How bad?

[Entity]

Stars $3/6.

One very predictable, bad opponent openlimps in the CO. Both blinds are loose-passive and also very readable. I've got 75s on the Button and overlimp.

I think it's too loose -- but by how much? Is this ok with two predictable limpers?

Rob

[djoyce003]

I never overcall with a crappy hand like that, even on the button. I raise a lot of hands here, but I almost never just overcall with something that weak. I might overcall with j 10 off, but not 75. I'm looking to raise or fold a hand, not limp, and 75s is not raise material, especially against loose blinds.

[sublime]

its the button man, limp away /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Grisgra]

I think it's pretty horrible. If it weren't a one-gap and there was one more limper you might be able to get away with it if they are all donks.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's pretty horrible. If it weren't a one-gap and there was one more limper you might be able to get away with it if they are all donks.

[/ QUOTE ]

They are all donks. The limper is a 70/20 sort of guy, so he doesn't have anything approaching decent here. Both would donate multiple bets with Ace or King high.

The difference in terms of equity between 87s and 75s is pretty small here (3%). Is it large enough that this is really that terrible, or is 87s something you don't want to be playing here either?

Rob

[rory]

Being last to act after loose-passive, non-tricky opponents is a happy place to be. 75s is a good limp.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm looking to raise or fold a hand

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? When your opponents are really predictable and really bad, what's wrong with wanting to see a flop?

I'm not defending 75s here, it's the lowest I've ever limped in this situation, but I don't get the "raise or fold" territory.

Rob

[rory]

If the blinds are tight then you should raise the limper. Since they are loose and passive and readable, then limping is good since they won't fold if you raise.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
Being last to act after loose-passive, non-tricky opponents is a happy place to be. 75s is a good limp.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey Rory,

They can be aggressive (the guy on my right has a penchant for overplaying his flush draws on the flop and the turn), but it's predictably aggressive when they are (and they are usually passive). I don't know if that makes sense or helps here.

Rob

[7ontheline]

I tend to agree that 75s is not a grat hand but not necessarily a LOT worse than 87s or similar hands - I wouldn't overlimp here but I don't think it's THAT bad if you're smart postflop.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]


The difference in terms of equity between 87s and 75s is pretty small here (3%).


[/ QUOTE ]

I have nothing to back this up so I'm basically just pulling this out of my ass, but the difference between 87s and 75s is pretty big. That number smells like poop a little bit, did you pull that out of your arse too? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Simply plugging both into pokerstove isnt going to give you a realiable output as for what the difference is

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


The difference in terms of equity between 87s and 75s is pretty small here (3%).


[/ QUOTE ]

I have nothing to back this up so I'm basically just pulling this out of my ass, but the difference between 87s and 75s is pretty big. That number smells like poop a little bit, did you pull that out of your arse too? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Simply plugging both into pokerstove isnt going to give you a realiable output as for what the difference is

[/ QUOTE ]

The number is from pokerstove, and I'm very familiar with the ways that stove is and isn't helpful (since it's calculating all-in equity to the river and doesn't consider how a hand will play out). But in terms of equity, the difference is 3% here.

I also realize that I'm likely up against a really bad hand from the CO limper (we're talking J2o, 83o, kind of stuff here), and two random hands from the other two, and I have position on them.

Rob

[djoyce003]

I guess what I meant, is that when i'm at a table full of passive people that limp way too much, i'm looking to play big hands, that I can raise with and take down >8 BB pots or so....i'm more interested in picking a better spot than 7 5 suited. I want to play a little bigger hand here so that I can raise with my superior position and superior hand and punish the limpers. I personally would fold...I think a call here is very thin +/- EV.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


The difference in terms of equity between 87s and 75s is pretty small here (3%).


[/ QUOTE ]

I have nothing to back this up so I'm basically just pulling this out of my ass, but the difference between 87s and 75s is pretty big. That number smells like poop a little bit, did you pull that out of your arse too? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Simply plugging both into pokerstove isnt going to give you a realiable output as for what the difference is

[/ QUOTE ]

The number is from pokerstove, and I'm very familiar with the ways that stove is and isn't helpful (since it's calculating all-in equity to the river and doesn't consider how a hand will play out). But in terms of equity, the difference is 3% here.

I also realize that I'm likely up against a really bad hand from the CO limper (we're talking J2o, 83o, kind of stuff here), and two random hands from the other two, and I have position on them.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]


Yeah, but thats like people saying not to raise 33 on the button cuz "you've basically got a coin flip". Its only a coin flip if it goes to the river, everyone seems to forget that. There is alot more to poker than a monte carlo simulation. The same is true with 75s and 87s, forget about the 3% equity number poker stove spits out, cuz the difference is alot higher than that in the real world.

Id feel a whole heck of alot than 3% better limping 87s here than 75s

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, but thats like people saying not to raise 33 on the button cuz "you've basically got a coin flip". Its only a coin flip if it goes to the river, everyone seems to forget that. There is alot more to poker than a monte carlo simulation. The same is true with 75s and 87s, forget about the 3% equity number poker stove spits out, cuz the difference is alot higher than that in the real world.

Id feel a whole heck of alot than 3% better limping 87s here than 75s

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, I get all that. That's why I put that notation at the beginning when I said that PS isn't super useful at calculating stuff like this.

But I don't know of any way to quantify 75s vs. 87s in this situation, since I've never had it happen before. I could ask someone with 100k hands in their DB how hands like this (speculative low suited connectors and gappers) play out with great relative positions, but it's such a situational question that I don't think it's super quantifiable, and I'm sure that someone like Nate would have different results than rory, and I'm nowhere near as good as either of them postflop.

How low would you limp here? You've got three players who are generally passive and non-tricky.

Rob

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]


How low would you limp here? You've got three players who are generally passive and non-tricky.



[/ QUOTE ]

98s T8s, Id go 87s if there was another limper

Most of these types of hands im gunna want more than 3 people in the pot to pay me off. And since they are so passive Im not gunna know what to do when I flop middle pair and they call.

but then i'm tight and dont have pimptastic post flop skills , so take that for what its worth

[spider]

3% equity difference ain't nothing in a 3- or 4-way pot. It's roughly the same difference as between 75s and 75o.

I know, not a perfect comparison due to the big hand potential of a flush, but still...

[rory]

58o.

[sublime]

58o.

no. not how tall you are rory. the hands you will limp with.

EDIT: not how tall you tell chicks over the internet you are :P

[helpmeout]

75s with one limper wtf? You've got a trashy one gapper drawing hand in a small pot.

I wouldnt play this even with 2 limpers, yay a trashy flush or a rare straight. You have nothing to fall back on if you miss your draw.

Dont even compare this trash with 87s. 87s is marginally playable here and is a much better hand overall, its a connector so you will frequently flop an OESD not a gutshot your pairs are still low but a pair of 8s is a lot better than a pair of 5s.

Loose players are the ones who play this sort of trash its where you make your money.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
Loose players are the ones who play this sort of trash its where you make your money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Glad to see we have a consensus here.

[rory]

He's not playing against a 2+2er, he is playing against 2 very straightforward passive players and one very predictable player. It is much different to limp and play a hand with these guys than limp and play the hand against a good player. You are ignoring the entire point of the post.

[helpmeout]

Tell me what you are hoping for with this kind of hand?

Where do you expect to make your money?

[rory]

We are looking to make one pair, or for my opponents to make nothing, or to make a weak draw on the flop. Passive, predictable players will not charge us enough when we are drawing and will not push us off of the best hand. We have the best position so we will be in a good spot to protect our hand if we do make a pair on the flop. We can free card and fold to these guys with impunity. We will not have to fear check-raises or other fancy plays. Against these types of players, you want to play as many hands in position as you possibly can, because you will put the money in on the big bet streets when you are ahead and you will not when you are behind. 57s is strong enough to play against these types of players. Stick a good player in there and 57s becomes not playable. Just the way I think about it though. I actually think 57s is a pretty strong hand in this spot.

[sublime]

funny how the same reasons i hear people giving to fold are the same reasons people give to call when its raised on the button and you have 75s in the BB.

[helpmeout]

You are kidding right?

You going to be happy with a pair of 5s when its checked to you on the flop?

Your opponents are bad and predictable but your hand is crap. You cant extract money with a pair of 5s or 7s.

Do you bet the flop? Then what you get 2 callers with bottom pair?

Bet the turn for value? are they drawing? risk a freecard? are you ahead now or behind?

[rory]

ding ding

[rory]

If I get two callers with bottom pair, then I check and take my free river card. Why is this so hard to play for you?

[helpmeout]

so bet the flop check the turn then another overcard on the river check again, do you call if they bet into you?

I still dont see any value here, you have to play passive because you have crap.

[rory]

You like to play 87s which has all the same problems as 75s and the reason why 87s is great and 57s is trash is you can flop more big draws with 87s.

You are 5:1 to flop a four flush or a 8 outs straight draw with a suited-connector like 87s. But you are 5.8:1 to flop a four flush or 8 outs straight draw with a one-gap suited connector like 75s. If you are going to play 87s then 57s is pretty much the same.

[naphand]

87 has more chance to make a decent pot for a straight than 75, while having slightly more equity in terms of pair-value.

If we consider the "playing zone" cards to be A-9, then 78 will make a lot more straights with cards in the playing zone (e.g. JT6) than 75, increasing the chances of making a decent pot when you catch. This is an important point, it is not just about making your big hands, its about what your big hands are against and the consequent pot size. An 8 kicker as opposed to a 5 kicker for a paired 7 likewise is significantly safer. And again a 2-pair hand like 78 is going to run into more gutshot-opponents playing cards like J9 or JT, who will call down not realising their overcard outs are dead.

[spider]

Rory, I mostly agree with what you are saying here, but I think the high card value of 87 compared to 75 is significant -- though not huge, obviously.

I can't quote any odds, but you'll flop top or middle pair significantly more often with 87. And against the sorts of opponents who aren't folding if they have any sort of pair on the flop, this is pretty important.

[rory]

I agree that 87s is a better hand than 57s.

[rory]

Of course you do not call if they bet into you. You still do not understand the point of the post-- his opponents are very passive and very straightforward. That means when they bet he can fold marginal hands without fear he is folding the best hand. If they check then he can decide to bet or to take a free card or a free showdown or whatever because he is last to act. Online it is pretty rare that you will run into these types of players but in live play they pop up all of the time.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
We are looking to make one pair, or for my opponents to make nothing, or to make a weak draw on the flop. Passive, predictable players will not charge us enough when we are drawing and will not push us off of the best hand. We have the best position so we will be in a good spot to protect our hand if we do make a pair on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

So why not play 54o here then? All it takes is a pair, a weak draw or your opponents to make nothing.....heck any 2 cards should do quite nicely in this spot then

[Gazza]

Of course you can play this hand against bad players when you are on the button.

Here are my scores from the BTN with such hands
75s +0.45 (VPIP 26%)
76s +0.21 (54)
86s +0.07 (17)
87s +0.22 (57)

Not a big sample but I'm sure they are profitable if you pick your spots carefully.

I know I talk a lot about raising from the button but when you don't feel able to do that sometimes it is better to call than fold

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
But in terms of equity, the difference is 3% here.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's important to understand what 3% means when comparing 87s and 75s.

When you limp behind you are investing 1 SB. It's a good play if on average you win back more than 1 SB.

Assuming that SB completes and no one raises there will be 4 SB in the preflop pot. An extra 3% of 4 SB is 0.12 SB or about 1/8 SB.

That extra 3% brought in 1/8 of the total amount of money required to turn a profit just considering current preflop pot odds. Postflop action (implied odds) is harder to quantify, but clearly 3% should translate into another substantial fraction of a SB of extra EV.

Don't look at 3% and think 'insignificant'. The message I take from 3% is that 87s is *much* better than 75s.

Of course hot-and-cold simulations have many limitations. Real play should favor 87s even more because it makes more hands that you can really feel good about betting.

[Alobar]

how many hands...and how many hands with just one limper????

[Alobar]

excellent post

[Entity]

I feel a bit chagrined that I brought up 87s at all, because I don't think it would be a marginal overlimp at all in this situation.

That said, I appreciate the comments about the difference 3% makes, but I probably shouldn't have brought up the all-in equity analysis in the first place, because that isn't how this hand will play out. I just don't know any other way to estimate the value of this hand with the button against this sort of opponents.

It's been an interesting discussion regardless. It's interesting to me that the forum is so split on whether or not they like this.

Rob

[Gazza]

[ QUOTE ]
how many hands...and how many hands with just one limper????


[/ QUOTE ]

100K database, between 50 and 60 examples of each.
Sorry, I don't feel like checking for one limper right now but I am saying that I think it is not bad to limp after one limper against the right people. A bit like with a baby pair.
Of course the vast majority of hands played from the button should be raised but the occasional limp is good for business

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
I never overcall with a crappy hand like that, even on the button. I raise a lot of hands here, but I almost never just overcall with something that weak. I might overcall with j 10 off, but not 75. I'm looking to raise or fold a hand, not limp, and 75s is not raise material, especially against loose blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]
Perhaps it is the way you are expressing yourself, but I don't agree with this philosophy.

The only goal should be to maximize profit. You advocate a stone-killer style of play and criticize the limp for not fitting in. That shouldn't be a consideration, especially online. If raising 75s is bad then don't do it. If limping 75s will bring in a few pennies of EV then go for it. Style should be irrelevant. Play each individual hand the best way you know how.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
Style should be irrelevant. Play each individual hand the best way you know how.

[/ QUOTE ]

while I agree, I dont think this is entirely true. If by limping to gain pennies of EV, it takes away from some "killer image" you have created, then it could be -EV, even tho the hand makes money.

Now weather or not something like this kills an image, or even if anyone knows you have this image, is a whole nother story /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Style should be irrelevant. Play each individual hand the best way you know how.

[/ QUOTE ]

while I agree, I dont think this is entirely true. If by limping to gain pennies of EV, it takes away from some "killer image" you have created, then it could be -EV, even tho the hand makes money.

Now weather or not something like this kills an image, or even if anyone knows you have this image, is a whole nother story /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

How +EV is a "killer" image, though? I don't mind having a LAG image, because while it forces me to make more marginal calldowns when people take shots at me, it seems that I get more action with better hands, and win more overall.

Rob

[Rudis]

This is borderland, no doubt.
VERY GOOD POST!!!
This is where you learn and develope.
If you are 100% sure it's not getting raised I believe this is a good limp.
Of course, you never are 100% sure.
The one time someone in the blind raise is rough.

[rory]

I never said I don't play 54o.

[helpmeout]

I understand your point, you do not listen to what I say though.

You cant bet for value because your hand has no value. Most passive opponents wont bet a pair of 8s but they'll call with it so you get no value on your pair of trash because even though you know your opponents dont have any big pairs they probably still have something better than your crap.

Your weak draws arent worth anything in these small pots because you dont have odds to call a turn bet. Your OESD and FD are a dog against any pair on the flop.

[James282]

It's fine.
-James

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
I understand your point, you do not listen to what I say though.

You cant bet for value because your hand has no value. Most passive opponents wont bet a pair of 8s but they'll call with it so you get no value on your pair of trash because even though you know your opponents dont have any big pairs they probably still have something better than your crap.

Your weak draws arent worth anything in these small pots because you dont have odds to call a turn bet. Your OESD and FD are a dog against any pair on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait...

You're saying my opponents are so passive that they won't bet a pair of 8's, so I won't know where I am, but if I flop a draw, I won't have odds to call those same bets which you said they wouldn't make?

Rob

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I understand your point, you do not listen to what I say though.

You cant bet for value because your hand has no value. Most passive opponents wont bet a pair of 8s but they'll call with it so you get no value on your pair of trash because even though you know your opponents dont have any big pairs they probably still have something better than your crap.

Your weak draws arent worth anything in these small pots because you dont have odds to call a turn bet. Your OESD and FD are a dog against any pair on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait...

You're saying my opponents are so passive that they won't bet a pair of 8's, so I won't know where I am, but if I flop a draw, I won't have odds to call those same bets which you said they wouldn't make?

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't listen to these people. It's a fine limp. If your opponents are this bad, you can get the money in postflop when you want to and draw cheaply when you want to. When you have position on awful players, hot-cold simulations need to be taken with a grain of salt. You have many ways to make very good hands that you'll love to value bet...and 75s doesn't do awfully against random hands when you have far the best of it skill wise.
-James

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
How +EV is a "killer" image, though? I don't mind having a LAG image, because while it forces me to make more marginal calldowns when people take shots at me, it seems that I get more action with better hands, and win more overall.

[/ QUOTE ]
In a loose low-limit game a scary stone-killer image is bad. You make most of your money from bad calls, not bad folds. If you succeed in frightening your opponents (not easily done) they will tighten up and play better.

Even worse the fish may make their most +EV move of all. They could decide they don't enjoy your constant aggression and leave. This especially applies online where another table is a few clicks away.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
I never said I don't play 54o.

[/ QUOTE ]

so do you??

I find it incredibly hard to believe that the person who pondered open folding A5o in the SB, plays 54o on the button to 1 limper.