Heads up against a limper

[SumDumFoo]

I have been playing a lot of HU 3-6/5-10 hold 'em lately. It seems the majority of the competion are limpers from the small blind/button. I usually take home the bacon against them but the rake is $1 max so I want to try to take them out as fast as possible. I have tried a couple different strategies against them.
1. Raise 1/3 of the time from the big blind
2. Go for the steal UTG on the flop alot

I have backed off of #1 because is does not seem discourage them from limping and it gets them attached to the pot.
I still go for #2 quite a bit but the problem is reading them. They typically limp with anything from AJs down to 45o so I really don't know where I stand.

Any suggestions?

[Ikke]

I presume you're talking about the rake structure at Paradise. See that there is a big difference between the 3/6 game and the 5/10 game rake-wise.

Paradise charges 0.50 when the pot gets 20 and another 0.50 when the pot get's 40. So when the average potsize is around these numbers, then the rake is the least favourable. So, to minimize your loss to the rake, you want the
(rake)/(potsize) to be as low as possible, in other words, you want either the pot to be significantly lower than 20, significantly higher than 40 or around 30.

HU, pots often go raise and a call preflop and a check-fold on the flop. Or bet-call, bet-fold on the turn. In 3/6 the pot is then 4*3=$12 resp. 6*3=$18 and in 5/10 it's $20 resp. $30.

So here you see something interesting. If your opponent is very loose preflop and on the flop, seems that 5/10 has a better rake structure, although if you opponent is also loose on turn or aggressive on the flop, you will often come around the $40 mark, making it unfavourable again.

Against tighter opponents the rake structure at 3/6 is favourable. You will often steal a lot of small pots of $12 without paying rake.

Now, at 10/20 you will almost always come to the max rake, and, only seen from the perspective of paying the least rake, you want to create big pots. Ofcourse, this is quite narrowminded, but can still be a factor to be considered.

Regards

[Jason Pohl]

Excellent post by Ikke.

However, I disagree with the idea that if the opponent is very loose preflop, $5/10 is a better structure. I find the exact opposite to be the case.

First, let me state that the gap between $20 and $40 is not as much as it seems, because that area is covered very fast on turn and river bets. Hands can be divided into two categories...those that end on the flop, and those that don't. If a pot still has action on the turn and beyond, it is pretty likely it will hit $40 (I know this is an oversimplification.)

The main consideration is whether the play might end before $20. In $5/10, if there is a raise and call preflop, then a rake is immediately paid. In $3/6, even if there is a raise and call preflop, followed by a bet and a call on the flop, no rake has been paid yet. This creates some significant strategy differences.

So, I conclude two things. First, $5/10 has a much higher rake, far more than the difference in limits would suggest. Second, limping is more often correct in $5/10 preflop. It allows more situations (which are very typical) for the action to end on the flop with no rake.

S&M point out that many hands should be limped in if the blinds are going to call anyways (i.e. are very loose). This factor is magnified when the rake is increased by a raise.

--Jason

[Ikke]

I agree with what you're saying. When I read my post back I didnt like the part:

"If your opponent is very loose preflop and on the flop, seems that 5/10 has a better rake structure, although if you opponent is also loose on turn or aggressive on the flop, you will often come around the $40 mark, making it unfavourable again. "

Exactly for the reasons you stated. It's a bit unrealistic to say that an opponent that is very loose preflop and on the flop will often fold to a turnbet, making the pot around the $30. Generally the pot will be bigger (either due to aggression on the flop or calling the turn), and th rake structure will be unfavourable again.

IMO 3/6 should show a higher winrate than playing 5/10 (even moneywise). I even wonder if 5/10 with this rakestructure can be beaten.

Regards

[Jason Pohl]

I have thought the same thing regarding the winnability of 5/10 games. An ironic trend I've noticed is that the best of the shorthanded players often reside on 3/6, and I must assume the rake at the 5/10 (and the toughness of the 10/20) game is the main reason.

--Jason