+1 to this is a great idea for a thread.

Assume we are in early position with no raises or limps in front of us at the type of table where preflop raises are rare and 2-4 limpers plus the blinds are common, creating 4 to 6 players seeing the flop. Assume at least 2 players are usually getting to the river and often getting to showdown when they do.

With little suited broadways like ATs, KTs, QTs, JTs, KJs and QJs would you limp and call one raise with these up front?

What if it's unexpectedly raised and reraised behind you? Would you coldcall 2 bets if you were likely to get 5+ players to the flop even if there was a chance for a cap, but fold for two bets if not?

What about big suited broadways? Will you raise AKs and AQs almost regardless of the table conditions? What about AJs or KQs? Would you cap any of these if it was rasied and reraised behind you?

I'm not a great player but I actually like your ranges there. I would raise 66, 98s and 87s in that situation as well because they're very easy to play postflop. I'm assuming I'm not worried about a limp-3-bet from the limpers, and if the TAG 3-bets it's because he has a monster hand, making *our* hand even easier to play postflop. I'm also not overly concerned about the TAG 3-betting because the limpers will either fold, creating dead money, or they'll call, giving us a bigger pot to win if our hand flops a monster.

I think I like your ace ranges, not because I fear domination, but because a pair of 7s or 9s actually has a decent (though not great) chance to win at showdown.

Raise imo.

Raise A8s, AJo, K9s, KQo, QTs, JTs imo.

I'm only folding the worst of the worst here like J3o, T4o, 94o, 83o, 73o, 62o, 52o.

Even from UTG, UTG+1 and UTG+2? Even if UTG raises are only getting called by the BB and maybe 1 or 2 other people and you have to play postflop out of position with an easily dominated hand? What's the upside? I'm not trying to be a smartass, just trying to understand.

At a tough table, I might fold the weaker stuff mentioned above from utg or utg+1, but I'm willing to go out on a limb with those hands without that read.

i fold Q6s cause probably lot of Queens are dominated and if we hit a a pairs of 6 its pretty easy to make a mistake 3 way till the river ( pair of 6 and realizing our equity till the river is hard...).
i would be more inclioned to call HU Q6s!

i call the other 2 hands cause lot of c/r draw bluff potential for balancing my big hands ( i do not 3bet in BB HU or way).
They are easy to fold when u miss the flop as well.

+1

Vs 2 bad players no need to balance your range so i only raise for value and the highest suited connectors for big draws and good top pair potential.
Something like 99+,ATs+,AJ+,KJs+QJs+.
I overlimp the rest except the very worst hand like T2o,38o,etc.

Seriously, if you ask those questions wich imo are really basics, you should read SSHE (small stakes holdem).
Its all in there for your questions.
ps: i am not being a smart a$$, for your bankroll it should be a must.

imo you should only call and not fold with those because you have a weak drawing hand multiway , wich if they go to the river a lot ( it should happen because they are bad by limping) you only win by hitting your hand and never by bluffing.
Why costing yourself money by putting more money in the pot pf by raising with hands you probably wont be able to win by bluffing and with weak Show Down Value with a pair of 8 or 7 that will get outdrawn a lot by the river with 1 or 2 players going to the river often...

Huge difference between KJs here and 87s for example...

You usually use low sc by raising for deception vs good players or HU pot since lot of chance you can win by bluffing and preventing good players to read you easilly.
As well, multiway pot, the need to raise weak hand for deception purpose ( like low suited connectots), especially vs bad players is not needed.

+2

I'm on board with completing some trashy hands with several players in. In this spot I play quite a bit tighter. My worst hands would look something like this....J7o, T8o, 97o, 86o, 75o, 65o, 54o. Perhaps this is way too tight and I have discovered a leak.

I agree mostly with you raising hands except the AXo part. I would raise down to A9o. I would like to get HU against the limpers. If the BB over defends then I would probably just complete and raise AJo.

All of these hands can be raised for value. They all play well MW. Tighten up the worst part of these ranges as the game gets tougher. By just limping with these you'r making your ep raising range way too tight. You won't get action when you have premiums and you make it way to easiy for your opponent to play against you because there is no way you could hit certain boards.

If you have already entered the pot, do not fold even if it is capped back to you. If these were unsuited, you can consider folding.

I would raise AKs, AQs, AJs, ATs, KQs no matter what the game conditions. I may cap all of these depending on who did the reraising and how many players are involved. I'm usually always capping AKs, AQs unless it's HU or I'm against a couple super tight ranges.

3 players limp, CO raises(he's fairly tight pre and passive post. When he bets he's got it)
Folded to me in the SB...what does your suited hand range look like here? Connectors, 1 gap, etc.

The BB is a fairly loose defender.

I *have* read the book, several times in fact. I post the question because often a poster like Bob148 or lawdude or DougL or Zeke Ferrari will have a suggestion that's different from the book and it gives me a chance to evaluate multiple points of view.

The book recommends limping little suited broadways in early position at these types of tables. An experienced player like Bob148 can raise them in early position because he has more postflop skill than I do for example.

the book is many years old and is useful as a primer for training new players and keeping them out of trouble. but it's not the bible or anything you should aspire to. poker theory has advanced far beyond this book, and the games have changed since then as well.

what's your current range in this spot and your reasoning behind it? what price are you getting immediately and what share of the money are you going to be putting in assuming you call and no one 3bets?

Tho the book is old, a bad player is a bad player ( of course depends on the stakes the game play at) , if we see a limper that call to the river a lot with weak draw, seem the antidote (SSHE) is always the same, no ?

If more than 1 seat is occupy by those kind of players, imo SSHE is still pretty relevant.

Hence raising low sc at this kind of table is less profitable .

TOP is old as well but still relevant imo.
In the value of deception factor, :" ...throwing in an extra bet with a weaker hand, against someone who won't fold anyway, simply cost you extra money.

In the example dalTx had given, raising low suited connectors seem a small error pf.

I'm not a great player, but here are my thoughts:

First of all, it's somewhat significant that we have relative position. Since the CO was the PFR, if we do flop a set on a dangerous board we'll be in fairly good position to check-raise and force most of the field to call 2 bets on the flop. If we flop a big draw and hit it on the turn or the river we'll be able to force anyone still in the hand to call 2 bets and they won't be happy about it but won't be able to fold in that huge pot.

re-raise JJ+, AKso, AQso - I think this is pretty standard.
flat ATs, AJs, KQs, QJs, JTs, 66-TT, KQ. I think all of these hands have enough equity to see a flop out of position when there's minimal risk of a 3-bet.
I'm not thrilled about flatting T9s, KJs, KTs, QTs, 98s or 87s because we're playing easily-dominated hands out of position to 5 people in a bloated pot but I don't think I'd be disciplined enough to fold them. I don't think flatting any of these is a gigantic mistake as long as they're played correctly post-flop though.
I don't think I'd have the discipline to fold KJo or QJo here either, and I think calling with either one of them would be horrible. ATo, KTo and QTo I believe I would be smart enough to fold.
I think with 76s and below, J9s and below, Q9s and below you have to fold. If we were cold-calling 5 ways on the button instead of the small blind we could consider 65s+, 97s+ and T7s+, but OOP? We won't have control over the pot size.

Those are my thoughts.

^ You would have the worst relative position here, not the best. When you flop a big hand, you want to trap people for multiple bets, not try to force them out.

So suppose we cold-call with 66 in what ends up being a six-way pot and we flop 6TJ. Everyone checks to the button who bets. There are now 13 small bets in the pot - wouldn't you want to raise there to force gutshots, OESDs and flush draws to face 7.5 to 1 pot odds instead of calling and letting them face 14 to 1 pot odds?

Of course you would want to raise there, but you would rather be in a different position, one in which they called the first bet, THEN you raise. And hopefully the pf raiser would put you on a draw and reraise, then you could trap them all for four bets.

However, the point isn't really strategic, it is definitional. When you said you would have "relative position", you are using that term to mean exactly the opposite of what it has meant in every other use of the term I have ever seen.

I'm a bit surprised at the amount of "calls" in the first hand. I pretty happily muck this PF.

I don't think this one got enough love although it addresses such common situations.

I call all three getting 5.5:1. Against a TAG raiser, I like Q6s more that K6s. 9To is inferior to Q6s IMO. 34s results in the most c/f flops, but it also gains the biggest pots when it does make a straight with an Ace, and it doesn't have domination issues.

I haven't seriously worked on my game in a long time though.