A range that is ahead of Villian makes as much profit as a range that crushes Villian. Why not raise KQ, KJ, QJ etc. Limping these hands, and playing a large multi-way pot eliminates your cbet opportunity.

It doesn't make as much if you don't maximize the profit. He suggested crushing range will make more than the wider range if the amounts are the same. If you're playing the weaker part better than your opponents then your adding that profit on top of what the tighter range brings you. That doesn't take into account the extra profits oil make from playing looser and getting paid for your better hands.

If you're going to get a large multi-way pot anyways when you raise, as in the case in some games, you don't have much of a cbet opportunity anyways.

If I have some aggressive opponents who are good at making big bluffs later in the hand, I sometimes like forcing them to play more multi-way pots that are protected to take away that play and to take them out of their comfort zone.

Where I play, that # @ 1/2 is about 27-35+ on weekends.

If I understand the strategy we're discussing, one of the objects is to raise a large enough amount that you only get one or two callers. This amount is determined by continually increasing your bet sizing until the goal is accomplished. One of the major benefits of having one or two callers is the increased profitability of cbetting into fewer opponents.

Speaking from the perspective of 3/5 and 5/5 games in Los Angeles, I can say this strategy works very well. Almost magically.

dgiharris has been talking about training a table to call a 8bb raise with the same range that they would call a 3-4bb raise. If a table sees a lot of hands with 6-7 players seeing the flop in a 3-4bb raise, do you prefer to see those hands become 6-7 players seeing the flop after a raise to 8bb? (My answer is: sometimes yes and sometimes no.)

Sometimes, I see opponents who are desperate to isolate and don't seem to realize that they have no chance of avoiding multi-way pots unless they raise so much that they make it profitable for me to slowplay before the pot with the intention of getting in an over-limp reraise. Other times, I see opponents who get completely flustered and start to overplay hands if you make a somewhat loose call in the hopes of starting a donkey train of callers.

My raising up to 8bb is for the purpose of limiting the action to 1-2 callers so that cbetting is still insanely profitable. Also, I like being able to better manipulate the table and having a bigger range I can raise for deceptive or exploiting purposes.

There are 2 schools of thought on achieving deception. A) The old school method is to raise the same amount regardless of your holdings, i.e. you always raise 4bb.
B) I subscribe to a newer school of thought that involves varying my raise amounts based on table dynamics, image, etc.

back to your original question, occasionally, I do get a super action table where a 7bb raise gets called by 5 players. If that is the case, then I adjust yet again. Either I will look for opportunities to squeeze, or I will up my raise amount to 12bb - 15bb so that I get 1-2 callers. and of course, eff stacks are important. A lot of the 2/5nl games I play in eff stacks are $800+.

he doesn't.

$1/$2 is a social game for a lot of players. they come with one or two buyins and if they lose and have a good time, they are OK with it. they aren't there to grind out a buyin profit every night.

I would even go a step further and say that my raise size is based on who has limped and who is yet to act.

Balance would only be necessary if the right player is in the hand.

Spot that I find myself in frequently,

A few limpers including an aggro-LAG...I raise LP with AQo, flop 955r
Checks to me, the board is perfect for a cbet, but what will end up happening is that all folds to LAG who will make a big raise knowing that I will usually fold...
Do u just check behind and maybe c/c it down?
Just shove since he will be raising this flop with all garbage but will fold some of his equity to a shove?

It depends on stuff like stacks, position, and number of players in the hand, but sometimes it is okay to give up on a hand. I've found that not c-betting 100% of the time when I whiff with AK/AQ makes my other cbets more likely to work to the point that if I don't have a player such as the one you described in the hand, another player will open-fold 88 and sometimes even TT on the flop, lamenting that they just can't hit a set against my obvious overpair.

If you have the image where players know you might check AA-QQ on this flop, you can also go for a delayed c-bet. Against the right player, you can also turn your hand into a bluff-catcher.

meh my game runs very very deep...and i have such an image that i can fold overpairs

I'd probably consider AQo a hand that I would not auto-raise with in that spot, then. As played, I don't think it is horrible to check behind with the hopes that the hand gets checked down if you don't improve, but you should consider an occasional 3bet semibluff on the flop.

I think IP vs limps I raise AQ a lot unless vs a really nitty range. Especially because a LAG just called, I'm likely raising.

Why would we want to play a limped pot with a good hand like aq which typically makes one pair type hands?

In position, especially. Both isolating, as madlondoner mentioned, and just straight up equity value from worse hands, as everyone pretty much can see, make raising far more profitable. One of the only reasons to be limping/flatting big hands is things like deception. This does not apply to the same extent in wide limp ranges and multiway pots as it does in HU or 3 way situations.

+1

I would think that folding pre is better than O.K., since you don't really have the implied odds against one, decent player to play for a flush, and you could be easily dominated if you hit your TP. It would think that one would have to be a much better player than the Villain to profitably play this hand.

I sometimes don't raise AQ when I know playing a lot of limped pots annoys certain players who want to create big pots because I am setting them up for a move in the long run. I sometimes don't raise AQ because a couple of tight passive players have limped in ahead of me. I sometimes don't raise AQ because I have a table full of regulars and limping a lot of pots keeps them playing predictably. I sometimes don't raise AQ because I want some decent hands in my LP limping range to discourage someone in the blinds from making steal raises. I sometimes don't raise AQ because I expect a short stack in the blinds to shove and I plan on calling.

Villain: very bad at teh pokerz...set mining with half his stack pre and all.
He views hero as a tight player, capable of making medium to big folds
Never raises his draws, will always always 100% bet really big when bluffing and bet significantly smaller for value.

1/3 Home game - 100bb eff
Action folds to Hero in CO with A9
Raises to 10$
Villain calls from the SB
Flop
346
Villain checks
Hero cbets 15$
Villain calls fairly quickly

Turn: K (40$)
Villain checks
Hero knows it's a great card but then realizes that he has no FE since villain's range is full of straight draws and this card doesn't affect his draw...I also know he will bet when missed pretty big, so hero checks behind

Beautiful River K (40$)
Villain bets 60$ (he doesn't know how much is in the pot, but he just grabbed a random number of chips and splashed them in there)
Hero calls

...and loses to pocket deuces.

If you can snap river because you're ahead cant you bet turn for value also?

He's never ever betting deuces there, I thought the value I get from bluff catching when he misses is more. I know he bets big to bluff me. Fwiw I made this call vs him few times and always has been good. He's not a thin value guy, more of a SD monkey

I'm going to use this thread to post hands that I play like a donk.

1/2 NL

CO ($425) limps.
BTN ($95) limps.
SB ($250) raises to $5.
Hero ($740) calls with KJ.
CO calls.
BTN calls.

This is an obvious 3bet iso with the SB raise size, SB's propensity for fit/fold on flop, and the CO/BTN being TP)

Flop ($18): 789

SB bets $5, Hero raises to $25, CO calls, BTN folds, SB calls.

Fine

Turn ($90): 4

SB checks, Hero bets $70, CO calls, SB folds.

Sizing probably too big, probably not getting called by naked A or T by either of these two.

River ($230): A

Hero bets $150, CO shoves for $325, Hero calls.

Bet size is way too big. Something like $70-$90 is almost certainly better. TP player with a set is almost never calling $150, and there's just so few flush combos that I beat that he'll limp. The call is just inexplicable and something that I so rarely do. My justification at the time was something like: "He wouldn't slowplay the A-high flush with the 3-card straight flush out there unless he had AT. Same with 56. Don't think he limps T6. I have the J, so he can't have the immortal nuts." For some god-forsaken reason, this trumped the more obvious logic that HE'S NEVER RAISING WORSE OR BLUFFING IN THIS SPOT

CO shows 56 and MHING.

^^This hand looks fine to me!

Certainly bluffs in his range include hands that actually beat you - 22/A3/A4/AJ.