So did you call it off?

hi all, appreciate the great depth of replies ott

not bumping to reopen the discussion on the flop spot, but would like to bump the above question again, as i see limp-rr strat being discussed in other threads

what's the correct way to construct a limp-rr range from UTG/UTG1?

can we include AQ-99, or should this be AK-JJ only, KK+ only?
can we ever have a light limp-rr range?

Can you promise you’ll eventually tell us if you called it off or not?
Feels like a tease at this point

But yes, for what it is worth AQ would be in MY personal limo reraise range but only at an “action table.” (Though far more than 99 in my opinion)

My range would be AK-AJ(rarely) and AA-TT(rarely) so close to what you said.

Of course. Here's an example. The other day I limped A4s in EP. The table was passive so I thought I could get away with it. 2 more limps and then the only aggro guy at the table made it $25 in the SB. BB called. I knew the SB aggro guy was full of it and I would have position on him so I 3 bet to $85.

He called HU and I took it down with a Cbet.

Yes, I called it off

You say that without telling us the results? Cmon man.

I said this before someone in this long thread...but if we raise the flop and get shoved on, its an obvious fold. People rarely shove a draw after a bet and a healthy raise because it looks like they have close to zero fold equity. When they shove after this action they have a set/2 pair 95%+.

But if we just flat call the flop bet and then someone shoves behind us, what do we do? He could be shoving a set/2 pair or a draw plenty of times.

There are 2 reasons I prefer to raise (or fold). I just listed the first one. The second one is because I think we are ahead of the UTG donk bettor almost every time. So we are raising for value but also getting out of the hand if raised behind us because we now are very certain we are beat.

If dont know if there is a way to do this math or not, but my intuition tells me that we get away cheaper when we are crushed by raising and also fold the best hand less often to a raise behind us.

If you want low variance just fold the flop in this very marginal situation.

f*ck, didn't get in before results. just saw the thread. seems the rise and fall of RagingOwl also passed me by. good spot to discuss as it touches on several dynamics and situations that come up often in live poker particularly (discussed below).

i'm gonna go with this as a proxy for UTG's range, which is the first factor to consider in our action, as (a) OP was at the table and (b) don't see donking ranges here tight enough to be ahead of us very often in live play

folding would require a pretty nitty read on UTG (i.e. 33,77,KQ, AQ, with no QJ or combo draws). it's not outrageous. if you have the read, muck it. looks like we didn't have that read.

i agree that this is not a spot with a definitive correct line. usually when it's close between two good options, i lean towards the aggressive action. it always results in clarified ranges, greater playability (undervalued by most players i find; playability literally translates to EV upside), and regaining of the betting lead (also often undervalued; it's amazing how often it buys us free cards when we want them, which in hold'em is fairly often). i also continue to sometimes be surprised by what you can get value from in low stakes games.

that said, there are two countervailing dynamics to consider:

1) gravy train dynamic: with this dynamic in a ramped up, deep, 2am game, we stand to bring along a nice train here if we flat. now, granted that affects playability and straight up butchers our equity to win, ofc. but this flop is not as wet as it may seem. there's 3 cards between the 7 and the 3, and one high card (which unfortunately is not a heart). yes we have to fade some turn cards (mostly hearts), but if we get one or two callers behind, we're not COMPLETELY in the dark on most turns. it's close. there's messy potential but going to the turn in the second car of the gravy train wouldn't be the worst spot in the world. and looking left we'd pick up information based on who called and how they put their chips in.

i also don't care if people have odds to chase. more on that at the end of the point.

2) value: i'm worried raising folds out what we beat from UTG's range. does UTG have enough of a bet/calling range here that we're ahead of to justify raising?

all these factors together is what makes it a very close spot. the honest truth is i would do both (flat or raise) depending on tiny factors like anything i picked up glancing to my left and gut feel in the moment. i probably lean towards raising because i think that's usually optimal in close spots. if we're raising, i'd min-click it or slightly more. why? because we're basically looking for thin value given what UTG's range likely is. and because i'm not worried about denying direct odds. more on that below.

like MikeStarr i too am not convinced that you're priced in facing the shove. we're just so smashed here so often. i'd fold unless i had pretty good, specific reads to justify calling.

is Snowie based on live hand histories or online? it's pretty clear that it advocates a fold here because of how it's constructed UTG's donking range (specifically, it figures QJ is not in most UTG players' limp/calling ranges). that's not true in many live settings.

interesting. i like to l/rr with more than just ultra premiums in game conditions like yours, oldsilver. ranges look ok, i think AQ may be too weak to include. these are the types of hands we're looking to get action from when we back raise. pocket pairs fair well. i think it depends on (a) stack sizes (specifically, are there any short stacks at all at the table, and who are those players) and (b) just how action the game is. the more short stacks, if any, and the more action those players are, and the more jacked up the game is in general, the more you can widen that range.

having a light l/rr range would only make sense at very LP call-happy tables where everyone has loosened up up front due to game dynamics but are actually playing tight when big money goes in. at that point raising those hands for value may be more +EV because you'll get called and have an easy time post. to me l/rr is only successful if we have a decent chance of having someone call the re-raise or stack off light. action short stacks are best for this. with so much dead money in the pot, you can basically convince them to go with it.

l/rr with lighter holdings like TT can also be a long-term image investment play if you're going to be playing in this room for a long time. sometimes you want people to know you have that capability. this is super secondary to just straight value though.

------------------------------

some general thoughts coming out of this analysis:

1) the value of position: my god do our decisions get easier here if we're even one or two spots to the left. AQo is an interesting hand because it often winds up in spots like this. it rarely makes anything nutty other than broadway. a good takeaway is how critical position is for these types of hands. (reminds you to think twice about what to do with QJ from up front, particularly with gravey-trainy game conditions.)

2) denying people odds to call: somewhat complex topic but my general view is that the main reason to "deny people odds" is not because it's bad to give them odds so much as it's better to deny them odds and still have them stay in the hand (i.e. call our bet or raise). so the question in this spot is not, omg we have to deny them odds, it's will they call with those hands if we raise. doubtful. the other aspect, ofc, is playability, so it's not just about odds. often times spots where you might be ok with giving people odds to draw because you don't think they'll call a raise you might want to raise anyway because of playability concerns. either way giving people correct odds is not necessarily -EV.

3) 100bb is actually pretty short: particularly if the game is juicy/ramped up, 100bb is too short to really reward the type of thinking going on ITT. this spot is a good reminder of why good strategic live players should seek to play 200bb+ deep if/when they can.

this is a leak

Very nice post, Sir