I'm gonna play again for the first time in a week, which, for me is a ridiculously long break from hold em. As mentioned I'm on my biggest downswing ever (nominally), and am going to play 1/2 a few times before getting back into 2/5.

With that being said, my thread about the 98s hand where I asked if I made a pure punt, made me recognize that I'm probably opening a little too wide.

When I decided to take a closer look at my ranges last year, I used the Upswing full ring ranges as my guideline, which I found out was ridiculous because they were for online play and for using ~2.5x sizing IIRC.

So I was just wondering what goes into your thinking for opening ranges and/or over an honest limper? Could you provide what your "base" ranges look like in the standard LLSNL game? I didn't realize that opening 98s for 4-5x sizing from LJ in most 2/5 games is not profitable. When do you start opening/raising over an honest limper with your suited connectors? CO?

What do you think of the following base ranges?:

EP: AQo+, ATs+, KJs+, 88+

MP: AJo+, KQo, all suited broadways, A2s+, 22+

LP: A2o+, all broadways, 22+, K7s+, Q8s+, J8s+, all suited connectors 54s+ and suited gappers 53s+

This is definitely considerably tighter than I was previously doing. I know we don't want to turn into a computer and just open/raise over one limper automatically with these ranges, but what do you think as a base?

Also, how do you know what hands to trim off when you have a tough player behind you? I assume we do this linerally by keeping the biggest cards in? Is there any way I could play around with this concept on Flopzilla?

I’ll try to keep this simple so I’ll say that my ranges are more or less the same with and without a single limper in front. Obviously, if there’s a tough player behind I would adjust the following. This is also assuming at least 100 bb deep and likewise around most of the table.

9-10 handed

UTG-UTG+2

AQo+, A-10s+, all pp (sometimes I’ll drop 22-44), sometimes I’ll throw in a suited wheel ace, or a low suited connector for deception on soft tables, KQo (not every time), suited broadways.

MP

A-10o+, A-9s+, all pp, A-5s, A-4s, the odd middle sc (not all of them every time), KQo, all suited broadways.

HJ-CO

All suited aces, A-8o+, all pp, 4-5s+ (basically any suited connector, not all 1 gappers though, maybe 35% of them), most suited Kings, obviously all broadway combos offsuit or not.

Button

Probably top 35-40% of hands.

Says who?

These are my base ranges for live full ring play for 2/5. When I drop off hands I usually do it linearly from the worst offsuit hands, lowest PP and SCS. But I guess you could prioritize a little differently based on stack depths.
The later positions like CO and Button I think you will find the greatest variability depending on your table, game flow and people in the blinds.
Like the button I could open as tight as 30% if the blinds are very aggro.
Or as loose as 80% if they are super tight.

UTG/UTG+1:
12.7% - 55+, AJo+, KQo+, A5s, A9s+, All suited broadways, 87s-T9s.

14.5% UTG+2: Above plus rest of suited Aces.

20% LJ: Above plus rest of the pairs, QJo, KJo, ATo, 76s, 65s, K9s, Q9s, J9s

22% HJ: Above plus K8s, T8s, 97s, KTo

26.7% CO: Above plus K7s, Q8s, J8s, 86s, 75s, 64s, 54s, A9o, QTo, JTo

43.3% BU: Above plus rest of Ax, K2s+, Q2s+, K9o, K8o, Q9o, J9o, T9o, 98o, 87o, J7s, T7s, 96s, 85s, 53s, 43s.

My vs limp ranges are considerably tighter and I think they should be.
Also a lot more variable based on who is limping and from where and who is behind me. But this is just baseline assuming the position or 2 before you is the lone limper. And if there is more than one limper I would tighten up my requirement more as my raise size will be larger. Also a lot of my decisions with some hands on threshold will have mixed frequencies.

UTG+1/2: Raise - 88+, AQo+, KQs, AJs+. Overlimp: 77, QTs, KTs, KJs, ATs

LJ: Raise - 77+, AQo+, ATs+, KJs+, T9s+. Overlimp: A5s, A9s, KTs, QTs, 55/66, 76s, 87s, 98s

HJ: Raise - 66+, AJo+, KQo, ATs+, T9s+. Overlimp: 55, 76s-98s, QTs, KTs, A5s, A4s, A8s, A9s.

CO: Raise - 55+, AJo+, KQo, A9s+, T9s+. Overlimp: 22-44, A2s-A8s, 54s-98s,
J9s-K9s

Button: Raise - 55+, AJo+, A8s+, A5s, 98s+. Overlimp: 22-44, K5s-K8s, 54s+, A9o, JTo, QJo,

If you’re over limping with these types of hands in early/mid position, how are you reacting to a co/btn raise from a perceived reg?

Depends on the sizing and if any other callers.

Generally I'm folding everything but the the pp and suited Ax.

But if the raise is 6x or larger and I'm the lone actor I'm folding everything. If there's a caller or more and I'm closing the action I'll call up to like 8x if we're over 100bb.

Also if there are active isoers I adjust to not over limp anything.
Unless I'm on the button.

I posted a thread a few days ago, and that was the concensus. Not everyone agreed, but an overwhelming majority of posters were against opening 98s from the LJ.

I appreciate you sharing. This is way wider than what I was doing previously. You're opening/raising all of these 4x/5x + BB/limper? This just seems super wide. I just wonder how we can profitably do this, because finding the right iso size is usually at or over 5x + BB/limper, and I thought we're supposed to narrow our range as our raise sizes get smaller? IIRC, this is even wider than Upswing's online 2.5x opens. I guess if you find the right iso size though, you will still get called by a too wide range and be able to profitably c bet most flops still.

I guess another thing that worries me is that the more we raise pre, the more people think we're fos, and the harder it is to get HU.

This is similar to my opening ranges, although I don't have anything memorized.

I've been tightening my ranges in EP/MP as well, but less because of profitability in the sense I believe you're referring to and more so because of dynamics (the regs have started to 3! me lighter).

If you're the best player at your table it seems profitable to be much wider than the average winning player, because you'll make better decisions than the rest of the table.

If you're not or can't withstand the inherent variance that comes with playing infrequently, than it could make sense to tighten your ranges until you are. My understanding is that most players go broke opening super wide long term because there are consistently players at the table who are better than them.

Interesting. Some people call me too tight. I've been playing close to these ranges for awhile and they seem to have worked out.
But yeah my standard is 4x first in and adding 1 bb for each limper. If there are loose fish behind I'll of course size up accordingly. Also based on table dynamics. Like sometimes I'll go much larger because I know people will call. Like when it's a table that's been running for awhile and stacks are deep and people want to see flops.

In EP my standard is 5x.

My ranges and open sizing are almost entirely table dynamic and gameflow dependent. Basically I'm looking to open for as small as is necessary to get the hand heads up or take down the blinds and I'm looking to open as many hands as the table will allow me to get away with. At a "good table" I'll have a PFR of like 50% with a 3-6x open sizing. At a reg heavy table or with bad seat position against a good, very aggressive player I'll probably have a PFR of like 15% with a 3x open sizing. I don't use static ranges by position. If I'm at a table where nobody ever 3bets without AA/KK and I can get heads up most of the time I'm opening hands like Q4s.

Not adjusting your opening ranges based on your position at the table is flat out a huge leak. I don't care what table dynamic there is.

You can't profitably open 50% from utg just because your table is tight and you will "outplay" people postflop.

I definitely adjust by position, but I don't use static ranges for each position. That being said:

No one is opening pure static ranges or advocating that. I just provided a guideline. Of course it can expand and contract within reason.
But your assertion that you can just open whatever you want from wherever is just nonsense.

I'm not sure about a 50% PFR UTG but I believe Garrett's PFR on LATB has approached 40% on numerous occasions and he's playing with mostly pros.

That being said, I agree with Spyutastic on his opening ranges at most tables. Definitely not 99s+, AQ+ UTG like some people recommend on here. If you play a 5 hour session with 25 hands an hour, on average, you'll play 1 hand UTG utilizing that strategy.

Sure, that is Garrett Adelstein though- one of the absolute best deep stacked hold em players in the world. I would go on the limb and say he probably have a deep understanding of why he is doing x or y in a certain game.

What he is doing in his games have zero comparisson to what you should do in your average 1/3 game or 2/5 game.

Looking at it again, the ranges aren't as wide as I thought at first, but they are for sure wider than Upswing's online ranges for full ring, using ~2.5x sizing. I obviously don't play post flop anywhere near as well as you, so it would make since to have more narrow ranges than you. With that being said, you don't run into the problem of opening so frequently that you find yourself in a lot of OOP mw pots?

I feel most often I'm in the pot with 2 other players.

Most commonly it's one oerson that has position on me and one of the blinds.

But I don't feel like I'm opening all that frequently though. Live play just seems so slow.

But most spots are pretty straightforward to navigate so I don't find it particularly troublesome.

There's a lot of reasons why mimicking Garrett is not a good strategy at LLSNL. Back when I played online 6-max, my database showed that UTG was nearly a breakeven position. 75% of my profit came from CO/BTN. Position matters a lot more than you are giving it credit for. If you are a good player, you could probably play QQ+/AK UTG, and your winrate would barely dip. If you're an average player, it would probably go up.

That said, I think we can open all pocket pairs at low stakes, as sets are monster hands that can realize equity a lot better OOP against stationy opponents than drawing hands do. My UTG range looks something like this:

22+, AQ+, KQ, suited broadways. I've made peace with folding AJo UTG. If it's a 3-bet heavy game, which almost none ever are, then the smaller pairs have to go.

My BTN range is pretty damn wide. I won't go through it all, but stove shows it as 42%. It rarely gets exercised though, since so few pots are ever folded to me OTB.

I agree, but he’s also playing with some of the best hold em players in the world (Andy, John Cynn, Art, etc.) Shouldn’t they be able to exploit his super wide ranges pre? They can’t successfully because he’s better than all of them. Same with Tom Dwan on HSP

95% of players at 1/3 and 2/5 play recreationally and would be happy to win 5 BBs/hr+.

None of this applies if you’re not the best player in your game, or are not aspiring to be one of them anytime soon.

I can guarantee you he didn’t play as tight as some of you would recommend when he was starting out, and was working his way up. The more tough decisions you have to make, the more you grow as a player imo

Saying that having a similar approach and mindset to Garrett and Dwan at 2/5 is a bad idea is like saying starting a business when you’re strapped for cash is a bad idea because 95% of them fail. Who cares? Lol

There was a Friday LATB a while back when they couldn't get a higher stakes game going so they played T/T with a $10 ante. The game was played by Garret and regulars from their weeknight games. Garret was obviously the best player at the table. He also had the lowest VPIP that night by a good margin.

Yeah I like how people use one of the best live players playing 500bb+ high stakes often 7 handed to translate to why they can open from any spot in low stakes 100bb games. Just awesome.