Tom, a reader from Florida, e-mailed the following question:

Is anything that is legal in poker, all right to do? Or are certain things legal, but unethical or in poor etiquette, and should be avoided?

This got me thinking about some past situations I found myself in. Let's look at a few of them.

1. Anything that is legal is all right to do. Agree or disagree?

2. Playing an online ultra turbo tournament, you take all your time each hand before folding, and play fewer hands than other tables. As a result, your blind comes around more slowly.

3. You encourage other players to play slow by using the chat box.

4. You take maximum time each play in a live tournament.

5. You comment on a hand after you fold, but while the hand is still in progress.

6. After being called on the river, you stick your hand in the muck even though a player at the table asked to see it. Does it make a difference if the player is in the hand at the end?

7. You show one or both cards on the river to get a reaction from your opponent.

8. You are one of three players left in a hand at a live final table and say something that influences play and results in a different outcome.

9. On the river you miscall your hand, getting a better hand to hit the muck.

10. Does it matter if your action in Question 9 was an accident of on purpose? Does it matter if the mucked hand is clearly retrievable?

Please e-mail me your thoughts on any of the above incidents and similar situations that you have encountered. Look for the results in a future issue.

Getting Off the (Jack) Pot. In response to a previous column about bad-beat jackpots, Steve in Las Vegas writes: "Bad beat jackpots ... endanger the integrity of an otherwise legitimate game of mostly skill, with enough luck thrown in to keep it truly interesting. Players, who know they are beaten but also know there is a possibility of hitting a jackpot, often stay in hands that they would otherwise fold."

Jim from California writes, "If players are stupid enough to pay one or two dollars extra per pot towards a lotto type jackpot, they should be able to do it. The only thing I regret is they are not playing in the games with a lower rake that I play in."

Limit Versus No-limit? (Part I). I am often asked whether a player should play limit or no-limit. What are the big differences in the two?

A few of my key differences are as follows:

1. Bankroll: In no-limit you can get wiped out in one hand, where in limit you can usually lose 10-12 times the big blind, depending on the number of raises allowed. You need a bigger bankroll to play no-limit that you do to play a limit game with the same blinds.

2. Starting hands: You can expand your starting hand list in no-limit because you can win a lot more since if you make a big hand. No-limit is a game of implied odds; fixed-limit is a game of big cards.

3. Betting on the river: In limit poker you only look at whether you will win more money in the long run on the river by betting, checking, raising, or re-raising. For instance, if you are a 90 percent favorite, but your opponent will only call you when you are beaten, then you should not bet.

More on this subject next time.

Mike Eikenberry got his undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Virginia, where he played varsity tennis and basketball. Founder of one of the leading national tennis camps, Mike is an avid amateur who has played both tournaments and live games for over 25 years. He can be reached at theeiks@comcast.net