You should have 2! pre from the begging

Your call is horrible. Why just call when nobody knows you got a monster Whith so many people in the pot somebody at least will have call your raise on the flop. Start early building the dam pot.

That's why I'm saying: Bet heavy pre and on the flop in such situations. Anybody reading my will be a big winner in this type of situations and many others like the ones where AK absolutely eliminates everything and dominates all others with the exception only of AA/KK. But for that you guys have to study my "labor of love"

I have no problem with the limp from UTG pre. yes, a majority of the posters in this forum will tell you to raise, but if you really want to make some easy money, limp raising is the best way to do it.

the flop is the huge error. you have to raise to like 70. that many opponents with that many potential draws, take the hand down. there is nothing wrong with winning the pot right there. why did you only make it 30?

Facing an EP donk into the world, having the world behind us still to react, and our magic outs being dirty, and the current pot compared to stacks being very small, I'd be totally cool with a nit fold on the flop.

Gwereallyshouldbenittingitupwhenourlimp/reraisefails,imoG

Surprised that there was no mention of stack sizes in OP other than H, and none of the arguments on either side of L/RR has mentioned stack sizes.

Anyhow, I can understand that most players in LLSNL have entitlement tilt with KK+ and play these hands with RIO because of this tilt. So it makes sense to play in such way that they can't perceivably make a mistake, and when they lose, they can blame "idiots" for making big mistakes.

I would take the premise of us being able to let go of our KK postflop easily if the pot goes limped very multiway for granted-like me and GG has mentioned. If you dont have that ability or skillset intact, even discussing the effective sideeffects the limp/reraise can generate is useless.


Trying to make this a big problem is pretty much a derail.

Do you mind eleborate a little bit on this part RP? I mean i (think) understand most of it, but i am a little bit unsure exactly what you mean with people are playing KK+ with RIO because they then can blame their opponents for making big mistakes.

People having entitlement tilt problems in a way that they think they deserve to always win huge pots with KK+ i certainly agree on.

Imagine never folding a pair regardless size of bet or action.

After thinking about it a bit, I can get on-board with a LRR in this spot. I do think that OP may not have an accurate handle on this table, however, given that it limped around 6 ways and no one put in a raise. I still think that the flop is a clear raise for value as our hand rates to be ahead even in a 6-way pot. Folding is way too nitty, as we should be able to pretty quickly determine whether or not our hand is best.

True enough...I assumed that was effective stacks but that could obv be wrong.

+1, I also assumed $400 stacks. I also assumed raises were going very multiway (but OP's description of this is a little ambiguous and can be taken a couple of different ways).

If there like a lot of $200 stacks (or those are the stacks we're expecting to get action from) then I'm more on board with opening.

GcluelessNLnoobG

Let me get this straight, you would rather L/RR deeper than shallower?

Yes.

Shallow (say $200 stacks), we can simply setup an easy SPR by opening. We can't accomplish this deeper (say $400) by opening, but we can by limp/reraising; if it limps thru, whatever, we play a very high SPR pot (which is also fine to play with TP hands).

I've said this before about the LRR debate. If you're totally cool raising in EP to $20, going 5way to a $100 flop with $380 behind OOP, then do that. If you're not comfortable with that result, then don't do that.

GimoG

How much do you LRR if someone opens $12 and 2 people call?

And $20 or 7bb is standard open in your game?

You're describing the exact game I play in RP, so very common situation.

I would limp/reraise to $65ish here. I choose that number cuz it offers 8:1 implied odds to the first caller, which automatically makes setmining unprofitable. I'll admit, it's a little overcompensating (I'm sure offering 10:1 or whatever is probably fine too), but I'm conservative like that.

If anyone calls, the pot will be $150 having $335 left. Our hand is probably a little face-upish (again why I like offering poor 8:1 implied odds), and we'll get the rest in with two bets. If someone called off 16% of their stack and outflopped us (plus can get away from TP / draws), nice hand sir.

I'll admit, I don't necessarily think I'll get action a decent amount of the time here (although in OPs hand he had SIX players go to the turn, so I'll let you decide how farfetched it is whether this raise can get action). Whatever. Ship the $40 free money and move on, if anyone calls (which they will do every so often) it's just gravy. What is the average won per hand with AA? Is it more than 13bb/hand? Cuz that's what we do here a lot with zero risk. And if someone opens to a more usual $20 and gets two callers, we're laughing with the amount of money we're taking down risk free, all the while setting up trivial postflop spots.

Gdisagree?G

yeah I'd think it would be the opposite though I don't virtually ever do it other than certain MTT spots or in PLO

It really isn't complex post flop. Do a quick in hand audit of the situation and actions should be very clear.
6 handed. Wet flop, Q49dd. Limped pot. Vs are super wide. Do I have Kd? My set outs are very dirty, A489JQ&D all clearly bad turns, other turns deceivingly bad... Etc etc.

basically, even HU in a raised pot, this hand would be on the tougher side of hands to play, 6 ways in a limped pot you'll just never have the best hand in any small-mid sized pot unless you improve. AP, your min bet will not accomplish what you want except to make things more complicated/expensive later in the hand assuming that you don't get raised again on this street. I cannot say folding is best as you have some nut runouts that if realized cheaply can have huge implieds attached, calling will let you improve sometimes, but it's mostly a poor option given you'll be folding to any immediate raises or turn bets.
I'd prob just pot it and look to get it HU and tread very carefully the rest of the way. If anyone calls behind, stack sizes will come into play quickly, particularly on this turn

+1. I see zero benefit in having a l/rr range in live NL as stacks deepen unless you're able to somehow balance it out to some degree/not an easy task. All you're doing is going face up OOP against uncapped ranges whose IO/playability grow the narrower the l/rr range and the more stack there is behind.

This becomes an issue only as stacks grow much larger, so there are admittedly sweetspots. I wouldn't limp reraise $1000 deep at 1/3 NL unless I feel I'm just totally outclassed postflop OOP and am cool with taking down whatever is in the pot preflop.

A $400 stack is easily within the LRR sweetspot at 1/3 NL, imo.

GcluelessdeepstacknoobG

Pretty much exactly how I described such player type:

What you are essentially saying is that you only want to play 2 streets with most of your non-nutted hands: pre and flop.

There is a very low ceiling for such approach to the game, but I can see you responding with the same line of logic: at least I am not losing.

IMHO, most players overestimate their EV edge in these difficult-to-play situations. The obvious answer is "well, duh, learn how to play better postflop". Another answer, imo, is learn how to get yourself into better situations.

I've said it once, and I mean it. If you truly are a wizard and fistpump these postflop situations (including when your flop bet in this spot gets called in 2 spots), then continue doing so. You're a wizard, and you'll do absolutely fine because you're able to distinguish between AQ vs JTdd vs 44.

For us non-wizards, setting up easy-to-play situations is where the profit will be made.

GimoG

I'm not sure if I misunderstand this comment or not; are you saying the LRR method is the tilt / KK+ entitled guy that is embracing RIO and complains about the idiot making a big mistake?

It's exactly the opposite.

Gremember,I'mtheguywhofoldedtotheflopdonk;Ihavezer oentitlementissueswithKK+G

This first statement is a bit off (I'd say TP type hands in raised pots, and extend to the turn).

Is your second statement saying this method guarantees a low ceiling of "not losing" == "breakeven"? For non-wizards, I would disagree with this statement; for wizards, yes, I agree, they are most likely giving up some EV.

GnonwizardG

I hope I'm missing your point, because this entire line of thinking appears to suggest that aggregate EV of standard lines w KK across all flops at 100-150bb is going be less than that of a strategy that often mixes in l/rr - based on the premise that lesser skilled players are unable to profitably maneuver through a relatively low frequency of situations like this one?

You played the hand ridiculously but you did not actually get your money in bad though you
had a great chance to river top boat or quads and it is three ways with a bunch of dead money