How about a full ring game?

would open 89s from every position in a 9 handed full ring game.

I can see opening occasionally with this in EP depending on the circumstances but not as a default. I feel like I would get clobbered if I opened this early in my games. That being said, I do see some good players opening with hands like these. I suppose you don't get dealt this hand often enough in this position for it necessarily to be a leak. I'd be curious what others think. I remember a post where DD opened 9Ts UTG and admitted it was a little lite.

I'm wondering if this is another spot where I didn't get the memo. My default is JTs. I may even fold this if the game is particularly Laggy....I hope this isn't HFAP thinking.

I suppose this might be a hand you can play if you are willing to take on more variance and most importantly, have the skill to play it post flop.

I've been gamestarting a lot lately. One of my most frequent opponents is a guy that never folds heads up preflop. He both opens and defends 100%. My standard 3 betting range preflop from the big blind is something like this: 55+, A8s+, A9o+, K9s+, KTo+, Q9s+, QTo, J9s+, T9s+, 98s+. However, I've expanded my preflop 3 betting range vs this guy in an attempt to exploit his overaggression. I've added A7s, A8o, K8s, K9o, JTo, and have removed T9s and 98s.

Sound good?

my default 3betting range is,
22+, A3s+, A7o+, K4s+, KTo+, Q4s+, T6s+, 95s+, 85s+, 74s+, 64s+, 53s+, 43s+

even your expanded 3bet range seems overly nitty. your current 3bet ranges can never have the nuts or anything stronger than 2 pair on low flops. your opponent can exploit this. in 3bet pots he can attack boards like 224, 332, 234, 345, 456, etc. since you can never have the nuts and he can have many strong hands including the nuts. then in single raised pots he can check back more often on the flop and play close to perfectly.

I understand what you mean but this Limit poker not NL.
This is one of those instance where a concept that is important in one variation of poker (NL) is almost pointless in another (Limit).
So i dont think it really matters much to the point of forcing our self to put bad hands to 3bet with pf.

For the rare occasion you can or not have the nutz on very low boards, we are still talking about 1BB swing when you speak about exploitation.

I'm not suggesting that we need to be able to threaten to have the nuts at all times. I'm suggesting that we should have a 3bet range that covers many different flops.

I get that but still, low cards like 223,334,445 i just do not think it is worth much , it is a very small range that comes rarely but you should loose a lot more with 34s,45s 35s,etc. for the time you missed it by 3betting imo.

It just does do much ( 3bet 43s for example) because you should have already some hands that you will be able to jam plenty on those low board even tho you do not have the mortal nutz.

when we speak 456 flop so getting 87s ok, but below that that i am very skeptical.
I mean once we raise and get 3 bet on the turn for example, the hand range drop significantly anyway and i am pretty sure the number of time you lost 3 bet pf with something like 43s and hit nothing exceed the number of times you were able to gain 1 or 2 BB more because you had a surprising hand .

i think it is very costly in the long run to make it has a default.

NL it works greats because you can stack someone just for the cost of a small 3 bet pf but in limit your gain is too little.

I just think it need to be incorporate as a exploitative line and not as a default.

PS: i mean as soon i see someone do this i just tighen up a bit and i start 4 betting all my SD value to make them pay a lot because paying 2 BB with low sc that often miss hurts a lot.

I think you have 2 choices against Mr. 100/100 in the heads-up game.

Option 1: have a big wide 3-betting range that hits all sorts of boards, like Rodeo suggests.

Option 2: have no 3-betting range, and balance your raising range on another street.

I really loved this post, btw.

I forgot J6s+

I figured you pitched all your suited jacks to balance your folding range. :P

Ewwh. Your standard range is doing really bad on low-low-low or low-low-high flops. I'd add a lot more Face-rag-suited hands.

what does it matters, even if you have high card with rag you wont hit much better anyway.

limit is a range vs range game, not a NL game where you need to hit every board with the nutz for stack size and IO issues.

low low low board so what, you have an overpair or pair and almost always tptp or tp2k or 2ptk or 2 high card that you wont fold, pretty hard to exploit that i think.
Yeah you wont have the nutz to gain sometimes 1 BB more with a raise but you will still call wide preventing to get exploited.
.

I wanted to bump this.

Are you guys opening 89s UTG? Again, my default is JTs. I know Rodeo is a good player but this seems too thin too me.

This can't be a real question


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

89s utg is not a profitable opening hand. It's just not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pretend this is a real question. What would be your answer?

89s is definitely lite. Reminds me of Mason's rhetoric that even good players are way too loose in early position in a full ring game.

BUT. it depends what the rest of your range is. {AQo+, Ats+, 88+, 89s-KQs} is 8.6%. I think that range would be very reasonable UTG fullring.

id open 89s utg if everyone else thought my opening range consisted of AA, KK, QQ, JJ, and AK utg and played accordingly.

in live play, though, this like never happens. the most likely scenario is you get cold called by hands like KJo and 88 and have to play the whole hand OOP with an equity disadvantage.

You should check out Phil Newell's books and look at Cepheus.

In 9 handed LHE, I play the same range from UTG-UTG2. So it's not like I open 89s UTG and by the time I'm UTG2 I'm opening 45s.

$4/8 game. Seven limpers. I have A6 of diamonds in the BB. Should I raise here? I did, and then guy on my left 3 bet and everyone called. Is this a cap?

In a similar vein, I had JTs in the BB, later in the session. 3 or 4 limpers. Should I raise? Just wondering if these kinds of BB raises with speculative hands have positive EV in loose passive games, or if they only serve to increase my variance / are spew. Thank you.

I like raising JTs better for its better playability post flop.

I don't mind raising A6s if your facing loose ranges. I would just check if There were known LRR's in the game or players who limped with strong hands. This is more common in a 4/8 game.

I would not cap after the LRR. Your overall equity is now lower, assuming it's a legit raise by the guy on your left. It's better also better to maintain your good relative position for those times you flop a hand strong enough to CR.

Thanks, mongidig. I agree with both those points.