I mean, yeah, if there's a very good chance that it's going to be raised preflop, then obviously we shouldn't be limping as much with speculative hands. It's something I've realized has changed a lot in my game and therefore I've tightened up considerably especially in EP/MP.

However, sometimes there will be tables that aren't as raisey, and contain some players that you should be itching to get into a hand to, and limping in / overlimping to hopefully see a cheap flop with them isn't horrible. If the worst case / unexpected scenario happens and someone raises big and everyone folds and we have to fold, whatever, we take the 1bb hit and move on.

GcluelessNLnoobG

Sure, but those 1bbs can add up after a while.

And how often do we actually hit a strong hand when we limp and make it to the flop? Not often in my experience.

They're called speculative hands for a reason. As an illustration: if we have to limp to fold preflop/flop 49 times just to hit a 100bb pay out on the 50th attempt, that'll be profitable to the tune of ~1bb/hand. I mean, obviously it doesn't work quite that way, plus I haven't factored in the times we lose money postflop sometimes, but overall we play speculative hands in spots where we *think* it will prove to be long term profitable. Whether we are correct in our assumption / actually have the skill relative to our opponents to make the spot long term profitable / etc. is another question altogether (and a valid one).

GcluelessNLnoobG

If one time in 50 we flop the supernuts, sure, sounds good, but the chances of flopping the supernuts are worse than that. With A5s we flop the supernuts about .84% (actually way less if we mean the SF but let's say the NF qualifies), and often we don't get paid, and occasionally we lose to a boat or SF. Most of the time limping a hand like this if we make anything it's a FD or TPNK. Do we give up with TPNK? What about all those times we chase the FD and miss? Adds up to a lot more than 1BB. Meanwhile the novice is supposed to correctly evaluate what to do with TPNK, backdoor draws, calculate implied odds accurately, etc.?

Playing A5s as a limp is not simple for novice players unless we fold every time we don't flop the nuts, in which case it's definitely not profitable.

Raising or folding every hand is a better strategy for novice players IMO as they can just dump borderline hands without much loss of EV and rarely find themselves in tricky situations.

I'm not saying limping is always bad, or even that it's bad in this case, but playing limped hands profitably is relatively challenging and more of an advanced concept I think.

Basically I just don't want to encourage a raise vs fold mentality in noobs unless the raising range is very tight (in which case, ok, fine). But I mean if there's 2 limpers and they have A5s on the Button, I think they are far better off overlimping it than they are raising it. Raising it makes it much easier to put stacks in play postflop where they can make massive mistakes with marginal hands. To play for stacks in a limped pot with a marginal hand they'd have to be fairly horrendous (I'm assuming they're not *that* bad); and if they are that bad, sure, folding is fine.

GcluelessNLnoobG

Given the choices are only fold, call, or raise, wouldn't it be pretty obvious that most people would choose to call with A5s.

And if your rationale to call is simply to try to hit something big, wouldn't that again be the most obvious and common rationale?

I mean...you don't really need a forum or discussion for such obvious approach, right? And it's not like you are defending it with new ideas or pointing out the inconsistencies of other approaches. You are simply saying, don't do anything beyond the most obvious.

I am not attacking you, but I simply don't understand exactly what you are bringing to the table when you repeatedly post these thoughts? How does it benefit you or anyone to always revert to what 99% of players are already doing in these situations?

All I'm simply saying is that encouraging noobs to raise any hand they are going to play (which is being encouraged by others in this thread) is a very dangerous approach, as now every single pot they play is a big one and every postflop mistake they make will magnified (typically involving stacks). If you're going to make a lot of postflop mistakes, you're much better off in a small pot.

GcluelessNLnoobG

Well yeah, that's why limiting your choices to raise/fold makes the game easier, because it forces you to fold marginal hands. Thought that was kind of a given. The point is if you raise/fold you don't have marginal hands, aside from when a SC or AXs makes TPWK. But most of the time we have very easy post-flop decisions.

Limping just makes the SPR high and gets the hand multiway which is kind of the opposite of what we want with A5s. If we had some earlier limps I think overlimping is fine but open limping OTB with A5s? Ugh. By raising we steal the blinds and straddle frequently, the importance of which should not be overlooked.

It's not hard to make raising more profitable than limping or folding here. We're OTB first in with a legit hand. If we risk $25 to win $10 and get called say half the time, our EV if we just fold post-flop is -$2.50 so we need to make back $2.50 on average ignoring rake, and being OTB with a playable hand we can easily do much better than that. If we get 1 call and take it down with a C-bet that's another $25. If called we typically have many good turn barrels. I get there are some complex situations like playing KJ OOP on a K high flop 4 ways but this isn't really one of those spots. By comparison folding is EV neutral, and limping costs $6, after which, assuming we don't have to fold to a straddle raise (not a good assumption IME), we need to make back $6 post-flop just to break even. That's a much harder proposition IMO. We can't C-bet as much since we're almost certainly multiway now and our hand looks weak since we didn't raise. We aren't going to flop better than TPNK much aside from draws. And A5s is great for draws, but it works so much better HU as the aggressor since we can barrel BDFDs, wheel draws, pair + BDFD, etc. If we bet a flush draw into three people after limping nobody's folding any kind of hand, so we're just piling money into the pot with Ace high.

^^^^

I don't have nearly as much problem with raising if there is a *very* good chance this ends the hand / gets in HU most of the time. Most of the games I sit in, as well as most of the hands I see posted here, start with "1 or 2 limps, I raise to isolate, we see a flop 5ways". In this particular hand, with everyone folding to the Button, then obviously a lot better chance a raise takes this down preflop / gets us HU; but even in this case we have to be aware that building a big pot isn't necessarily great if our opponent is better at stealing pots postflop than we are.

In many ways similar to HOC recommending the value of noobs ending the hand preflop with their big pair hands by raising; although he was making a big assumption that raising the hand preflop often ends the hand. In most games I play in, all raising does is build a big bloated multiway pot, which is an even worse spot for most noobs (and even others).

Ggamedependent,imoG

Why would we assume the blinds / straddler are going to call OOP to steal the pot, or that they're better at it than we are? We have the button and one of the best semibluffing hands in the game. We would have to be braindead to somehow be worse at stealing the pot in this situation.

It's been a while since I read HOC. So he recommends raising big pairs with the goal of ending the hand pre-flop?? Not to build a pot with the best hand? That is freaking terrible advice if I'm reading that correctly. Though I see people do this sometimes. It's really obvious...they have a normalish raising size with all their hands but a few "pet hands" where they raise like 15BB then show JJ when everyone folds and sheepishly say "well what else can you do with jacks right?"

I'm referring to this from a standpoint of "noobs would be better off raising". If Hero on the Button is a noob, regardless of our reads on blinds/straddler, I don't think it would be that much of a stretch to assume that anyone with more experience than a noob is going to be better at stealing the pot postflop (even with their positional disadvantage). Throw in a read that suggests straddler is laggy (I know we don't have reads in this particular case, all we know is person straddled), and it's not even close.

HOC is saying that if you're outmatched (and I think this can easily be applied to noobs) that you're better off taking down the pot postflop with you big pairs, and I agree with this. With respect to the "noobs would be better off raising" discussion, what I disagree with is that HOC is assuming the raise will often take down the pot preflop; in my experience in my loose preflop games, raising has little chance of taking down the pot preflop (a limp/reraise is much better at this). As for noobs making it lol 15bb to take down the pot preflop with JJ, it might be a far better strategy than you think; if they raise to less at a table of opponents that have them greatly outmatched, a lot of their opponents will only be calling their preflop raises if they believe it is profitable to do so (and if that's actually the case, the noob is losing money longterm if they see a flop).

GcluelessNLnoobG

So a noob who never steps out of boundary of a noob shall be a noob forever?

When do you think a noob can qualify to raise from the button with A5s as oppose to just limping?

If hero can raise for value, then why not?
It looks like a clear raise in this situation against the blinds and straddle only.

Sure, you get into situations like this one, where you feel sucked in. But on the flop you have TP against short stacks with random hands when it's checked to you, there is a K, a FD, and two broadway cards which gives the hopefuls enough to hang on. Absolutely calling turn.

It's pretty hard to steal pots OOP with random hands. Unless he's just x/r a ton which I rarely see at this level. I don't think we should be concerned about this when we're OTB with the likely best hand.

Assume you meant preflop?

Yeah I agree a raise will not typically take it down. Maybe Harrington means noobs who suddenly start playing 25/50 lol.

I'm pretty sure it's a terrible strategy. But I love these guys. If I'm in the blinds or OTB with tight players in the blinds and their raise gets everyone to fold, if they're deep enough I'll raise to like 55BB with all kinds of trashy hands and they mostly fold, and when they flat I can c-bet any Q-high or higher flop and they fold.

And I can just flat KK+ and get them to stack off when we both have overpairs.

Granted most players don't make these adjustments though. With most players, or when I'm not in a position I can 3-bet them light, they successfully risk $30 to win $2 in blinds (yeah they take $1 for the drop here).

Remember, I'm not saying that *you* shouldn't be fine with raise/fold approach here; I'm saying this is a dangerous approach to recommend for noobs.


Yes, my bad (wish I could re-edit that).


And again, for *you* this is probably a bad strategy. But for noobs (or anyone else that is simply outmatched at the table), they are simply not going to be profitable seeing a flop with players that outmatch them; their goal should be to end the hand preflop / get in as silly large percentage of their stack preflop with a very tight range so that calling isn't profitable. In fact, even I've been coming around to the benefits of simply taking down pots preflop (avoiding the rake being a big benefit), especially at tables where I don't have a towering advantage over anyone.

GcluelessNLnoobG

So if you are a noob, don't raise because it's a bigger mistake than limping.

And the reason for the bigger mistake is because of SPR and A5s is too weak to raise with low SPR.

If you have $2 and it costs $1 to limp, it's a bigger mistake to raise to $2 than just call $1, IF IT'S A MISTAKE AT ALL, even though you have not establish how it is a mistake other than that it could be a mistake...

Isn't any decision a potential mistake for a noob no matter what he does? And anything short of folding is essentially opening the door to make a mistake and if it's already a mistake, putting more money in the pot is always going to be a bigger mistake?

I mean...I honestly can't figure out what you are saying other than simply:

If you are a noob, putting more money in the pot without the nuts is a bigger mistake.

This is terrible advice imo.

Learning to play post-flop is crucial to becoming a good player. So how do you expect noobs to learn how to play post-flop if they don't see flops?

How is it terrible advice to suggest taking down pots if you're outmatched by the table?

Instead the advice should be to build a bloated multiway pot when outmatched by the table?

Gbutdowhatyouwant,Idon'treallycareG

The advice should be to make a small/normal sized raise and then evaluate on the flop imo. Noobs are allowed to fold the flop. Taking down pots pre teaches nothing about the game.

Creating bigger pots preflop simply makes for much bigger mistakes postflop. Since noobs are likely the ones to be making the mistakes postflop, I see no reason why we'd be advocating that.

Gyoudon'tteachsomeonetoswimbythrowingtheminthedeep endwithoutalifejacket,imoG

If your goal when you enter a pot is to make everyone fold, you are doing it wrong, because this is not part of a winning strategy. Telling a noob to do things to minimize his losses will just ensure that he will always be a noob. Everyone was noob at one point, and everyone's goals are different, but do you want to be the guy that really understands the game and can beat almost any line-up, or the guy who is forever mediocre and unable/unwilling to improve and move up?

Now I'm not saying that there aren't spots where I'm hoping for folds pre-flop (so don't strawman me saying I'm encouraging people to intentionally put themselves in bad spots just to learn), but if you think raising JJ and getting called is a "bad spot", poker is not the game for you.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

I don't know what kind of noobs we're talking about here, but I'd say if you instructed a new player with basic understanding of relative hand strength to (a) raise good hands in position, (b) always bet if you flop something good, and (c) not indiscriminately c-bet, they'd do pretty well in a short-stack game. My best advice for noobs would be (d) rack up and leave if the stacks get too deep.

Last line is funny because GG would take it even further. In another thread he's actually arguing that even with AA it's a mistake to put more money in the pot pre-flop from UTG+1.

I would say give noobs the same advice as everyone else, perhaps with a few caveats. Play JJ OOP for a normal sized raise. If you get bit a few times it's part of the learning process. Write down the HHs, figure out why you got bit and how you can play JJ better. Not...just do whatever you can to avoid getting bit even if it means you'll never improve.

That's not surprising given that he's only approaching the game from the perspective of how to lose less as if there are only two range of cards: nuts and losing hands.