Never limp as first one in?

[mistrpug]

From Chris Ferguson's website:

[ QUOTE ]
Never limp in. PUMP IT or DUMP IT!

One of the most important rules of Hold'Em -- Limit or No Limit -- is to never, ever call as the first player to enter a pot before the flop. Either pump up the pot with a raise, or dump your cards in the muck. If your hand isn't strong enough for a raise, it's too weak for a call. This tactic makes it more difficult for your opponents to read your hand, and it makes it impossible for the big blind to ever see a flop for free when you're in the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now I think he's talking about tougher limit games, but does this idea have any merit in small stakes games?

[bdk3clash]

Open-limping is clearly the correct play in many instances. If a game is very loose and very passive, for example, why would you raise with a small pocket pair? Limping is much better than raising in this spot.

[lil']

It's been said numerous times on these boards that if you are playing a low limit game and can't limp UTG with a low pocket pair, you should switch games.

[Jonny Melon]

I think it usually holds true for large offsuit cards, less so for smaller suited broadways and small PPs.

[StellarWind]

I think this idea is essentially correct in limit games between good players.

Raising with 66 or QTs UTG is generally -EV. So raising is out. The next question is should you call? In a TAG game the answer is no. You'll never get the big fields you want and you'll be sliced up by raises.

In a good loose/passive game however you can make money by calling with these hands because raises are less common and lots of people will come in, even if you do get raised. But you still cannot make money by raising 66 and getting called in three seats or possibly reraised. So calling is correct.

[bdk3clash]

I guess I'll respond point by point. Most of what Ferguson is saying here just doesn't apply to most small stakes games.

[ QUOTE ]
If your hand isn't strong enough for a raise, it's too weak for a call.

[/ QUOTE ]

Disagree. Many games feature players who will call preflop for 1 SB with a ton of hands but tighten up significantly to a raise, especially an EP raise. The implied odds for hands like 22-99 are awesome, so you definitely want to see a flop--folding would be silly, and raising would knock out the very players you want seeing a flop with you.

[ QUOTE ]
This tactic makes it more difficult for your opponents to read your hand, and it makes it impossible for the big blind to ever see a flop for free when you're in the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

In most small stakes, your opponents aren't really paying enough attention to worry about them "putting you on a hand" when you raise before the flop. Besides, you should be raising a wide enough range of hands that your raises shouldn't mean anything to an observant opponent other than "probably a big pair, or big cards, which may or may not be suited."

From a purely postflop perspective, with most speculative hands I'd rather the BB be there than not--honestly, the more the merrier. The hands I'm drawing to will most likely crush him; if he's around to pay me off, all the better.

[tomcain]

Hello

Just look at SSH. There are lots of hands it says to call with. pairs 88 and below, medium suited connectors, axs.

Tom

[Ed Miller]

That's bad advice. So is his point number 2, "Never bet your medium strength hands."

[Malcom Reynolds]

Do his points have no merit at any level of play? From 25c/50c microlimit to $1000-$2000 high stakes limit play?

Not trying to be contrary. Just wondering.

[Ed Miller]

Do his points have no merit at any level of play? From 25c/50c microlimit to $1000-$2000 high stakes limit play?

Not trying to be contrary. Just wondering.

For this advice to be remotely worthwhile, it has to be clarified considerably. As written (one brief paragraph with no qualifications), it is essentially worthless advice.