You're missing my overall point by focusing too much on a very small part of my argument. Maybe saying that AJo and KQo play "well" in multiway pots is overstating and I should've said they play "fine" in multiway pots. But that's not the point of my post. The point is that if you're willing to raise pre flop UTG with AJo and KQo when we have zero information about their hands and everyone left to act now has the option to call or reraise, but you are unwilling to raise them in a similar spot when many players have limped to you in the SB, which gives us plenty of information, then I think your using faulty logic.

When raising UTG, we have no idea what the people behind us will have. Initially, we raise because we're trying to win the blinds. But anyone that's played LHE for more than a few hours knows that is an unlikely scenario. So we have to tighten our raising range to include hands that are profitable in not only the most likely of circumstances (we raise, one or two players call, one or both of the blinds call, and we see a flop multiway), but in every circumstance. The great thing about having AJo or KQo in the SB after 6 limpers is that, in most cases, the limpers have given us some useful information about their hands by refusing to raise. It's likely they've got poor hands and we're going to have a pretty big equity advantage and our hand plays fine in multiway pots. So that's why I raise both AJo and KQo in the SB after 6 limpers.

YMMV

Yeah, your reasons to raise them are certainly valid and I wasn't meaning to disagree completely with your post, which is why I only focused on one part. I just wanted to point out that one of the reasons for raising certain hands in EP (including those two in particular) is not available when one is in the blinds.

I remember certain super successful online players arguing the value of raising the SB with hands as week as Q8o vs a single limper. I can't remember the reasoning but my guess is

a) Most limpers tend to have a very weak range. They still raise their top 10-20% hands, but limp the next 50 or 60%.
b) They tend to play very poorly post flop. So even if you are giving up a slight amount of equity pre flop (and position) you can make it up. The prime example is fit or fold players who fold the flop way too often.
c) You want to isolate and play them HU so your post flop skills have the biggest possible advantage.

Obviously vs. limpers with stronger ranges, or who actually play closer to correct post flop, or vs. a number of limpers instead of a single limper, or with a very sticky BB, you'd have to tighten up a bit.

Playing online, it gets ground into you that you should attack spots where clearly inferior players are involved. Overall, there are fewer bad players. Due to experience in shorthanded spots, you're way more comfortable both in and out of position with marginal values/wide ranges. All three of your reasons seem reasonable. Rodeo is giving away some excellent poker coaching, imo.

In a live game, narrowing the field is over-loved by people trying to play well. Sure, if I could steal the blinds with AJo, it is really valuable. Mostly you won't. The hand plays well HU and IP. So what? It is a decent favorite in other spots and we're in one of those. Do the right thing there.

I'm always a bit torn about raising big offsuit hands in the blinds like this (re your example of raising AJo and KQo in the SB after 6 limpers). I understand we have an equity advantage preflop, but by pushing it, doesn't that put us at more of a equity disadvantage postflop, if we flop just top pair? Giving gutshots and middle/bottom pairs better odds to draw out on us, etc.

I know this is an age-old argument--- just wondering if current limit hold'em theory now says that pushing preflop equity should trump everything else.

I recently was reading Barry Tanenbaum's "Advanced Limit Hold'em" book, and he recommends not bloating the pot if you have AK, QQ, or JJ in the blinds, since it makes people more correct to draw out on your postflop. He does recommend raising there with AA and KK, and also (oddly) with small pairs (I guess on the assumption you have to make a set with them anyway).

So his theory is at odds with the Ed Miller theory (as I understand it) in SSHE that you should push your preflop equity edge and not worry about it. Not sure how modern players deal with these two theories which are at odd with each other.

How profitable is a gut shot getting 16:1 on the flop? Where does the rest of the pot go?

Sorry if that was cryptic. What I'm getting at is the misconception that if your opponent is making money then you made a mistake. With the exception of unbeatable hands, there is always a bet size that will allow your opponents to profit. This is fine. It's ok if multiple players profit due to the money in the pot.

Thanks, Bob. I see what you're saying. I'm just wondering if there was a point where it was mathematically proven that the old theory of "not bloating the pot preflop because it makes chasing correct" was proven to be inferior to the "maximizing your preflop equity edge" camp. I've seen both views espoused but no one really proving why one is superior to the other.

Or maybe one is superior, but it also increases variance. I don't know.

It's a question that comes up for me quite frequently, as I often find myself with big offsuit cards either in one of the blinds or on the button, after a bunch of people limped with (most likely) trash hands.

Try to answer the question from my first response.

Okay. I'd say the gutshot is very profitable if it is getting 16:1 to call. Since it only needs 11:1. Ditto middle and bottom pair who only need 9:1. The over pair or TPTK profits from every bet going in, too, as long as none of the draws hit. The only people who don't profit when it is 16:1, are those that call the flop when they don't even have a single overcard.

So, I guess what you are saying, is that while the best made hand and the aforementioned draws all profit when the pot is that big, the best made hand profits MORE. And I am guessing you're saying this extra profits eclipses the value of keeping the pot smaller in an effort to make calling by the long shot draws unprofitable.

Please correct me if that is wrong.

Yup you nailed it. Except the part about the gutter being "very profitable." Id call it only Slightly profitable.

Thanks, Bob!

Yea the whole trying to keep pot small to make draws unprofitable has always bugged me. Imagine a game where you can put up to $200 in preflop, but still plays 20-40 after that. If you knew your opponent would always call $200 preflop with 100% of their hands, why would you not raise the max with all good hands, even if it meant it priced your opponent in for all their draws post?

Good analogy.

I would assume this also applies to the old example of just calling on the flop with AA if the pot is huge, the flop very coordinated, and someone on your immediate right bets into you. I've read you should wait until the turn to see if a safe card drops off, then hope the guy on your immediate right bets into you again.

I'm guessing the theory now is you should just raise the flop and push your equity advantage while you have it.

Number one goal of a being in a huge pot should be not folding aces. Second goal is eliminating players, third is charging draws.

If no one folds to flop raise and you can always face them with two bets on turn if you wait, then wait.

One would argue that having AcAs on a theoretical board of say Jh Th 7s

You don't have the equity advantage vs 5 players

If you get the 3c on the turn. Then you probably do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

KQo and AJo play exceltijally well multiwyas. I have no idea what you guys are talking about. I suppose if you just play terrible then they don't play they will be very profitable in 7 way limped pots

Almost everytime on this board somebody says I'd rather have 5-6s Than A-10 there they are very wrong: Such spots exist but it's gonna be spots where you are gonna lose on the Axx board and the Txx board. This is never the case in limped pots

Here's a statement that people will disagree with somehow: AJ> KQ > 9/10s > 56s

I won't disagree with that inequality statement, and yes, AJo is still profitable in multiway pots, but I think it is more profitable in shorthanded / headsup pots, which is why I would typically say it "does not play well multiway". 56s is not a great hand, but it is more profitable in multiway pots than it is in shorthanded / headsup pots.

I agree with you that those hands play well in multiway pots, but I decided to soften my argument in order to get my overall point across which is, raising those hands UTG, but refusing to raise them from the SB after 6 limpers is laughable.

Hi Jon. I agree with you as well. However if you ask a beginner where he puts
A5o on that list, don't be surprised if they get it wrong.

Make it A5s and a no limit holdem player and it gets even more interesting.

We agree

Standard bad live grinder type (loves him some cc in position, flop raises with weak showdownables, FSDR, you know the type and how they play) opens CO. BTN, who is a little bit frustrated but is likely three betting a somewhat reasonable range (though possibly a bit too wide) three bets. The MVP of the lineup takes three to the face as is their custom from the small blind. Do you have a cold calling range in the big and if so, what below is in it:

A5s
44
KQo
87s

Fold x4



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If I have a cold calling range, all of those hands are in there for sure.