is no secret formula that guarantees you always win, nor a certain technique to win the most money… time at the table whether online or in-the-flesh is by far the best teacher.

That said, we - and they - still think you might want to add some of all of these titles to your library.

As avid poker players we are confident that you can never know enough about this great game - and any new insight may be the difference between winning a little and winning a lot! 

This new page on PokerLabRat.com features the best poker books as recommended by Chris Ferguson, Steve Brecher, Perry Friedman, Erik Seidel and more…

>>GO TO Poker Books Recommended by the Pros

“Playing big draws aggressively against multiple opponents can create very profitable situations. ”

In Limit Hold ‘em, it is not uncommon to see pots that are contested by four, five, or even six players. This happens with some frequency at lower limits, especially when playing with those who haven’t learned the virtues of a tight-aggressive style of play.

In multi-way pots, draws become especially powerful, and playing big draws aggressively against multiple opponents can create very profitable situations. For example, say that you’re dealt As-8s on the button. Three players limp before the action gets to you, and you decide to limp as well. Both blinds call, so a total of six players see the flop of 4s-7s-Jc. You have no hand at the moment, but you do have the nut flush draw.

On the flop, the small blind bets and three players call. What’s your best action?

Clearly, folding would be wrong. With two cards to come and nine outs, you’ll make the nut flush roughly 35 percent of the time, making you only a 2:1 dog. With six small bets going in the pot pre-flop and four going in on the flop, you’re getting pot odds of 10:1.

You might be tempted to just call and see what the turn brings but, in fact, raising in this situation gives you better value. The pot is getting large and it’s likely that all your opponents are going to call. Even those who have nothing more than second pair or a gutshot straight draw may feel that their pot odds are favorable enough to justify calling the second bet. If your raise gets called by four people, you’ll be getting great value. You’d be getting 4:1 on your money when you’re only a 2:1 underdog – a clear win for you.

The raise might also work well for you on the turn and river. By acting after the flop, there’s a chance that the other players will check to you on the turn. This gives you the option of checking and taking a free card if you don’t make your flush.

The level of aggression that you show with a draw will largely depend on your position. To show how your play might change with position, imagine you’re in a hand with the same hole cards (As-8s), the same number of players (six), and the same flop (4s-7s-Jc). This time, however, you’re not on the button but are in the big blind instead when the small blind bets out. Here, you want to encourage the other players in the hand to put as much money in the pot as possible. If you raise, you’re probably going to force players with second pair or a gutshot to fold, so your best option is to call. Give your opponents every opportunity to throw money in the pot.

Finally, let’s look at how you might play the same cards when you’re the first to act. If you have a nut flush draw in the small blind and there are six players in the pot, go ahead and bet. It’s a favorable situation for you, so you want to make sure that some money goes in the pot. When out of position, I’ll usually follow-up my flop bet with another bet on the turn no matter what card hits. Then, if I miss again on the river, I can decide whether or not I want to bluff at the pot. If I’m against only one or two players on the river, I’ll usually bluff. If there are five players left in the hand, I won’t bother. It’s too likely that someone will call.

You can make a lot of money playing draws in low-limit Hold ‘em. Just remember that you want as many people contributing to the pot as is possible, which means that in different positions, you’ll need to do different things to get the most out of your draws.

Chris “Jesus” Ferguson

>>Since he started playing in the World Series, Chris Ferguson has won more bracelets (5), made more final tables (25), and had more money finishes (42) than any other player. He has earned more than $4,000,000 playing poker in the WSOP and WSOP circuit alone.

If you want to learn more about Chris, join him at the table on FullTiltPoker.com.