I'm thinking of a better way to play hands I love in late position, but not so much in EP. Now I never like playing from OOP, but certain hands dictate it, and I just go with the flow and raise pre, usually larger than normal. But here, I'm asking about hands that make TPTK like AJ, AQ.

These hands are too strong to fold out-right with no info, but can get us into a tun of trouble if we raise pre. 3 streets of value is hard to get with these from OOP, and checking turn for pot control can induce a semi-bluff of bluff. If you call that bet, you essentially say "Screw pot control" and are forced to call bets on safe river cards, whatever they may be.

So what about limping, with the plan to L/3-bet depending upon subsequent action? Basically, what type of player raises and in what position. So, I wouldn't do this to someone who only raises with big hands, but rather a looser player, or a player good enough to loosen their range as their position nears the button.
Its almost like you straddled, giving you the opportunity to get info pre flop, but cheeper and having the opportunity to see your cards first.

Under the right conditions, you now have a hand that is likely stronger than your opponent and likely to get it HU.

I'm not too worried if the pot limps through either... I only spent a bb, and went to flop with the best hand. If I don't like the flop or subsequent action... I just bail and no-one knows.

Any thoughts?

I fold AJo UTG, don't see the problem with doing so. Honestly a noob can probably go ahead and fold AJss and AQo as well, I know that's controversial though.

The TPTK hands I'm going to play, I'd rather just raise UTG like normal. If we have people aggressive enough that we don't like playing TP hands OOP, they're going to make our life pretty miserable by attacking our limps in position anyway. I guess the first limp-3bet should work out OK for us because they will presumably take it as a premium hand and fold but I wouldn't like to make a habit of it.

I think with AQ and AJ UTG would depend on the table:
My image
Stack sizes
Loose or tight tables

One constant is, I'd always raise this hand UTG but depending on the situation I'd probably raise less pre than the standard open. Ex UTG I might open 3BB but on the Btn I might open 5BB

Thats one way to go, but the problem with raising less is that it will result in more action on average, leading to trickier situations multiway oop. Ive done that and dont like it too much... But still not a tun of hours to draw a solid conclusion. I like to raise pre the same each time based on the table dynamics and increasing for each limper. From EP im likey to raiser greater however to thin the field more.

depending on the table i change my ranges. At the usual passive 1/2 game a limp like 22-66 from EP and some of the small SC. I don't L/rr a lot but there are times where it is a good play.

I also just always open for $10 + BB for each limp. Sometimes i change this when a super calling station is in the pot but thats it. Don't see a real reason to get too complex with sizing pre flop and possibly give something away about your hand

I'm asking this question because I've been playing at crazy tables recently. The first 200 hours I played were in PA at my local casino where the massive majority were NITs to Super NITs... all old dudes. AJ was an easy fold from EP and even from MP really... no point in messing around with that.

Now, I'm down south, and these tables are ridiculously loose by comparison with pre flop raisers, and AJ has become a solid hand... I'm just looking for a way to play it while OOP.

Grunch I think this could be OK. You would need to take some other adjustments into consideration to continue to do it, I.e. Occasionally playing AA-KK and AK also as a limp/rr to add some balance and not cap your range. Another thing that I would take into consideration would be that in the cases where we're doing this it should be for value in general, as our open pfr would have been to begin w. So, if someone opened to 12 in back of you you aren't making it 50 to fold then out, you're making it 25 or 30 w a plan and factoring in what you will do when called. The other obvious implication there being that if you're super deep, or against a creative player this play is NOT for value anymore, it's just opening you up to being out played in an inflated pot w a hand that easily could've been played as an open raise, rather than dog earring it as specifically AQ or AJ, which, just like most hands, can't stand a ton pressure on most boards. Think about it, do you want to be picking off the $40 river bluffs w A high, or are you looking forward to having AQ unimproved and not knowing whether someone is picking up on weakness and/or just unable to resist a Bluff at a $200 pot, and throws out $170 w their 76ss busted flush draw?

All in all, I wouldn't make this a static play in your arsenal for these hands, but based on occasional situations I think you could do it, and possibly have it be even more profitable than an open raise; but do your winrate a favor and strongly consider the classical way of playing these hands in these positions and find concrete reasons why you're deviating from the tried and true before calling an audible.

Also, AJo I have no problem folding UTG in full ring

I'm wondering if the number of times I limp/fold doing this will be bad.
I truly would be doing this to value raise, so I'd need a loose table where I can put AJ ahead of a large chunk of there range. I'm partly concerned that I'll be building a biggish pot with a weakish hand while OOP. I'll test it out.
Appreciate the input Sungar... not sure why some of you old hats say grunch lol. Reminds me of an old man who pissed he has to do something.
If I implement this strategy, I'll keep record of its results, with all the info I can muster.

Grunch means they havent read the other responses.

Places I play are typically passive enough to allow a lot of limping even from early position. If you get raise then use your judgement. Im sure I limp fold enough for it to be considered a leak but its deinitely not a major one,

There's so many factors to consider here that no one can give you an answer on this. Try to avoid having a set plan for a given hand. Circumstances always change and you should too

I'm fine with limping these hands in EP, depending on table dynamics, but I'm not a big fan of l/rr with them. I think l/rr is so heavily weighted towards KK+ that you are actually overexposing your hand and might value own yourself on favorable boards. If you are going to bluff l/rr id prefer Ax suited type hands that need to be heads up to have any real value and give you blockers to AA just the same as AQ. AQ might actually be worse to bluff with since it blocks QQ which is a hand you can probably get to fold with a few bets.

While I consider AJo a weak hand in EP, when I get it in mid-position [5 players left to act] I consider it a strong hand if nobody has opened. With 5 players left act, there is only a ~10% chance that someone behind me has an ace with a higher kicker:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poker_...old_'em%29

From EP, you raise more to thin the field more.
That's one strategy but consider that when called, you'll always be OOP, and now in a bloated pot.
I raise smaller in EP, because I have so little info, not bc of hand strength.
In LP, I raise much bigger.

So, in casino game, my standard raise UtG might be $8 (4bb), but CO or button, if there's one limper, I raise to $15, and more than one limper, maybe $17, etc.

I want to play bigger pots in position, and when OOP, I don't want to play bloated pots with one pair-type hands.

The smaller PF raise is fine with hands like AJ but what about AA or KK?
Sometimes, someone will attack, my small open, so if I have AA or Kk, yay, ship it. Sometimes, it will be multiway and I'll have to be cautious.

If I open to $8 with AA and get 5 callers and the flop is JJ8 and I check and a player bets, the next guy calls, and the button raises, I can muck.
Not every spot is so clear cut but you get the picture.

The small Pf investment when OOP makes it easier to release in bad spots.

All that said: if your open raises to $20 are getting called, adjust. I'm finding that opening to $8 in EP often yields two callers, which is manageable. Sometimes, it's 5 callers, which creates $40 pot. Bet/fold $35 gets a lot of info.

I've been wondering the same.

I don't think you can make as much money playing speculative hands OOP as you can IP. Two reasons:
- You usually have more information to act on in late position.
- Aggression in late position makes money; aggression in early position usually spews money.

It follows, then, that you will usually be playing these hands passively, so choose hands that play well that way.

There are several types of speculative hands:
1. Mid-pocket pairs. Very straightforward to play, generally profitable
2. Small pocket pairs. Not clear these are profitable to play OOP, regardless of table conditions. Maybe.
3. Axs. Gobbledygeek has discussed criteria for playing this OOP on a couple of occasions, to considerable debate.
4. SC's. Note that there are several different ways to win with these. Drawing for a pair against a bunch of fish is by far the worst way, but that's what it'll be more often than not. So you have to ask yourself, how low you're willing to go. A lot of people will limp in with JTs from EP if they can get away with it. Are you willing to go 89s? 78s? Make up your mind before you get into this. More frequently you will be watching the hand unfold through the turn, depending on who you are up against you can make hay but turn play OOP is tricky and expensive, you have to be deep to even think about it.

Of all the hands you might consider playing, non-suited, non-paired cards other than AK basically put you into a pair-drawing contest with a bunch of fish. You will lose every time. So, I'm not saying don't play speculative hands from OOP; I'm interested in that question myself. But you have to really think about what you're willing to play, and why.

All hands are just tools for making money.

How do you expect to make money from OOP with AJo?
Do you think that people are going to give you too much value with weak hands to compensate you for all the times that they have/make a better hand than you?

How does that compare with how you plan to make money with AK, QQ, 66 OOP?
How does your villains range tighten up when you are raising from EP as opposed to raising from LP when you could be stealing with most of the deck? Do they call you down just as light later on in the hand? Do they bluff when you show weakness? Will the semi-bluff raise you at any point?

When we are playing OOP we lose options to do a variety of different things.
We lose the option to check behind on the flop and spike an over OTT, or check behind on the turn and control the size of the pot when we flop a weak showdownable hand.
We lose information.

Everyone in the game is dealt the same hands over the long run. We all get AA as many times as anyone else (except me, I run like god) and if no one used any information we would all make about the same about of money in the long run.

However, if we play IP more we play with more information than our villains at all times and use that information well then we will make more money than them. When we play OOP we want to compensate our self with our lack of information with a stronger hand selection. Or we want to rely on information that we have previously obtained. We want to know that they fold too often, call too often or otherwise play in an exploitable fashion.

Gotta go to class, I'll post more later.

For me it all comes down to stack sizes (especially of those I expect to be in the hand), looseness of table, and difficulty of the table. The shorter / tighter the table / ABC everyone is, the more I'm raising big Ax hands; I'm cool with building big pots OOP cuz I just don't think I'm going to be put in too many tough spots postflop (a lot of the time I'll simply be committed with TP, otherwise I don't think anyone is going to play back at me and steal a pot). The deeper / looser the table / trickier/difficult, the more I limp big Ax hands (possibly to reraise), because being OOP with TP hands in bloated pots at these types of tables sets me up for spots where I can make lots of big mistakes.

FWIW, I insta-fold AJo/KQo in EP, but I'm rockish like that.

GcluelessNLnoobG

Yeah... I've been instafolding KQ AJ from UTG & UTG+1 since I started played a few months ago. I raise AQ, but hate playing it when I know Ill be OOP for sure.
My tables would be truly passive, so AQ AK JJ QQ 10-10 would not 3 bet me. So I never knew what I was up against. Down south, again, players are not three betting often without KK, AA, but many players open raise wider than I'm used to.
Anyway, just throwing it out there. There wasn't a resounding "No!! You idiot!" Probably because Spexdome is banned. So i'll give it a go here and there. Should be fun!

I stick to a select few speculative hands in EP when I open.
98s is a low as I go and I need decent stacks at the table. No 1 gap SCs.
I am only opening UTG/1/2/3 with about 10% of hands. Always for the same amount.

A typical hand [that I can c-bet] with 98
Open for $8, 3 callers, blinds fold.
Flop [$24 raked]J75

I bet $15, they fold.

This is not the game you want to be playing with speculative hands in EP.

This is a small-pot strategy, what I call a "pair-drawing contest." You can win a pair-drawing contest with the fish if you are heads up and in position, because half the time you both get to the flop with nothing. Being the aggressor IP is enough to give you an advantage; add in the times you actually outflop your opponent, you are well ahead. Being out of position isn't the same, even if you are an aggressor. And being up against multiple opponents kills your advantage.

The things that make this a good flop to bet also make it a good flop to c/c, and there are advantages to that approach. Difficulties as well, such as the question of when, and how to take the initiative.

This table is kind of tight to be playing speculative hands anyway. Think about how you would be feeling if you started off with 55. A lot of things have to come together to make it worthwhile, many of which are contradictory. We want people to bet in LP, just not too strongly. We want people to fold to our semi-bluff, but pay us off if we get there. I think for the most part this has to be a big-pot game, and we need to understand that we are going to lose a lot of small pots for every big pot we take down. Little or no margin of error for those big plays that will come up so often OTT.

Playing speculative hands OOP is never going to be as profitable as playing IP, but if we can define the conditions under which it is profitable at all, we should be doing it.


That's a big fat "if" though.


(ETA: You have however probably defined the sort of table GG would raise Axs pre, likewise JJ, TT or even 99 pre. Just maybe not 98s...)