simple 2/4 Posting in question with QTo

[Webster]

No reads of any kind.

I post in in the CO with QTo.

one guy limps in.

What do you do - see the flop for free with this speculative easly dominated hand or raise.

I normally don't even PLAY this hand one more seat over.

[krimson]

*deleted*

[Webster]

But you have ZERO reads! (see 1st sentence) Which is a read in itself - what is the default play!

[crownjules]

With no reads, I'd check. I'd only want to raise this if I knew I could get it heads up with the limper. Since we have no reads to the tightness/looseness of those yet to act, check and [hopefully] see the flop.

[HolyBejeesus]

Raise.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
No reads of any kind.
I post in in the CO with QTo.
one guy limps in.


[/ QUOTE ]
I think this is a REALLY easy raise.

I understand that you don't have reads but, I don't think this matters as much as you seem to be suggesting. Answer this: If it was folded to you would you have raised? If the answer is "yes" (and it should be) - why does the presence of an unkown limper change this from a raise to a check?


[ QUOTE ]
What do you do - see the flop for free with this speculative easly dominated hand or raise.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't consider QT and easily dominated hand against the range of an unknown limper.

[krimson]

[ QUOTE ]
But you have ZERO reads! (see 1st sentence) Which is a read in itself - what is the default play!

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, was quickly scanning the post /images/graemlins/wink.gif

I usually raise this to jocky for position and fold the blinds. This however position dependent! I would be more likely to just check vs an UTG limp, but would raise pretty much any middle position limp.

[W. Deranged]

If you were entering in the CO behind one limper, you would be raising or folding a significant majority of the time. You would often raise to try and isolate, buy the button, increase your chances of winning uncontested on the flop, etc...

You are a poster with a somewhat decent hand. Now think raise or fold.

Oh, wait, you can't fold.

So raise.

[Webster]

hmmm - crunchy has the argument saying he would raise if 1st in (which I would agree) and then says why not raise with one unknown limper.

Taking crunchys argument a step farther (further?). Then the idea of raising when 1st in is ACTUALLY raising if 2nd in if you have no reads at all, limper be damned.

krimson - says - it is position dependent on WHERE the limpers position is. Which is interesting also.

curious - ya gotta luv poker !!!!!

[jaxUp]

[ QUOTE ]
I would be more likely to just check vs an UTG limp, but would raise pretty much any middle position limp.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do the same

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
Raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

[chief444]

Not even remotely close.

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
No reads of any kind.

I post in in the CO with QTo.

one guy limps in and announces that he is a donkey with trash.

What do you do - see the flop for free with this speculative easly dominated hand or raise.

I normally don't even PLAY this hand one more seat over.

[/ QUOTE ]

fyp

[callmedonnie]

Raise. sure it's junk, but you're alread in. and raising is better than encouraging the button and blinds to see things cheaply.

[shant]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

[sy_or_bust]

This is a really easy raise. Even when you don't post it is usually good.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
Then the idea of raising when 1st in is ACTUALLY raising if 2nd in if you have no reads at all, limper be damned.

[/ QUOTE ]
Under this logic, if I'm understanding you correctly, why would you ever even sit at a table where you didn't have reads on the players?

[ QUOTE ]
I normally don't even PLAY this hand one more seat over.

[/ QUOTE ]
(I don't know the following - I'm making an assumption based on this comment and your prior posts/blogs)

This type of thinking indicates to me that you are playing with a very restricted strategy. For someone who's been playing the game as long as you - I'd expect you to be much more open to breaking the rules, as outlined in a starting hand chart, and learning to take advantages of some favorable situations when they present themselves.

Time to get out of the kiddee pool Grinder! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Webster]

LOL - I am pretty restricted when I first sit at a table - very conservative. When I 1st sit down I like to get into the flow of a game for an orbit.

That is probebly why I would not raise in that situation - BUT - that is also the reason for posting the question on the forum. To get others opinions.

Playing online is basically playing in a vacume - you can read so much but certain things escape you.

Seeing others (and yours) logic it does make sense. I normally do not have zero reads on guys. MOST players fall into 2 MAIN groups - "fish" and "not fish" with many flavors inside those layers.

With THAT said - any "not fish" would raise in - thus - I should assume that a limper is a fish and thus(again) I should raise and thus (for the 3rd time) I have learned.

Thanks. The zero read thing was bothering me!

As for the kiddie pool - the water is getting a little yellow!

[Webster]

I still think jaxUp has the best answer and auto raising I don't think is the correct answer. Just because a lot of people say raise does not make it correct, even on 2+2.

AT least I know how the throngs think now! /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
I still think jaxUp has the best answer and auto raising I don't think is the correct answer. Just because a lot of people say raise does not make it correct, even on 2+2.

[/ QUOTE ]
I disagree.

If it's a "non-fish" (as you say), a limp from UTG is most likely some suited drawing hand or a small pair which you definitely want to raise, probably get HU against, and steal the pot on flops that they miss. If the limp is from MP, I would no longer consider them "non-fish" as no decent player is open-limping in MP.

If your player is a fish, what position they're in when they limp is almost totally irrelevant because this type of player is predominantly oblivious to position and their hand range is not neccessarily defined by what position they are in. You're raising the fish because his range is so large that your hand is quite likely to be ahead. You are also raising against this player because you will play better post-flop.

[Webster]

So all you guys that say raise are actually saying that what Miller wrote in his book is wrong then? You're saying go against "book"?

[SmileyEH]

Raise.

-SmileyEH

[Webster]

Well - obviously raise is the answer but - man - getting unlimited odds to hit is a nice thing to have.

So - raise with QTo and go against possabiliy 4 other players and probebly 2

or - check - PROBEBLY get a free card and THEN decide what to do.

Raising you take control with off suited dominated power cards.

Checking you get unlimited odds with a free card and if you hit can THEN take control.

OR - I'm just tired and once I sit at a table it'll al be clear.

I'm not arguing raiseing is wrong - I'm just not hearing WHY raise. Forget about isolating - not going to happen in 2/4 and 3/6.

[shant]

[ QUOTE ]
Forget about isolating - not going to happen in 2/4 and 3/6.

[/ QUOTE ]
This type of thinking will get you nowhere.

Read crunchy1's last post in this thread. He makes a very good point about possible hands that a "non-fish" and "fish" would limp in that spot.

[SackUp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No reads of any kind.

I post in in the CO with QTo.

one guy limps in and announces that he is a donkey with trash.

What do you do - see the flop for free with this speculative easly dominated hand or raise.

I normally don't even PLAY this hand one more seat over.

[/ QUOTE ]

fyp

[/ QUOTE ]

HAHAHA, I love it.

and EASY RAISE!

[HolyBejeesus]

There are a few reasons to raise:
1) Value: you have a better hand than the weak limper, and are in position. QTo is a dominated hand, but not against this guy! Much more likely, YOU have HIM dominated.
2) Isolation: your hand has a better chance to win the pot HU, and you can get some dead money from the blinds. If the BB comes along with J2s, fine, his loss.
3) MOST IMPORTANTLY: you are getting all the desirable effects of raising for HALF THE PRICE! This is a very easy raise.

[PITTM]

[ QUOTE ]
No reads of any kind.

I post in in the CO with QTo.

one guy limps in.

What do you do - see the flop for free with this speculative easly dominated hand or raise.

I normally don't even PLAY this hand one more seat over.

[/ QUOTE ]

i would raise even if i hadnt posted, so i would say raise anyways? would you prefer the button call or fold? cha ching!

rj

[Webster]

[ QUOTE ]
3) MOST IMPORTANTLY: you are getting all the desirable effects of raising for HALF THE PRICE! This is a very easy raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

THAT is what I was looking for - I think your the 1st person that mention that.

fair enough.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
Forget about isolating - not going to happen in 2/4 and 3/6.

[/ QUOTE ]
You are WAY off here - or you're not playing in the right games or with the correct relative position. I'm making a [censored] TON of money isolating players at 2/4 - and not just in tight games. There are plenty of opportunities for this in games that are generally loose as well.

[crunchy1]

Here's a few things for you to think about and a few questions to answer for yourself. You're looking for answers and justifications so answer these questions yourself (or ask if you can't) and you'll see why raising is the better play here.

[ QUOTE ]
So - raise with QTo and go against possabiliy 4 other players and probebly 2

[/ QUOTE ]
Do you think QTo plays better against 2 players or 4? Do you think you have more pot equity against one weak limper or 4 opponents? Which option do you think has a higher EV: checking or raising?

[ QUOTE ]
getting unlimited odds to hit is a nice thing to have.
... ...or - check - PROBEBLY get a free card and THEN decide what to do.

[/ QUOTE ]
Checking is NOT guaranteeing that you're going to see a cheap flop. If you happen into a game where I'm the button and there's one limper and you check your post I'm raising with a VERY wide range of hands on the button. And I'm taking down what is now a decent sized pot a large percentage of the time UI. I'm taking down a monster pot when I outflop you. I'm not losing more than a couple SBs when I miss and you don't because of my positional advantage. Would you rather be the one taking this advantage PF or would you rather let the button take this line?

[ QUOTE ]
Raising you take control with off suited dominated power cards.

[/ QUOTE ]
You keep suggesting that your QTo hand is dominated but, have yet to give any range of hands that would suggest that this is the case. What hands dominate you here? AA, KK, QQ, AQ, KQ, QJ, maybe a couple others? How often do these hands get limped in front of a late position poster? How likely are they to be held by the button/blinds?

[ QUOTE ]
Forget about isolating - not going to happen in 2/4 and 3/6.

[/ QUOTE ]
You're just wrong here. Out of 66,000 hands that I've played at the Party 2/4 I filtered by hands where I raised PF and 2 players saw the flop. This has happened 7,363 times with a winrate of .63BB/Hand. This is a significant portion of my overall winnings.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
So all you guys that say raise are actually saying that what Miller wrote in his book is wrong then? You're saying go against "book"?

[/ QUOTE ]
If you're referring to the hand charts here then you don't understand their intended purpose.

Here's another good reason to raise:

If one or more of the players on the button/blinds are decent players who would call one bet PF, but won't call your raise it's definitely to your advantage to raise them out of the pot. Afterall - wouldn't you rather play eliminate the good players from the pot and only play against the bad ones?

... This is straight out of SSHE!

[Nick C]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No reads of any kind.

I post in in the CO with QTo.

one guy limps in and announces that he is a donkey with trash.

What do you do - see the flop for free with this speculative easly dominated hand or raise.

I normally don't even PLAY this hand one more seat over.

[/ QUOTE ]

fyp

[/ QUOTE ]

Or it could be me, UTG, with 44 or KTs.

Anyway, though, I like a raise. Even versus the KTs I mentioned, versus me, I suspect raising might be an okay play, unfortunately.

I've been away awhile and haven't really read through this thread before responding. So I guess now I will.

[clownshoes]

Rayzee

[oreogod]

Well I raise, especially if hes open limping in MP or later. Even against an UTG limper it should be fine-ish (later the better...not that it really matters.).

[Webster]

Question answered!

HOWEVER - let me cover my ass for a second. I NEVER really doubted raising was the way to go - I just needed proof a I was on the fence. you can say theories all you want but I needed numbers.

Being a numbers guy I ran 16,000,000 hands of simulations last night (while I was winning $342 on the $4 tables CHING CHING)

And I will humbly say your correct! NOT that I doubted you guys but I needed proof.

Using 10 typical players and running only that hand with the limper playing ANYTHING with 3 random players to act after me and using the samr Post flop strategy. You are correct!

In a 2/4 game limping in will average $1.63 per hand (0.407BB/100) and win 27.7% of the time

Raising in will average $1.96 per hand (0.49BB/100) and win 36.4% of the time. The actual style and loose/tightness of the 3 players after me really had no effect.

I will slink back into my hole.

Grinderswarehouse - NOT just another BLOG (http://www.grinderswarehouse.com)

[tansoku]

[ QUOTE ]
You're just wrong here. Out of 66,000 hands that I've played at the Party 2/4 I filtered by hands where I raised PF and 2 players saw the flop. This has happened 7,363 times with a winrate of .63BB/Hand. This is a significant portion of my overall winnings.

[/ QUOTE ]

You must be raising a lot, this filtered number is over 10% of your total hands! Am I missing something or are you raising 2x per orbit /images/graemlins/confused.gif
If you are...damn!
Obviously you play well postflop.
I would normally limp with QTos here with one limper ahead of me, but your response here has made me re-think that.
Good thread...

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're just wrong here. Out of 66,000 hands that I've played at the Party 2/4 I filtered by hands where I raised PF and 2 players saw the flop. This has happened 7,363 times with a winrate of .63BB/Hand. This is a significant portion of my overall winnings.

[/ QUOTE ]

You must be raising a lot, this filtered number is over 10% of your total hands! Am I missing something or are you raising 2x per orbit /images/graemlins/confused.gif
If you are...damn!
Obviously you play well postflop.
I would normally limp with QTos here with one limper ahead of me, but your response here has made me re-think that.
Good thread...

[/ QUOTE ]
I isolate a lot. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Ed Miller]

[ QUOTE ]
So all you guys that say raise are actually saying that what Miller wrote in his book is wrong then? You're saying go against "book"?

[/ QUOTE ]

Where did I address this situation in a book?

[sfer]

Here. (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=577550&page=&view=&sb=5&o =&fpart=all&vc=1) Who's Tosh?

After reading this post, I began trying this. I have to say, it worked the majority of the time. I took down a few pots that I don't think I would have otherwise done had I just limped in.

Thanks.