Limp re-raising QQ + stop-n'go

[bobdibble]

From a results oriented perspective, this hand went off perfectly. However, the pre-flop LRR may stir up some debate.

Live 20/40.

Hero is UTG w/QQ.

UTG+2 is a *turbo lag*. He is in *every* pot, raises about 75% of the time, and no-one respects his raises, so lots of people cold call him. I have been joking that the table has become 40-20-40 since you are guaranteed to pay 2SB in order to see a flop.

Hero call UTG w/QQ.
UTG+2 raises (duh) and there are 7 callers back to Hero.
Hero raises, all call.

8 see the flop for 24SB.

Flop: Q58 rainbow

Hero *bets*, 3 callers (inc lag) to an LP villian who raises, folded to hero... hero *calls*, previous 3 callers all call.

Turn: 2 - putting a 2 flush on board.

Hero bets, lag calls, others fold, LP villian raises, hero raises, lag folds.

River: 5
Hero bets. LP villian folds?!?! (He later said he was semi-bluffing a flush draw on the turn.)

[benwood]

The limp & re-raise on the flop will widen out your varience a lot, of course. but it will raise your EP a lot more. I like it. but on the turn I like 3-betting. Those guys are'nt going anywhere, of course, and villan may cap it.Now everybody is tied on, and if you can run the gauntlet and live through it, you're a happy [and rich] man.

[elena_elphie]

I like the LRR (although open raising is just fine too), but I am wondering about the stop n' go. Why not simply 3-bet the flop. You represented AA/KK w/ your LRR and a 3 bet would continue to represent that. Villains in the middle w/ something like middle pair, or bottom pair would still think they were getting correct odds to call two more. Less sophistcated villains would think, umm, big pot, and still call two more. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

I could also see c/ring the turn, since the raiser was very unlikely to be trying to raise for a free card on that drawless board and will almost certainly bet again.

[ArturiusX]

I like a raise/re-raise better.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
The limp & re-raise on the flop will widen out your varience a lot, of course. but it will raise your EP a lot more.

[/ QUOTE ]
WTF?!? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
UTG+2 is a *turbo lag*. He is in *every* pot, raises about 75% of the time, and no-one respects his raises, so lots of people cold call him.

[/ QUOTE ]
Explain why you felt that, because of this, limp-reraising was the best play here.

[admiralfluff]

I etend this "WTF" to the rest of his post as well.

[admiralfluff]

If the LAGtard has any propensity towards 3 betting pf, I would much rather open with a raise. If he is likely to just CC your UTG raise, than the LRR is good. I like the sng a lot, but it should be fairly obvious to most observant opponents as to what oyu're doing. Some LAGs love to stab at pots on 4th if checked to them, but if you had a reliable postflop read on UTG+1 suggesting he would do so, I'm sure you would have gone for the c/r. If the turn is checking to the LP flop raiser the majority of the time, than the sng is clearly the best play with such a large field IMO.

[GetThere1Time]

I think you're trying to be too goofy here. If he's a LAG that's gonna raise you at every single point then click raise until your finger hurts. You missed tons of value by not playing this faster. Sure you got the pot 7 way for 3 bets but you might have had it 4 or 5 way for a cap. Even if you do thin the field, I would rather get the cap in and put myself in a position to make numerous bets vs maniac preflop/postflop rather than have 7 players drawing against me in a huge pot. Then you flop the nuts and try to get cute again when people will probably call tons of bets with anything resembling a hand/draw in a big pot.

I guess my point is when playing with a LAG your best bet is usually to just jam your strong hands. You'd be surprised how many players will come along for numerous bets when they see you and a LAG going at it, especially if its happened more than once at the table.

[W. Deranged]

LAME!

1. Limp-reraising in limit hold'em usually sucks, IMO. It's general purpose is to get huge amounts of money into a multi-way pot. This rules when you flop top set, but it is bad when you allow weak A- and K- high hands to see that flop that wouldn't have to beat you.

1a. QQ plays better short-handed. You should not be trying to trap multiple players to pots when you have QQ. It does have good big-pot potential because of the sets, but its value will increase with fewer players.

1b. Your read on villain in UTG+2 should be encouraging you to RAISE here, not to limp-reraise. You know that villain is going to put a ton of money into the pot anyway. Let him reraise you to get the pot short-handed, with him putting in many bets taking very much the worst of it.

2. Three-bet the flop! The lag and perhaps some of the other flop limpers as well will come along. No reason to wait to get your money in. These players have shown a willingness to call for multiple bets already. People like to call; you should let them.

This hand was one of the most egregious examples of FPS I've seen in awhile.

[bobdibble]

[ QUOTE ]
LAME!

1. Limp-reraising in limit hold'em usually sucks, IMO. It's general purpose is to get huge amounts of money into a multi-way pot. This rules when you flop top set, but it is bad when you allow weak A- and K- high hands to see that flop that wouldn't have to beat you.


[/ QUOTE ]

The lag would most likely only call my raise unless he actually had a good hand. Most of the table would call my raise as well, so rather than seeing the flop 8 handed for 3 bets, if I had raised, PF, we would have seen the flop 6 handed for 2 bets, probably.

[ QUOTE ]

1a. QQ plays better short-handed. You should not be trying to trap multiple players to pots when you have QQ. It does have good big-pot potential because of the sets, but its value will increase with fewer players.


[/ QUOTE ]

See above. The choice is between 6 players for 2 bets v.s. 8 players for 3 bets.

[ QUOTE ]

2. Three-bet the flop! The lag and perhaps some of the other flop limpers as well will come along. No reason to wait to get your money in. These players have shown a willingness to call for multiple bets already. People like to call; you should let them.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is a live game. People crap their pants when someone 3-bets. So, I only called the flop for 2 reaons. 1) I would have been facing the callers with calling two bets cold -- some of these guys would have dropped at that point. 2) If I 3-bet the flop, I am likely to shutdown the LP raiser, whereas, if I call, and lead the turn, I can trap some more people on the turn, and can likely get to 3-bet the turn.

[ QUOTE ]

This hand was one of the most egregious examples of FPS I've seen in awhile.

[/ QUOTE ]

The flop/turn stop-n-go, maybe.. but given that I would ahve shutdown the LP raiser, I think it is borderline.

I am pretty sure the LRR given the way the game was playing at the time is hugely +EV. As I said, I think it is the difference betwen a 6 way 12 SB pot, v.s. an 8 way 24 SB pot on the flop... which would you rather have with QQ?

[Padawan Learner]

bobdibble:

FWIW, I will disagree with the prevailing sentiment...I really like the flop/turn stop and go. With that board, and the position of the flop raiser, and 3 trapped in the middle, I think it is a perfect spot for it.

[W. Deranged]

Bob,

I think you make some excellent points but I am still confused about a few things:

1. Will your hand really get 6 ways to the flop if you raise UTG? If so, I think it's important to note this in the original post. Your reads were based on how opponents reacted to raises from the turbo-LAG, not to legit raises from tight players. At 20-40 many players are kind of clueless but they will observe that you are a reasonably tight player raising in EP. They might give you much more credit for a hand than they would the turbo-LAG.

In a complete limp-fest where you are absolutely positive that your raise will not get the hand short-handed, I can understand your logic. I will concede there are times this would be ideal (clearly I prefer an 8-way 24SB pot to a 6-way 12SB pot).

2. I think that you are being a little inconsistent about how your represent your opponents. You claim they will all freely call two cold pre-flop but all of a sudden get terrified of the flop three-bet and dump on the flop. I'm just not sure how this all resolves; a player who will play extremely loose pre-flop but then extremely tight on the flop is not a hugely common entity, and I find it a little hard to believe that you will find a table basically full of players like that. It seems that you are sort of describing your opponents in a bit of a results-oriented way.

Another thing to consider is pot size. The line you took pre-flop meant that the pot is already gigantic. Players will be calling two on the flop very freely with just about anything. The stop'n'go is way too fancy for a pot this size. You'll be able to lead the flop anyway after the flop three-bet, and passing it up is just letting bets go away. Players who don't improve on the turn may dump to your turn-donk bet regardless of whether you three-bet the flop or not, and so you may be losing customers. The late position bettor may be just as confused/scared by the donk-bet as he would by a three-bet lead. Get the bets in now and be consistent on the flop with the line you implied with your pre-flop play.


This is a clear example of the big-pot = straightforward play principle. There is no need to manufacture bets here. Money's going in no matter what you do, and the only mistake you can really make is waiting until everyone has lost interest in their hand before charging them.

[Entity]

I'd 3-bet the flop but I love the rest.

Rob

[B Dids]

Because he wants to play a huge pot with the 3rd best possible starting hand.

I do not understand people advocating a raise here. If you think the bad players will call two cold, but not three, a limp re-raise seems like a very nice play in this spot.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
Because he wants to play a huge pot with the 3rd best possible starting hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't see anything in the OP that wouldn't suggest that the *turbo LAG* would only raise PF and never 3-bets. So, explain to me why we would want to forgoe protecting our hand by raising into a LAG who will probably 3-bet a reasonable amount of the time forcing out the majority of the field.

I'm never dissapointed to play a large pot with many players with a large premium pair. However, I'm hard pressed to be convinced that in the long run we're better off encouraging huge pots, with multiple players, with just a large pair in the hole (where we will typically need to improve our hand) vs. using good relative position to protect our hand, play against fewer opponents, including loose/aggressive players who are still going to substantially pay off our hands (in many more cases where we don't need to improve to be best at showdown)

I'd love to see some solid evidence that limp-reraising has a greater EV than raising outright - but, I just don't believe that this can be substantiated.

[W. Deranged]

It seems like Crunchy and I are sort of in the same boat as this one.

A lot of the argument comes down to reads. If hero has a very clear reason to believe that:

a) TurboLag will often raise pre-flop but not three-bet
b) Many players will call two cold from TurboLag
c) Hero raising pre-flop will primarily reduce pot size but not field size (number of players)

then I think the limp-reraise line might be better. Many of these were not clearly stated pre-flop and are huge factors in the pre-flop decision.

[bobdibble]

[ QUOTE ]
2. I think that you are being a little inconsistent about how your represent your opponents. You claim they will all freely call two cold pre-flop but all of a sudden get terrified of the flop three-bet and dump on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, where I play live people equate a 3-bet with the nuts and will start folding post flop. And I am certain that most of the time the LP raiser will slow down if I 3-bet unless he has a set or better. But while they give a post flop 3-bet a lot of respect, they don't respect a raise pre-flop. 4-8 to the flop for 2 bets is pretty common in these games.

[sthief09]

nice hand. I think since the pot is so huge you could 3-bet the flop, but I like your logic behind the stop n go, to trap everyone in. if they're the type to call 1 bet with anything but fold for another 2 then I like it. I feel like most people are attached when then call for 1

anything other than a limp reraise here is terrible

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
I feel like most people are attached when then call for 1


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I agree. That's why I 3-bet. But if you had a really solid read counter to that, I don't mind the stop and go.

Rob

[bobdibble]

[ QUOTE ]

a) TurboLag will often raise pre-flop but not three-bet
b) Many players will call two cold from TurboLag
c) Hero raising pre-flop will primarily reduce pot size but not field size (number of players)

[/ QUOTE ]

I should have stated it this way. Note that turbo lag will 3-bet if he actually has a good hand, so never is incorrect, but he won't 3-bet with the same junk he will raise with.

[bobdibble]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I feel like most people are attached when then call for 1


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I agree. That's why I 3-bet. But if you had a really solid read counter to that, I don't mind the stop and go.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

The 3 callers were actually a mix. 1 would have definitly folded, 1 would have called, and 1 was in between. So, had I 3-bet, on average, that would be 4SB (inc the raiser and figuring 1SB for the 50/50 guy) more on the flop.. but the raiser would probably not raise the turn, and the others would probably drop at that point because of the 3-bet, so I'd make 1BB there from the raiser, for a total of 3BB.

The line I took made 3SB on the flop and 4BB on the turn for a total of 5.5BB.... 2.5BB more than a flop 3-bet.

Note all of this is calcualted from the point at wich I make the decision to call or 3-bet on the flop, i'm ignoring all previous sb put into the pot.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, where I play live people equate a 3-bet with the nuts and will start folding post flop. And I am certain that most of the time the LP raiser will slow down if I 3-bet unless he has a set or better. But while they give a post flop 3-bet a lot of respect, they don't respect a raise pre-flop. 4-8 to the flop for 2 bets is pretty common in these games.

[/ QUOTE ]
First off - you didn't really mention any of this in your OP so you can't expect that initial responses are going to neccesarily be inline with your thinking/views - there's nothing wrong with that - it's good that we're getting it cleared up.

The one thing I'd still like to see a comment from you on is how the LAG would respond to a PF raise. Is he 3-betting, folding, cold-calling?

[bobdibble]

[ QUOTE ]
The one thing I'd still like to see a comment from you on is how the LAG would respond to a PF raise. Is he 3-betting, folding, cold-calling?

[/ QUOTE ]

Folding the bottom 20% of hands, raising the top 10%, and cold-calling the rest.