Pwning limpers

[SossMan]

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t30 (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

MP3 (t555)
CO (t2415)
Button (t1775)
SB (t260)
SossMan (t2000)
UTG (t440)
UTG+1 (t740)
MP1 (t2425)
MP2 (t4330)

Preflop: SossMan is BB with J/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, A/images/graemlins/club.gif.
<font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, MP2 calls t30, MP3 calls t30, CO calls t30, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, SB completes, <font color="#CC3333">SossMan raises to t180</font>, MP2 folds, MP3 folds, CO folds, SB folds.

Final Pot: t330

[etgryphon]

Hey Soss,

What does pwning actually stand for?

-Gryph

[Potowame]

I like it, getting standard for me. In the lower buy-in you somtimes have to pop it alittle higher to the Desired result.

By the way AJo is a monster for me to punish the limpers with.

[SossMan]

go ask the guys in OOT.

[Absolution]

I find it very table dependent. Sometimes you'll get one of those tables where it's a huge limpfest, but always 1 or 2 will call. What do you do with AJ after 2 call and the flop misses you (knowing that they quite possibly have call-any clicked)? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Potowame]

Pwnkem, I am making a continuation bet. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[woodguy]

Bah.

That was a value raise.

This is pwning limpers:
Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t150 (10 handed) converter

Hero (t3675)
UTG (t3400)
UTG+1 (t2737)
UTG+2 (t3328)
MP1 (t2400)
MP2 (t4950)
MP3 (t1455)
CO (t3808)
Button (t5545)
SB (t4600)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 4 /images/graemlins/heart.gif, 6 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
UTG folds, UTG+1 folds, UTG+2 folds, MP1 calls t150, MP2 folds, MP3 folds, CO calls t150, Button folds, SB completes, Hero raises to t900, MP1 folds, CO calls t750, SB folds.

Flop: (t2100) 7 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 7 /images/graemlins/club.gif, T /images/graemlins/club.gif (2 players)
Hero bets t1200, CO folds.

Final Pot: t3300

Regards,
Woodguy

[SossMan]

value bet my ace high.

[SossMan]

show off.

[woodguy]

/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[nolanfan34]

I like this, IF I think a couple of the people will fold. Some tables though, I find that once people are in, there's a cascading effect where if the first person calls, the rest will call too. In that case, it stinks when you whiff the flop, and all of the sudden find an almost t1000 pot, that you are likely to feel obligated to make a continuation bet at.

I don't mind this against one or two opponents, but if it's going to be 5-way post flop most likely, then I probably ramp the raise down a tad to control the pot size a little better.

[fnord_too]

Bah, I was hoping to see some clever non standard play here.

[Absolution]

:P I just got limp reraised from someone in first position trying this. And, that sucked because my raise had to be so large because of the limpers. :/ Next hand the guy cold calls and outkicks me. Arg. Only thing getting pwned there was my stack.

[Potowame]

Pwning Limper reraisers....... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

It is high risk, high reward. It is a higher % play in my experience when the limps start from Mp2 or later. I usually stay away from this play with any utg limps.

[Absolution]

I had to learn the hard way. /images/graemlins/smile.gif At least I learned.

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
Bah, I was hoping to see some clever non standard play here.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is standard? in TPFAP sklansky talks about almost this exact situation as a bad time to raise (the examples he uses are AJs and 99) because you'll vomit if reraised. he suggests doing it with hands like 64o. woodguy, you're a genius.

[young nut]

That guy was steaming, I must see how you did it

[SossMan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bah, I was hoping to see some clever non standard play here.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is standard? in TPFAP sklansky talks about almost this exact situation as a bad time to raise (the examples he uses are AJs and 99) because you'll vomit if reraised. he suggests doing it with hands like 64o. woodguy, you're a genius.

[/ QUOTE ]

why would I vomit if reraised? I can easily fold this to a limpRR.

[fnord_too]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bah, I was hoping to see some clever non standard play here.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is standard? in TPFAP sklansky talks about almost this exact situation as a bad time to raise (the examples he uses are AJs and 99) because you'll vomit if reraised. he suggests doing it with hands like 64o. woodguy, you're a genius.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree, he sais don't raise if you mind a re-raise. I don't mind a reraise here at all, as my hand finds the muck with no qualms. He does say that this situation is a great place to steal from because it is unlikely that any of the overlimpers has a hand that doesn't mind a raise. So really you only have to worry about the initial limper, but very few people limp/reraise, especially at tables where limp fests are common.

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bah, I was hoping to see some clever non standard play here.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is standard? in TPFAP sklansky talks about almost this exact situation as a bad time to raise (the examples he uses are AJs and 99) because you'll vomit if reraised. he suggests doing it with hands like 64o. woodguy, you're a genius.

[/ QUOTE ]

why would I vomit if reraised? I can easily fold this to a limpRR.

[/ QUOTE ]

not really the sense i meant it in - it's obviously a fold to a limpRR, but you'd be kicking yourself for not seeing a flop when you have the potential to flop a nice hand. makes more sense for AJs than AJ.

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bah, I was hoping to see some clever non standard play here.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is standard? in TPFAP sklansky talks about almost this exact situation as a bad time to raise (the examples he uses are AJs and 99) because you'll vomit if reraised. he suggests doing it with hands like 64o. woodguy, you're a genius.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree, he sais don't raise if you mind a re-raise. I don't mind a reraise here at all, as my hand finds the muck with no qualms. He does say that this situation is a great place to steal from because it is unlikely that any of the overlimpers has a hand that doesn't mind a raise. So really you only have to worry about the initial limper, but very few people limp/reraise, especially at tables where limp fests are common.

[/ QUOTE ]

sklansky was under the impression that a BB raise like this will either get reraised or folded to. i never thought that was true, at least at the ~$100 level online MTT, so his reasoning wouldn't apply well IMO, but it would go like this:

if you had J5o in one orbit on the BB and AJo in another, it makes more sense to raise the J5 and check the AJ than vice versa (b/c you're only going to see a flop if you check, so why waste AJ's value by raising).

but like i said, i don't think this raise-or-fold assumption really holds, so let me ask the question that i care more about:

how often do good players do this? would you do this without some kind of read on the limpers / the table in general? i have not been making this play at all and perhaps i am giving up some equity.

[DonT77]

If you can pull off this play at least 54.6% of the time at a particular table then I guess the play is +EV (bet 180 to win 150). I don't see this play working near 50% of the time in the lower buy-in games ($10-$30) that I typically play online. At least 50% of the time one of the 4 limpers will likely call a 6x raise by the BB once they are already in the pot.

Here is one way of thinking- if I was in the CO with a small PP I'd call t30 and then I'd call t150 on top of that. Here's why - since your bet of t180 leaves you t1820 - I'm getting implied odds of ~10:1 if I can bust you with a set vs. your top pair, two pair, or overpair. Also, now that I have position on you it doesn't matter if I hit my set - I can win the pot just by getting a good read on you. I'd like the raise-over-several-limpers play a lot more if you were on the button than in one of the blinds, and I'd be less likely to challenge your raise when you have position on me. IOW, you'd have to bet at least 13% of your stack to get me to fold my small PP when I have position (assuming my stack &gt;= your stack).

Anymore, I think the raise-over-several-limpers play is overdone online so I'm quick to challenge when I have position, especially if I've seen the player make this play once already. Any thoughts?

[Potowame]

[ QUOTE ]


Anymore, I think the raise-over-several-limpers play is overdone online so I'm quick to challenge when I have position, especially if I've seen the player make this play once already. Any thoughts?



[/ QUOTE ]


This is one reason that I will do this several times a trny. When you pick up a hand you will get action from a guy who thinks you are just trying to push him around. So the times that you end up loosing on this play are more than compensated for with the action you get with your monsters.

[SossMan]

it only has to work 55% of the time to show insta-profit. I still likely have the best hand and can often win the pot postflop, too.

[docknet]

[ QUOTE ]
So really you only have to worry about the initial limper, but very few people limp/reraise, especially at tables where limp fests are common.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe we play at different levels, but I often see LimpRR at Stars and others, and I do it often myself, especially with a big pair UTG or EP

[Potowame]

[ QUOTE ]


Maybe we play at different levels, but I often see LimpRR at Stars and others, and I do it often myself, especially with a big pair UTG or EP



[/ QUOTE ]


I Dont like this play on a passive table, that tends to be a limp fest. If You can count on a raise 50% of the time if you limp early than its alot better play. If not you end up seeing the flop with 5 players and having no clue where you stand post flop.

[docknet]

[ QUOTE ]
Anymore, I think the raise-over-several-limpers play is overdone online so I'm quick to challenge when I have position, especially if I've seen the player make this play once already. Any thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

I like it later in MTTs and SnGs. Early on you can never know what some bonehead will do. How many times have you seen somebody overbet the pot by 10xBB and have 5 or 6 callers? This morning I saw some guy call from EP a pocket KK raise of about 15 to 20xBB with 67s (about 1/4 of his stack).

AJ doesn't look all that good when you have many callers, and I can think of few times when I like to bet more than the pot--especially early in the tourny.

[docknet]

[ QUOTE ]
I Dont like this play on a passive table, that tends to be a limp fest. If You can count on a raise 50% of the time if you limp early than its alot better play. If not you end up seeing the flop with 5 players and having no clue where you stand post flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree totally, and always raise if the table is passive. But I love to do it where there is some guy frequently raising the limpers, trying to pick up the bets, as sossman is doing here.

[woodguy]

[ QUOTE ]
how often do good players do this? would you do this without some kind of read on the limpers / the table in general? i have not been making this play at all and perhaps i am giving up some equity.


[/ QUOTE ]

Don't know if I make the "good player" class in your book but I do it almost every time the blinds are worth it.

Every time sounds like a lot, but the situation doesn't happen too often.

If I had pulled the same stunt within an hour or so I probably wouldn't again unless I had the goods and wanted a caller.

If I had been laggying a big stack I probably wouldn't do it either as I'm bound to get a caller with a crappy hand out of position.

I usually make notes on the serial limpers, and in the case I posted, the open limper had the "serial limper" tag and no one was punishing him, so I figured I would.

I would say that I get called about 30% of the time.
Rarely get re-raised.
When called, they are folding to a continuation bet about 85% of the time.
Well worth the effort IMHO.
These are on Party $50+ and Stars $50+
The case I posted was from a Party Super.

Regards,
Woodguy

[Absolution]

Do you find that your continuation bet varies as well? This is tricky for me. Half pot bets get called a lot at lower buy-in because they figure it's cheap enough to see one more card. Sometimes it has to be a pot bet. So, the ballsy turn continuation bet is needed at some tables, but I have a hard time pulling it off because it's so expensive and end up giving them another card. I think this happens a lot and that's why they always call continuation bets. People (like me) give up after the flop because of the big pot and give them a free card. :/

For example, earlier today I tried to steal in position with total junk. A very loose-passive limper called it. A scared AQx flop came and I figured I'd fire a little more than 1/2 pot bet. He thought for a second and called. This scarey board then scared me and I checked it down to see Q9s. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

I mean, what do you do when you get a table that will almost NEVER let you take one down before the flop?

[Absolution]

pwning Sossman /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[woodguy]

For continuation bets I'll usually 1/2 pot it with no flush draw or 2 connectors, and 3/4 pot with flush draw and 2 connectors.

In the case I posted, the CO had ~3000 left so 1200 would put him to the test at 1/2 pot.

I was going to push, but thought that would look a little desperate.

The continuation bet can be expesive when it doesn't work, but it works enough to be +EV over time.

In the case I posted my ass was hanging out there pretty far, but I got myself there, so you gotta try to get out.
Not betting there would be a disaster.

When you fire at the flop after stealing with junk and get called is one of the toughest situations in a NL tourney.

I don't really have a set rule or good words of wisdom, but its rare that I fire a second shot on the turn with nothing unless I have good notes.

To counterbalance that, if I actually wasn't stealing and had a hand I may not fire on the turn to induce a bluff (if the board wasn't drawlicious), and also so that no one gets too excited against me later when I may be stealing and check behind on the turn.

I hope there is discussion about that situation in the threads Lloyd is going to start.

Regards,
Woodguy

[DonT77]

Yesterday I played in a 50+5 B&amp;M NLHE Freezeout - 26 of 66 players remained with top 7 getting paid. Avg stack was t7600 and the blinds were at t600/300, I had t3300 left after the blinds passed me by. With my only 5.5BBs in front of me I needed to make a move or get cards quick. I had a tight image, playing only 1-2 hands per orbit. So I'm thinking of this thread and I'm thinking that if I get a chance to go all-in over a couple of limpers I'll take my chance.

Here's the hand-

SB posts 300, BB posts 600, utg folds, utg+1 calls, folds to MP2 who calls, folds to hero on button with 87o who raises to t3300 all-in (betting t3300 to win t2100). My thinking is that I have to make a move soon, utg+1 and MP2 have not shown strength, and if I get called by a hand like AJ or A9s then at least I'll have 2 live cards, and if I get called by a small PP then I'm coin-flipping. Plus, this is the last orbit I'll have any folding equity with my all-in raise as next orbit I'll be down to t2400 with blinds at 400/800 (3xBB).

Like the play or hate the play?
(note: I'm going to post this question on a new thread too.)

[fnord_too]

[ QUOTE ]


Like the play or hate the play?


[/ QUOTE ]

I like it. Good thought proccess. With one limper, I probably fold, but with two there is just too much in the pot to pass up and like you said, you are probably only a 3:2 dog if called by one player.