Oh yeah, I just looked up "standard" in the dictionary and it said, "IWSJ's pre-flop play with suited connectors in the CO after 5 limpers."

FWIW.

First off, I understand OP's dilemma in general: often we'll run into spots where we have a hand where we have some equity/outs but can't profitably call, but are also the perfect hands to bluff-raise with since we aren't doing terrible against just top pair hands, our line can look really strong, and we can often gain additional equity on turns to barrel again with.

However, this is a really really terrible spot to attempt it. You're raising on a board where with the given action, its extremely unlikely all three players will fold. You'll often be forced to fold what might be the best hand, and even with position if someone flats it'll be a total guessing game figuring out if we can shove for value or get villain to fold a superior hand. And most importantly, we really don't have all that much equity: I like this play a lot better if its a drier board (say with no club draw), and if we at least have a backdoor flush draw that lets us shove some turns with well impunity.

So basically I commend OP for being creative enough to capitalize on spots where floating will look too weak and folding feels too much like giving up. But this definitely isn't one of them, so just re-squeeze your cards one more time and pitch them into the muck. Just wait for better, far less marginal spots to come up, as they definitely will.

ya, thats not my point. my point is that you will get better hands to fold ala jx, but there's some likelihood that nut flushes and unpaired flushes will either backraise now or c/ship turn and you're just boned. then u put in a ton of money "bluffing" but get rebluffed and lose. seems like a bad spot to me, since with 3 other players the liklihood of either one of them getting stubborn with jx+ or the above happening is way to high for it to be profitable, no?

I probably limp behind 80% and raise about 10% of the time. I fold probably 1% of the time.

I find that raising only works when hero's image is super-tight (having been card dead). I also that find even with a tight image, I have to raise large to get the pot heads-up so I can player poker, and not be stuck playing fit/fold in a huge MW pot. For this reason, when I raise I make it ~$125.

I honestly don't like limping behind with this hand, but I feel like I have no choice...

I know that I can't raise it every time b/c if I do raise it every time it will lead to a PRF% that is quite large, and as such, my image will be such that I get called in more then one spot, and stuck in a bloated MW post where fit/fold is usually the only option.

Folding seems lolbad and way too tight.

The only other option is calling, so it seems like the only logical option through process of elimination.

However, there are a number of problems with calling. First of all, after the being 6th caller, the incentive to squeeze increases dramatically for someone behind or in the blinds.

Also, even when someone doesn't squeeze, there are a crap-ton of reverse implied odds in a limp-fest pot, where it is not uncommon to run into {K2, Q6, ect.}

Interested in what all of you think about this hand PF...

I feel that for online poker, the PF game is solved (with at least 1k hands on everyone).

But for live poker, these spots are not as simple as most people think.

So you don't like limping yet do it 80% of the time? And what do you do the other 9% of the time you aren't limping, raising, or folding?

And why do you have to play fit/fold poker if the pot isn't heads up? Poker can be played multi-way as well...

And what's wrong with playing a big pot if you are in position. Here you only have 1 player behind from guaranteeing absolute position throughout the hand and the times the BTN does decide to come along being second last to act in a multi way pot is not the end of the world. And if the BTN abides by many of the maxims that you instinctively seem to like, "don't go broke in a limped pot", "need a really strong hand to mix it up multi way", etc... then surely a flop bet by you on numerous boards will buy you that coveted position, no?

If calling is the logical option [for you] then why do you hate it? There seems to be a fear that resonates throughout these boards of playing a hand without absolute position. Though I understand the importance of position and its inherent advantages, I also recognize the difference between HU pots with/without position and multi way pots where there are more than 2 positions (namely, IN or OUT OF..).

Though the incentive for squeezes may increase, that doesn't necessarily translate into that coming to fruition. Sure their is more dead money to go after and more mediocre hands that probably can't call a raise but there is also more people to try and get through and more likely a calling train start where each successive player is getting better odds than the last to see a flop. Not so easy to pull off a squeeze on practically the entire table.

And what if the BTN does do this? Then you relinquish 1bb? Is that the end of the world? If one of the blinds squeezes, well you have position now! Your decision on whether to limp, raise, or fold should be based on the BTNs and blinds tendencies so your fear of what may happen behind you should have already been accounted for when choosing your initial play.

Sure there is a chance that you are over flushed in some circumstances but unless its the BTN who has those cards you will be able to watch the hand develop in front of you and be able to better decipher if you are in fact in a cooler situation. I also don't think you should fear monsters at all times. Though getting over flushed happens (and blos) it certainly shouldn't be the deciding factor in wanting to play the hand...especially with our position. Also, this hand is strong because it makes straights as well as flushes (with the straight being the FAR preferred hand to make).

How is limping from the cut off standard? From my perspective it leads to l/c. I just dont like to limp in middle to late position and call a raise because we have the odds. I call it making false odds. Its a raise or fold pre the first time. Great points made by jloc postflop i like your thought process.

To me, it is not clear how best to play this hand in live poker, given the previous action, and table dynamic.

Partly b/c I don't think I've ever seen it happen in my FR-Rush game where I was in the CO and facing 4+ limps. I've never seen a CR video talking about it, ect.

I've looked at the math (probability of X players whiffing all of the various boards), but I haven't been able to really decide how best to play the hand MW (5+ players) post-flop.

Playing online, I felt confident with my PR game. Everything seemed so simple, and an easy consequence of my villains' stats. Playing live, these PF spots come up often, and I feel lost.

And I think unless someone is an extremely good player, they should feel lost too.

Playing live, these MW spots come up with {SC, ect}, and I have yet to find a solution to them. Of course, I see the merits of each play (call/fold/raise) but I do not know which is best for most table dynamics (but not all).

Sometimes, it is very clear to me that I should raise to ~$150. Sometimes it is clear to me that I should fold. All other times, I find raising and folding to be bad, so I elect to call. However, I still find calling to be full of problems. It just seems like the least of three evils.

I have difficulty playing MW pots as the PF raiser when I whiff. I'm not saying it's impossible to determine how/when to c-bet, but I find it very complicated. For example...

Hero is in CO w/ 78

Preflop: ($15) (10-players)
Five limps to hero, Hero raises to $100, BTN calls, SB folds, BB folds, 2 limpers fold, 3 limpers call.

Flop: ($500) ??? (5-players)
Checks to Hero, Hero?

To be honest, I have not figured out which flops I should be check/folding, and which flops I should be c-betting, for all of the various table dynamics.

I assume it is possible to make these determinations at the table, but I'm not good enough (yet?) to do so.

If you can, then you are a very good player.

However, you did say that you limp in this spot, so this situation wouldn't come up for you?

I think this is the consequence of taking the PF theory of NLHE that we have developed by studying/playing online poker, and trying to apply that same theory to the word of live poker. Since live is so different than online (so much more limping and less PF raising), these problems (fears) come up.

Princess when raising from the cutoff you need a real read on the button. His style pre/post are vitale to the hand. If button is a loose player who calls alot. I dont want to give him absolute position. But if he is tight plays abc poker/sitting duck im raising more often then not. I tend to hug the button, if i have tighter players to my left, i will hug the button/co and the hijack position. For me having loose players on my left give me a world of trouble.

I think this is spewy, because of the high likelihood that you're gonna have to fire the turn and possibly the river to get folds.

I'd rather lead flop and see what happens from there.

solid post

Thinking more about this hand PF, I think folding PF is best, because of the table dynamic.

The table dynamic being: "omfg this game is so soft --> four limpers to me? wow. lollivepoker."

Playing in a game where hero frequently finds himself in a spot facing four limpers is like going back in time to party poker 2004. Those games were crushable at 3bb/100 by simply set-mining.

Back then, I would just fold 78, and wait for {22+, AK} and get paid every time I got a monster.

Obv. that isn't possible anymore OL, since the OL has game change so much --> forcing hero's to learn to play poker...

1. position v. blinds,
2. blinds v. LP openers,
3. blinds v. blinds.
4. learning how to exploit stats,
5. ect.

For a game where hero frequently finds himself in the CO, and facing four limpers...hero isn't playing poker as much as hero is collecting chips from fish.

Sure, a very good player can raise the hand PF, and show a profit.

Sure, a very good player can limp behind, and show a profit.

But waiting for premiums = high-profit/low-variance.

That being said, even for this table dynamic, if I was card-dead with a tight image, I would prefer a large raise to punish the limpers, and the fit/fold players...

Calling is okay too, but for the reasons I mentioned in another post, there are problems to address...

This is horrible thinking. You should be playing against ranges, not actual hands. Just because you make wrong decision against a specific hand your opponent happens to have, you don't "lose" anything.

Obviously you can not call with this hand on the flop so your options are fold or raise.

If you compare the options, in both options you end up folding the hand under pressure. Therefore you don't "lose" equity and it doesn't affect the range of hands that goes to sd or has some real sd value.

Actually bluffing in spots like these without the blockers and miracle cards that happen to give you the best hand is bad. That said, I rarely do this but it's immensely profitable (risk $575 vs reward $775 in this case), but it requires good reads, this kind of blockery hand (56, 54 would be even better as it doesn't block almost any draws and you actually block one of the more realistic set combos, also with a 5 on the turn/river you can v-town people and even other outs a probably more cleaner), right opponents and absolutely nitty image. It's really hard to comment the move without actually being there.

Stupid 30 mins rule for editing, A5 is a good candidate as well and the sizing could be a little bit bigger, like $ 600 maybe to make it look a little less calculative and you win like $ 675 if you pull it off, which is still a lot.

This post sums up my thinking exactly, and my thought process when I conducted my squeeze. Hands that raise in this spot need to either be:

1. Easy to fold under pressure
2. Easy to call or shove under pressure

Blockers are nice, but not needed, IMO--if I have like T7s here with a backdoor draw, I have miracle outs and any Jx is still hating life. Sure, there are more 88s in V1's range now, but the hand is still an easy pitch.

That said, I do not think that there is much room for this play unless we believe that our PFR cbets too much in multiway pots, folds too much to pressure, and our callers are all incapable of spazzing over the top with draws. This does not happen too often.

Unless you just are completely lost in multiway pots, I would say that folding preflop is the leading candidate for worst play. And if this is actually the case (that your find yourself completely lost in how to maneuver with this type hand in this position), then I strongly suggest you drop down a level in stakes so you can practice playing these situations with a lower learning fee.

Again, we are in the CUTOFF...the 2nd best possible position, with no guarantee that the BTN will even be coming along, thus making it the best position for that hand (which is all that really matters). The times he does play you will start to learn and understand how multiway pots work, how position is fluid within the hand as you manipulate, pressure, and leverage stacks against each other to suit your own needs (such as buying position, pressuring better/high equity hands against each other, over repping and/or using deception to alter your hand/range strength, etc..).

As for the game being soft as a reason, I'd think the exact opposite actually. I interpret that as players being weak hand readers, lacking fundamentals (e.g limping in AND probably happily calling raises from behind), over playing hands making implied odds go way up, not being positionally aware thus getting trapped easier, the lack of 3betting which both allows you to know what you are up against when facing one while also being able to see cheap flops with high upside/frequency while rarely facing one, etc..

I'd even argue that this hand could be profitably limped from the HJ in accordance with the similarly required prerequisites needed to limp the CO. Limping gets a lot of flack (and rightfully so since the times to limp are sparse in relation to the times to raise/fold), but that doesn't mean those sparse times don't exist. The problem that many have is they overestimate how their aggression will affect a field of players as it relates to FE and too often take a profitable situation like limping and seeing a cheap flop in great relative position (possibly best absolute) and create a 'too big to fail' spot to remain profitable. Over aggression can be just as deadly if you miscalculate the dynamic of the table.**

**This is not an argument to call over raise here as not enough detail was given but rather just an endorsement for why limping can be good here as opposed to folding.

Except back in 2004 there weren't training sites, an abundance of knowledge on public forums, 'pros' offering their insight on national t.v, multitabling players who are acquiring vast amounts of information in a shorter more refined way, poker software tools to breakdown huge sample sizes and sort/highlight important dynamics, etc..

The games are not remotely the same but I will say that live poker resembles party poker circa 2004 LEAPS AND BOUNDS more than any online game played today and if you are coming from a strictly online back round you will have to go through some growing pains when learning how to deal with these situations (thus the suggestion to drop a few levels to make this learning process cheaper). Some multiway pots are self induced such as this one while others are just the nature of the game (calling stations which is great). Either way they are unique and carry a far greater dynamic in that there are more variables to account for and thus that many more contingencies to digest.

Exactly. So get in the pot and start collecting. Folding doesn't accomplish this and we are currently debating folding vs calling preflop. An argument can be made (given the right circumstances), for playing a random hand from the back over a strong hand played from the front.

Just because premiums yield high profit (no argument here), whose to say that other hands that aren't considered "premium" [by you] can't also show profit? If there are players who looove to slowplay big PPs and then never fold them (yes these people exist in droves, especially found in "omfg this game is so soft --> four limpers to me? wow. lollivepoker"), then limping seems like the best choice for an assortment of hands not just relegated to "premium". And again, don't underestimate how strong being in the CO really is.

I don't think anyone is arguing that a dynamic can't be shaped where raising is the best play. I believe we have been debating the merits of calling as you have said folding is better. If you want to engage in a debate as to when raising is best vs limping, I'd say there would be too many intricacies for such a discussion, not feasible in post form. No handy list can be made. Obviously certain traits can be ideal as a primer for whats ideal but the part about playing poker as you say, is in the finer details that are constantly in flux....in real time.

I dont like it. Flop too drawy so even though he may fold pairs etc, he would have to be a real nit to fold to you on that flop.

Now if stack sizes are good for it, I wouldnt mind c/c and then CRAI on turn if his turn bet size suggests moderate strength and not top overpair strength etc. (if others were not in pot too)

But on this flop with others in pot, nah.

absolutely **** not horrible thinking. if you dont consider all the possible outcomes of your decision then you are just dumb as clay. not saying its the only thing to consider. and actually theres a huge flaw with what you wrote beneath telling me how horribly I think. all im gonna say. gl

Ty,

I guess you didn't figure out anything that I said, but please do point out the flaw in my thinking.

Oh and imo the blocker value is quite important. There's always a chance that someone is playing a big hand badly and it considerably lowers the chance of that + the added outs. One positive thing is that it also stops me from overdoing a squeeze in situations like this :P

Hero is in CO w/ 78

Preflop: ($15) (10-players)
Five limps to hero, Hero?

I don't think it is profitable to limp behind in this spot. However, that is not something I can prove because we don't have a live poker-tracker.

There are just too many problems with being the 6th limper PF w/ this hand.

1. The incentive to raise increases dramatically for someone behind or in the blinds.
2. There are a ton of reverse implied odds in a limp-fest pot, where it is not uncommon to run into {T2, Q6, KQo, A8, ect.}

Another issue to deal this is the bet-sizing tendencies of the player pool. In most instances, players lead for ~pot, and shut-down when the scare card comes. This makes it difficult to extract the necessary value when hero's draw comes it --> when the flush card comes, most villains shut-down, and try to get to show-down cheap. When hero calls pot OTF, hero usually doesn't make enough OTT and OTR to justify the necessary odds to cover having to hit, and his reverse implied odds.

Since folding is neutral EV, I think the burden of proof is on the person that wants to limp to show that they are making money by limping. But even if you are making money by limping how much money do you think you're making in that spot? 0.01bb/100?

But I do think the most important thing to decide is how to beat a given game. That is why I pointed out that big-hand mining limp-fest games is +EV. Just like is was circa 2004 OL.

I think this really depends on the villain. Some will fold a J here a lot (since they are deep and they are afraid of facing larger bets on later streets - kind of like the guys who open muck 22 on a J98 board and they say something like "I'm folding the best hand, you have AK!")

Obv the play sucks against stations. Also stacks are deep enough to where you def have the FE to get guys off 1pr hands.