You said nothing about solvers, you said something about the best players in the world.

If it said limping it was worse than folding, I would assume it was a very flawed program.

Do we even know that limping kings in a 5 way pot is +ev ? I assume it is.Even if it is its less +ev than raising. Another issue is realizing your equity in a multiway pot is much more difficult than in a hu pot

Not at arguing. At that you are lol.

This is hilarious. Like playing dumb just to be argumentative funny.

While I would agree that from what I have personally seen, David does not play optimally at crappy low limit games (too tight, thinks players are playing at a higher level than they are), it is absurd to say that he is giving bad advice (especially without reading the book).

The play at those games is so bad that even moderately decent advice would improve many players games. I am sure the advice in this book is better than moderately good. At the very least, I am sure the book is spot on accurate when it comes to the fundamentals of poker. I doubt the adjustments required to handle the atrocious play are 100% good, but I also bet they would improve the play of most players in those games.

Read the book first. Then criticize.

The problem is that it is possible to make the most bizarre play the correct play if you adjust the assumptions/reads about the other players.

I obviously haven't read the book (yet!!!, I will) so maybe you already talk a little about this, but I think it is more important to not only make it clear why you are making a non-standard play, but make it very clear that this is a unique situation and shouldn't happen 99.9999999% of the time. It is clearly non-standard.

The last thing you want is bad players in these games to read the book and their take from it is limping KK after a few limpers is acceptable and using the book as justification to do so.

I want to make it clear this isn't a criticism. I clearly haven't yet read the book. However it is equally clear that this is a rare situation that doesn't happen at real poker games.

There is absolutely no reason to balance at these levels.

If you are playing at a $1/$3 game that requires you to balance your ranges than you should immediately get up and leave. Why are you playing in that game?

Scary flops aren't that scary if you have few players paying more for continuing in the hand. Because of that you raise with KK.

Then an ace on the flop is as scary as it gets. And with limping the bad aces are still there. Save the fold, you have many other opportunities to show you can fold KK. But premium hands are there for you very rarely.

Fancy play. Are there any simulations defending limping with KK?

This was covered earlier in the thread.

It's very funny to me that so many people assume anyone who wants to improve their poker game is a pro, or aspires to be one. No one wants to work at McDonald's as a hobby.

If you want to improve your game you don't stay at 1/3 - 1/3 is playing against drunks, new players, gamblers, etc - little to no improvement will be made. Atleast at 2/5 you start to see some competency. Furthermore he said 6000 hours of 1/3 play - that is a TON of hours. Even over 10 years that is a lot of time spent playing 1/3 - that's great if you enjoy it, just don't think it's the best use of anyone's time.

Once the table sees a showdown where you limp KK doesn’t that make your image really bad to the point of costing you future action?

Costing you action for your raises? How does it cost you action?

Cost you action in general. You’ve basically told the entire table I’m passive so my bets and calls and continues are mega strong.

You will win smaller pots. They will wait for the goods against you. They might bluff you more and stop their bluffs when you call knowing you’re always at top of range.

You are the one scratching your head “why is this guy playing 1/3” with the drunks, new players, and gamblers? Seems like the question answered itself if you are looking for a fun atmosphere.

But he probably has his reasons why he plays 1/3, I’m sure he’s aware that 2/5 exists and would play it if it’s available in his area and he wants to.

Obviously, you are limping KK with the intention to 3!, so why would people interpret that that you were passive?

Ev of folding is 0

If you agree overlimping with JQs or 55 is +ev, KK is +ev as well.

Having 4 players call your raise for lol 5% of their stack might not quite be the boon you think it is. If you think it is then you'll likely do fine; but if you don't think it is, then it is perfectly fair to attack things from a different angle.

ETA: I won't be answering any questions here as to why I play 1/3 NL as they are irrelevant to this book / thread / derail, ldo. I have a well thread in LLSNL (which I'll update in 142 hours when I reach 6000 hours of 1/3 NL), and anyone is welcome to ask questions there.

GcluelessLLSNLnoobG

Ya I guess..

It might work but your hands face up.

Once you do the limp re raise monster and get to showdown precisely once in each game the deception is gone forever and you just become exploitable bc this isn’t a balanced play and is quite opaque going forward.

I could get behind this play if it was also done with a range of hands AA-KK and some A5 or Ax wheel suited type hands and maybe a suited connector or two.

I used to fight this thinking in terms of ranges but once your opponents figure you out they might not even know what a range is but they know you’re strong when you make this maneuver and they fold and play perfectly going forward. They don’t even have to be able to spell poker and they’ll still figure this out.

If we're playing a relatively shortstack and someone has raised over a bunch of limpers to 7x and gets 3 calls, do we even care if our limp/reraise gets called?

And as for being concerned about being face up, all we have to do is play AK the exact same way and it pretty much balances out our combos ~fiddy/fiddy with big pears.

GcluelessfaceupnoobG

The tricky omc type isn’t doing it w AK ever… it’s literally AA-KK.

Somehow half the time it works 100% of the time!

It would be best to balance with AK and suited connectors or whatever if you make this sort of play, regardless of what OMCs do.

I obviously haven't read the book yet, but I'm assuming this (i.e. also doing this with AK/etc.) will be part of the strategy (and it is definitely part of mine).

GcluelesstrickyOMCtypenoobG

NL is a dying game anyway…

Best to save your money and play PLO instead.

The problem w live NL is that the small games might be soft but people have no money. The bigger games might attract somewhat formidable opponents at 2-5nl. So NL you have to game select.

If you’re playing for fun, these games just aren’t fun. You will come across some of the most miserable of regs at low stakes holdem. When I’m waiting for my game I’d prefer to play low stakes stud over low stakes NL most of the time.

Fun players can fair better in plo when the equity runs closer. PLO tables are usually way less tense and everyone’s getting stacked and talking Strat and having fun wo NL snipers flatting KK in the HJ.