What about flopping flush draws and nut straight draws?

Not flopping a monster with sc's vs missing when set mining are not comparable. You're going to often flop draws, sometimes to the nuts, and you can decide what to do based on the bet size you're facing/how many call a raise ahead of you.

SC’s have a ton of post LP playability as a semi bluff, as you described. But it is much easier to realize that fold equity of you raised preflop and your playing versus a smaller field. It’s much harder to realize fold equity versus a big field with wide ranges in a small pot.

Some of these comments are interesting to me, but miss some of the point of having a limping strat in LP. A lot of the time, your cards don't matter at all given we should be able to bluff certain spots and never get to showdown. Again, ONLY in LP and ONLY deep and ONLY when you feel like you have a good edge versus opponents.

Limping is not always about "getting stacks in" or "flopping 2p+ and being worried about RIO". Sure, winning those big pots with rando 2 pair are fun and give you a great image. But IMO, it is more about using your position and ranging your opponents to the degree where you can win pots with aggression that you have no business being in at all.

This is old philosophy. 33:1 is ridiculous. Suited connectors play way better. And allow us to continue more often postflop.

Extrapolate that 5% of 2 pair+ on flop for 1 more card. By turn we will have 2pair+ 20% of time. (Going off memory).

We don't need 33:1. We definitely don't need to be able to get stacks in vs 1 pair hands.





Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

I also disagree with this. The easiest postflop spot to get ourselves into is either (a) a small SPR where we are totally fine committing with TP type hands or (b) a very high SPR pot where we'll have 3 postflop streets worth of poker to play (where we'll have lots of room to utilize our postflop decision making skills). The worst spot is a small SPR multiway pot where we're not fine committing with TP type hands and yet at the same time the small SPR handcuffs our decision making skills; and yet this is the spot we'll often get ourselves into by raising at loose tables with small-medium stacks.

GimoG

I think there needs to be a distinction made here. There is a fairly large difference between open limping and over limping. Open limping is the taboo that most pros/books/strat hate because most of the pros playing larger stakes aren't playing 1/2 where you win $3 (or $2 in some casinos) with a blind steal. Your overlimping range should be very wide closer to the button. There is nothing wrong with iso raising but this concept is rarely applied correctly. The idea is to iso the rec player and to do this, sizing must be really big. In the game, I play if the rec limps and we raise to $12, we are getting 5+ callers. This is not isolating anyone. If you raise to $22 - $25, then it goes HU or 3 ways a lot. So, ultimately isolating is fine but rarely done correctly.

The problem with attempting to size bigger in order to accomplish the isolate, especially in smaller stack games, is that getting in way too big a percentage of our stack with likely the worst hand with relatively little dead money in the pot is eventually going to catch up to us. We'll steal a lotta little pots (whose cbet ones will be ravaged by rake), but the one time we're caught with our hand in the cookie jar likely won't make up for this.

Overall, the biggest benefit of an always-raise strategy likely isn't in terms of +EV/-EV for the actual hand, but more in terms of metagame for future hands (where we aren't just seen as the guy raising TT+/AK and therefore can't easily be ranged).

GcluelessNLnoobG

Many boards favor a limping range over a raising range.

If I raise 87s preflop and get 4 callers I don't want to cbet on 955ds. The only thing I can credibly represent is an overpair (or 99) and I should have a lot of overcards in my range.

If I overlimp it on the button and everyone checks to me, I have a profitable stab and a lot of turn cards that a villain who limped in will have trouble calling down.


Speaking of open limps, I'll sometimes open limp rag suited aces in EP. Only at loose-passive tables though. Those hands, they're hard to play for a raise out of position (few situations where you can valuebet and get called by worse, often dominated by a calling range), but overflushing or outkicking with trips in a limped pot should be profitable. Plus in limped pots against passive players I'll often realize my equity (eg. pair of aces is good at showdown because nobody tries to bluff me off the hand a zillion ways)

I don't think low pocket pairs are profitable to limp from EP, most of the time you can't call a single bet, when you hit your positional disadvantage plus other players being weak (since they all limped) makes it too hard to extract value, plus you're often limp/folding and flushing BBs away.

The thing is, it doesn't matter if you value own yourself in that instance, usually these limpers have such a wide range and can't fold because toppairlol means you'll get value from the times they have a2-aj vs that one time they have AK.

"and mostly raise from early to middle position. "

this makes no sense at all. You want to raise more the later your position.

^

If I'm the first one to open the pot I nearly always raise. Also maybe the first sentence is misinterpreted, but I toss weaker hands for the most part unless I'm in late position, I didn't mean that 'I raise weaker hands in early to middle and limp them in late position.'

The situation I'm describing is over-limping in a large limped limp pot. Again depends on the game, but I think that a lot of players are too aggressive attacking limpers in games where they are just calling raises. With players like I described above who will limp with strong hands it's even worse.

Let's say I have a medium pair, AJ, or whatever in late position and want to get it heads up. 5 people limp to me and I raise to $18 or so. I've been in games where almost everyone will call. Now what? An unpaired hand is going to miss 2/3 of the time, if it's a medium pair I'll rarely hit a set and there will mostly be overcards.

Ok so let's continue. The pot is like ~$80 to ~$120 now, depending on how many limpers called. The flop comes and I mostly miss. Am I going to fire and try to bluff out multiple opponents? Depends on the texture and whether I can represent anything. Then what sizing, 1/3 to 1/2 the pot? Then someone has a piece and calls, do I fire again on the turn? How much of my stack am I going to get involved with absolutely nothing. Looks like a good way to burn money.

Now if people are limping and constantly throwing their hands away to my late position raise that's different.

Yes, but you're not going to see a card for free often. That's an additional payment you're going to have to make, nor are you likely to get direct odds to see that next card. If you catch your FD on the turn and someone else starts shoving money in, how happy are you going to be calling with your 9 high flush?

I'm not saying the draws have no value, but they aren't a huge money maker with the cost of chasing.

I play 1-2-3NL and this type of situation comes up frequently. I totally agree with VipMan. Just my 2 cents.

The spots when we whiff are actually fairly trivial (we give up, imo).

The difficult spots actually occur when we hit our one pair, where now we'll likely be facing a commitment decision on our first bet. Are we outkicking someone and ahead? Or did one of our 5 opponents outflop us for only 6% of their stack preflop? I guess we'll find out when the remaining 94% of the stack goes in postflop where most everyone else has a much better idea of where they're at than we do?

GcluelessraisingnoobG

If you want to get it heads up and too many people are calling, raise bigger. In a situation with AJ where you raise to 18 and get 5 callers - that's a GOOD thing. Against loose passives, your range/equity is going to be way ahead of everyone else and you have initiative and position. If the pot is 6 ways, you should almost never be cbetting/bluffing without a made hand or a hand with a lot of equity. It doesn't matter if you miss the flop 2/3 times and give up. The 1/3 times that you hit you'll gain value to make up for it and since you're the preflop aggressor and everyone checks to you, you can check back and hit your J or A or BD door for the 2/3 you miss.

I mean you could use the same logic to fold AK UTG instead of bringing it in for a raise. AK is still going to be unpaired 2/3 times, so it's "burning money".

First, the size of the preflop raise is often not a deciding factor in how many callers you get unless it is considered unreasonably small or unreasonably big. Much more relevant is how many people have a hand they want to see a flop with or whether there is an early caller to the raise (information that we simply won't know).

Secondly, our equity is never *way* ahead. Go ahead and range a hand like AJo against a bunch of hands; if it's a favourite, it's likely a very small one at best.

Finally, we don't get to simply check down the hand postflop to realize the slight equity edge we may have had preflop. Our most likely hand is just one pair. If anyone else decides to put in the remaining 95% of stacks postflop, there's a very good chance they can beat one pair (with a small SPR, will it be too late for us to figure that out?), plus a lotta hands will have a much better idea of where they are in the hand they we do.

Graisingto$18andgetting5callersin'tnearlythecoupyo uthinkitis,imoG

Why do you think you need to get your stack in by the river to play a hand profitably?

Someone told me you cant limp Axs profitably in EP at 2/5. Of course I accepted the challenge. Results for the last 149 times I limped A9s or lower in the first 3 positions:

+$925

I had 2 pots that got all in before the river and I won $95 more than my equity in those hands so lets call it +$835.

That's +$5.60 per hand including all the times I folded to a raise after limping. I included results of every time I limped in that situation. If you keep track of any kind of things like these, you know that $5.60 profit per hand is damned good especially playing OOP.

Ok, then you should raise as big as you can and punish their weak limping ranges/passivity and get max value.

Depends on what you define as "way" ahead. If I have 25% equity in a field of 5 players, that's a substantial edge imo. But the edge is bigger the bigger the pot is. If I limp behind and am playing against the same 5 players, 5% of 10 is .5 edge, vs if I raise to 20 and the same 5 called with a 100 pot, thats a +5 edge.


I really don't get what you're trying to argue. So what are you doing when a bunch of limps come to you and you have AJ on the button? Just limping behind?

We're setting up a very favorable situation raising this hand over loose passives:

A) opportunity to pick up dead money+blinds uncontested.
B) initiative, meaning we're often going to get to act first on the flop.
C) Assuming we're better postflop, we're increasing the magnitude of their mistakes postflop, assuming we have a postflop edge. This is assuming that stacks are relatively deep (I generally table select and where average stacks are generally 150bb+)


"plus a lot of hands will have a much better idea than we do." I don't agree with this. The 1/2 and 1/3 players I've played are mouthbreathers and play very face-up. If I flop top pair on a good board, I'll go for three streets and value and make more than the times I lose to two pair+. And I can get away from TPTK depending on the action/player.

Hey its this thread again...april already eh?

Sometimes raising bigger doesn't get them out.

I see what you're saying and depending on game conditions I'll attack to take down the dead money.

The main criteria I look for is for the players who have demonstrated that they will limp and then fold to a raise during the session, or if they are are very tight and don't want to get involved oop with a mediocre hand. If I have several players like this I'll also make late position raises to thin the field or take down the pot. In fact, a week ago, I got needled by a reg when I limped on the button with AJ that went to show down.

"Bro, AJ, the button, no raise? What's up with you today?"

But again it's situation dependent. What I'm describing is a game where players will vigorously defend their limps. If you're taking AJ or a medium pair and raising you're not going to be way ahead of them. In fact collectively they will be ahead of you.

I think you're making some assumptions that are incorrect.

1) That you will be way ahead, you won't.
2) That they will all check to you. Not in my experience. If one of them gets a piece they will donk into you, or x/r you.
3) That the times you hit will make up for the times you miss. Have you kept track of this?

There are no absolutes in the game. Limping behind and seeing a flop cheaply is viable depending on game conditions.

1) It doesn't matter if you're "way ahead". Obviously we have different definitions of what that means, but the same applies to just "ahead." If your hand is better than their range, you RAISE. That's ABC poker. If I'm ahead by just 1% equity, I'm putting more money in. That's how you make money in poker. Put money in when you're ahead.
2) If they donk and you don't have anything, easy fold.
3) Yes. Not that I tracked only AJ on the button specifically, but I could fish it out of my notes since I have about 500+ hours at 1/3 at 22bb/hr. I had ~60% buttoning opening range during this stretch. If I'm not profiting with a 10% hand on the button, then I don't know where the money is coming from.

"There are no absolutes in the game. Limping behind and seeing a flop cheaply is viable depending on game conditions."

Sure. But 99.99% of the time, raising AJ over 5 limpers on the button is better than limping behind. But by all means, keep doing what you're doing.

In limp heavy tables, depending on how you expect players to respond to a pot sized raise, you can adjust your open limp/overlimp vs. Raise range. In some tables, if four people limp, an appropriate raise size might be ~$16. In some 1/2 tables this will get through. In others, it will not, and it is almost certainly a mistake to include suited connectors and mid pairs in your raise strategy.

You should about folding AJo in such tables too out of position.

I suspect you're playing in very weak games since your apparent win rate is at an unsustainable $66/hr, in addition to running well. This accounts for the money more than raising 60% of the time on the button or your limp attack strategy. And how exactly did you track this live?

My response was specifically for the comment regarding "raising with AJ and getting 5 callers is a good thing"; I'm arguing that it isn't nearly as good a thing as you think it is.

So we have a very minor equity advantage preflop; big deal, that was only for 5% or whatever of stacks. If we were getting in 100% of stacks, then that would obviously be +EV. But getting in such a small percentage of stacks isn't the coup you think it is. This is much more a Limit concept (where we are getting much larger percentages of stacks preflop compared to what the overall pot size will be, plus we'll always be able to get to the river to realize our equity); these things aren't as applicable in NL.

If you're starting with 100bb stacks ($300 in 1/3 NL), and raising to $18 with AJ, and getting 5 callers, you're creating a pot of $108 and only have $282 left. The SPR is less than 3 and you're basically setting up a commitment decision on your very first bet. There's no "3 streets" of betting or time to use your postflop skillz to figure where you stand with your measly TP. If you are playing a bunch of droolers who'll stack off with their TPnK at this point, ok, you're going to make up for the times you run into sets / two pairs / good draws. If you don't have nearly as many droolers in your game, you've set yourself up for a terrible spot, all in the name of a ~1% equity advantage preflop for ~5% of your stack.

I bring this up every time this conversation arises, but there's a book (I always forget which one, I think it's NLT&P) which goes over a toy example of AK vs 87s. AK has a significant 60/40 equity edge over 87s (an equity edge that blows your AJ vs 5 opponents out of the water). And yet in the toy example where both opponents aren't brain dead, when serious money goes in postflop (keeping in mind only a very small percentage of stacks went in preflop), 87s is actually the hand with the advantage. For example, how much is 87s going to lose to AK on a A83r board? Now compare how much AK is going to lose to 87s on a A87 board. And now factor in 4 other callers with hands like JTs, 44, etc. The equity advantage that you think AK has in a pure poker stove exercise shrivels up real fast unless all your opponents are brain dead.

So, unless you are getting in significant portions of your stack preflop, or you are extremely deep and going very multiway will still create a very high SPR where you will have lots of streets and room to utilize your postflop skillz, it is my opinion that you do not want 5 callers to your preflop raise with AJ.

GimoG

Alright I'm not going to try to argue with you anymore, since I've seen in other threads that we apparently play in vastly different types of games (apparently yours are 100bbcap, with competent players *which I highly doubt*, but it's possible). I don't play 1/3 anymore, but when I did, there were plenty of spots that would stack off light.

My question is, let's there are 5 limpers in front of you, and it comes to you on the button. What do you do with AJ here, typically?

I would typically raise, especially the shorterstacked I am (and thus the more comfortable I am committing with TP postflop).

However, I'm never looking for 5 callers and will size accordingly. In fact, in most games it's probably in my best interest to end the hand preflop and take the 6.5 bbs in the pot unraked (which will likely be more profitable, on average, than any other result).

GcluelessNLnoobG