Open-Limping In 6-max

When I started playing 6-max, I decided To never open-limp, even UTG. Then, after I got stacked by open-raising 55 UTG when I flopped bottom set vs a higher set, I did some results-oriented thinking.

I would like to limp 22-77 in EP, but should I be limping anything else in EP for shania? At what limits should I even care about shania?

I was thinking about limping all suited broadway cards (any two suited cards in the A-T range).

What are you 6-max players limping in EP, if at all?

[soah]

I limp a lot UTG. I don't do too well playing out of position where I was the preflop aggressor. Frequently I end up with marginal hands and I don't know if I'm getting action because my opponent thinks/hopes I missed the flop, or because they actually have me crushed. Uncertainty leads to mistakes. In limped pots I have a much easier time reading hands based upon how my opponents respond to my betting, and I don't feel so bad about letting go of a small pot if I'm not sure about my hand. (And hopefully my opponents don't feel so bad about letting go of small pots either.)

[wtfsvi]

I limp quite a lot utg. Suited aces, pocket pairs 66 and under, suited broadways. For utg+1 I open limp a bit less, but it still happens. Co/button is where I never open limp.

[orange]

[ QUOTE ]
I limp quite a lot utg. Suited aces, pocket pairs 66 and under, suited broadways.

[/ QUOTE ]

I however limp sometimes in the CO/Button.

[Toyboy]

Ditto.
Axs, 22-77 and suited broadways are all fine limping hands in CO / Button provided limpers in front. If not you must raise!

[theblitz]

[ QUOTE ]
Co/button is where I never open limp.

[/ QUOTE ]
Even with 2 or 3 limpers before you?

I wrote a long answer but I decided to scrap it. Let's keep it simple, if I limp I do so because I want more people in the pot with me. More people in the pot usally means more action when you hit the flop good. Plus rasing and playing 57s or 44 OOP isn't exactly something that I think you should do to often.
But I do not think you should have strict rules that say you always limp with certain hands. As always, it's player dependant. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Rob

[theblitz]

In a similar vein:

What do you complete with?

I use to limp a ton of hands in 6 max. I have since changed my preflop play and my winrate has improved dramatically. I see no reason to ever play low suited connectors, suited one or double gappers, unless you are on the button or CO and come in for a raise. They have almost no value in my opinion. I also limped with QJo, QTo, A9-A5o. Discontinuing this and simply folding has plugged a major leak in my game.
That aside, I will still limp with 22-66 in UTG and UTG+1, some suited A's, and sometimes offsuit broadways like AJo, KQo, and ATo. I will usually raise with them, but if I have had a few continuation bets picked off, I feel more comfortable playing a small pot with them.
As I have moved up, I am more likely to limp with some hands. I am more likely to raise with alot of hands if I am confident about my postflop skills in relation to my opponents' post flop skills.

[wtfsvi]

Open limping = opening a pot by limping. Limping with no limpers before you.

[orange]

[ QUOTE ]


What do you complete with?

[/ QUOTE ]

It depends /images/graemlins/smile.gif(how many limp ahead of you, how aggressive BB is, etc etc etc.)

Usually suited connecters, suited 1 gapers, suited Ace/King rags, stuff like that.

Depending on the table, I don't mind completing with stuff like 910o.

[Benholio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Co/button is where I never open limp.

[/ QUOTE ]
Even with 2 or 3 limpers before you?

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought open limp implied that you were going to be the first in the pot?

[djoyce003]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Co/button is where I never open limp.

[/ QUOTE ]
Even with 2 or 3 limpers before you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Open limping means being the first one in and limping....if there are 2 or 3 limpers before you, you cannot by definition open limp.

[theblitz]

[ QUOTE ]
Open limping = opening a pot by limping. Limping with no limpers before you.

[/ QUOTE ]
Dang!

That's what happens when you read posts whilst 3-tabling.

[unlucky513]

i don't have a set rule for what i'll open limp with...
it should be table dependant.

[punter11235]

I used to never raise UTG in 6max but after reading some El D posts Iam now experimenting a bit with it. (sometimes raise, sometimes call). In general UTG I play only PP's +(AK,AQ,AJs,KQs) so I dont like having diffrent actions with this small group of hands. Now I sometimes raise with any of these and sometimes raise with any of these I think I will have better opinion in a month or two what's best in midstakes.
There is still no force in the world that can make me raise UTG or UTG+1 in fullring game whatever I have.

Best wishes

[wdeadwyler]

I raise any two suited broadway utg and utg+1, except maybe qjs, which I limp. Id open limp w/ 22-88 (sometimes 99 and 1010 depending on table). Ill also limp kjo and qjo utg and utg+1, and fold to a raise from most players. I raise a10+ utg and fold anything worse. Also, I utg limp with sc.

[dtbog]

[ QUOTE ]
When I started playing 6-max, I decided To never open-limp, even UTG. Then, after I got stacked by open-raising 55 UTG when I flopped bottom set vs a higher set, I did some results-oriented thinking.

I would like to limp 22-77 in EP, but should I be limping anything else in EP for shania? At what limits should I even care about shania?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your posts suggest that you play 200NL... I think this level online is just high enough to think about Shania.

200NL is the first level (and some 100NL tables, I think) at which I noticed that people stopped giving action to total nits -- i.e., if your Shania includes only {AA, KK, AKs, QQ} when you open a pot, no one will call your raises.

I therefore assume that they're capable of making more Shania-based inferences, so in your case, I'll limp some other things early for Shania purposes.

What to limp? Well, I think the best case here is not to limp dominated hands like ATo/KJo here; I limp some of the weaker suited connectors that you might otherwise muck like 97s.

The benefit of playing these hands in this spot is that you'll be routinely bet/3betting with monster draws/two pair, check/calling small bets with decent draws, check/folding when you miss, and presumably stealing when the texture of the flop is right -- in other words, you'll be making a lot of very dissimilar plays. This increases your Shania much more than a hand like ATo/A9o, where you'll become predictable.

When you flop a set, therefore, you'll be able to bet/3bet against thinking opponents who know you might be as weak as bottom 2 or a flush draw.

I think this is tremendously helpful; any alteration of play that helps you get money in on the flop with a set is good for business.

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
I raise any two suited broadway utg

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ill also limp kjo and qjo

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I raise a10+ utg and fold anything worse. Also, I utg limp with sc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. That's more hands that I play from LP and I am not THAT tight for this forum standards. I think you will be owned fast at higher stakes is you continue using this strategy.

BEst wishes

[wdeadwyler]

You dont raise kjs kqs utg? U dont raise a10utg? We are talking 6max here. If you arent raising a10 utg then you should be folding it IMO.

[ericlambi]

Sorry, but what the hell is Shania?

[wdeadwyler]

[ QUOTE ]

There is still no force in the world that can make me raise UTG or UTG+1 in fullring game whatever I have.

Best wishes

[/ QUOTE ]

To be fair, I think THIS strategy will get you owned in higher stakes.

[wdeadwyler]

?

[ericlambi]

[ QUOTE ]
I used to never raise UTG in 6max but after reading some El D posts Iam now experimenting a bit with it. (sometimes raise, sometimes call). In general UTG I play only PP's +(AK,AQ,AJs,KQs) so I dont like having diffrent actions with this small group of hands. Now I sometimes raise with any of these and sometimes raise with any of these I think I will have better opinion in a month or two what's best in midstakes.
There is still no force in the world that can make me raise UTG or UTG+1 in fullring game whatever I have.

Best wishes

[/ QUOTE ]


You are joking I hope.

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
You dont raise kjs kqs utg? U dont raise a10utg? We are talking 6max here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I play only 6max for 3months now.
UTG my default is to instamuck the following : AJo, KQo, J10s,QJs,KJs and I think its standard for many good players here.
I play much looser in 2last positions but I still dont play crap like QJo (but I can play suited onegappers there).

Best wishes

[dtbog]

[ QUOTE ]
You dont raise kjs kqs utg? U dont raise a10utg? We are talking 6max here. If you arent raising a10 utg then you should be folding it IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

We actually had this discussion about ATo a few months ago, and raise-or-fold was the consensus there as well.

I'm more concerned about the LP comment, which I hope was an exaggeration. Who here doesn't play ATo/KJo from LP at 6max?

[dtbog]

[ QUOTE ]
UTG my default is to instamuck the following : AJo, KQo, J10s,QJs,KJs and I think its standard for many good players here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Game selection is part of poker.

If I'm not actively looking for another table, I'm either

1) at a 6max at which limping JTs UTG is going to be marginally profitable because many of the rest of the players get easily married to their hands

2) folding JTs UTG but only beacuse there's a maniac at my table who raises PF too much

At a solid table, I'm mucking it, but I'm also looking for a new table.

[wdeadwyler]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You dont raise kjs kqs utg? U dont raise a10utg? We are talking 6max here.

[/ QUOTE ]

UTG my default is to instamuck the following : AJo, KQo, J10s,QJs,KJs and I think its standard for many good players here.
I play much looser in 2last positions but I still dont play crap like QJo (but I can play suited onegappers there).

Best wishes

[/ QUOTE ]

I raise ajo utg, and limp the rest except for kjs, which I raise or limp depending on table dynamics. As for lp, why dont you play qjo? Do you EVER play qjo?

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
Who here doesn't play ATo/KJo from LP at 6max?

[/ QUOTE ]

I usually openraise these but muck it after sb limps. Standard or too tight ? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[wdeadwyler]

If you mean UTG limps, I think you are being too tight.

[dtbog]

[ QUOTE ]
I usually openraise these but muck it after sb limps. Standard or too tight ? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on UTG /images/graemlins/smile.gif

If he's 10/4, I muck every time.

If he's 30+/anything, I'm usually calling.

If you don't get married to top pair jacks with a king kicker postflop, you're OK here.

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
To be fair, I think THIS strategy will get you owned in higher stakes

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. Its good strategy and many good players use it. Many (like EL D for example) disagree.
Pls note that this strategy cant be that bad (even if its bad at all) cause you will still win mucho $$$ from UTG playing only the best hands and only calling with them. EVEN if raising is better the diffrence cant be that much. Compare this to playing ATo, KJo and similair crap , you get them often, if you get a call it will be from better hand than yours or in the best case by similair hand, you will be out of position thus often finding yourself in difficult situations when outkicked or bluffed by opponents in position. This is -EV even if you are better than rest of the players at the table.
Best wishes

[wtfsvi]

Some female country artist.

[wdeadwyler]

You are telling me limping utg with aa, kk, qq, aks is more +ev than raising them? No

[wtfsvi]

If these are the only hands you raise UTG, then of course it is (against very good players).

I don't like it though. Prefer raising more hands in stead of none.

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
You are joking I hope.

[/ QUOTE ]

No I dont. I am sure that at 200NL and below limping is far superior, because :
-its difficult to win big pot if you raise UTG cause even 200NL players will give you some credit for UTG raise
-its very easy to win big pot when limp-reraising, cause many people can stand a thought of raising AK and then muck to reraise
-its very easy to win big pot even if unraised when you keep charging your AA vs some guy with KQ on Qxx board
-you can always trap somebody by limp-callin (good stack size are needed for that) and take his stack if he flop TPTK or overpair
-you dont give any information about your hand range, compare this to raising AA/KK/QQ/AK and limping with small pp's +AQ/AJs your opponents life is much easier
-if you raise even bad opponents usually tighten up which is very bad, cause you want them to play crap which they will after your limp;

Many of these reasons may not be valid at higher stakes (surely they are still valid at 400 and 600NL though) so probably this should be reconsidered there.

Ok I realize that this is controversial but I am really good at crushing 200NL guys and I think my preflop philosophy is significant part of that.
I think you can at least think about ideas above.

Best wishes !

[dtbog]

[ QUOTE ]
-its very easy to win big pot even if unraised when you keep charging your AA vs some guy with KQ on Qxx board
-you can always trap somebody by limp-callin (good stack size are needed for that) and take his stack if he flop TPTK or overpair

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you run into this a lot at 200NL+?

I thought 200NL was where the stacking-one-pair-with-AA-every-time stopped.

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like it though. Prefer raising more hands in stead of none.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that there are 2 good options : raising more or limping all. I like the latter but I am experimenting with the former in 6max now. I dont know which is better. I strongly believe that limping is better in fullring but I dont have strong feelings about 6max.

Best wishes

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought 200NL was where the stacking-one-pair-with-AA-every-time stopped.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Not every time. More often than not still.
At 200NL there are many players who can fold TP if they see that you only put the money in with the goods, but majority still cant.
Its true that you wont win large pot if unraised but you can still win sth decent.
If you ask about limp-calling. Its similair to set. You still often take guys stack with 55 on K53 board vs his AK why not do the same with AA ?

[KowCiller]

[ QUOTE ]

-its very easy to win big pot even if unraised when you keep charging your AA vs some guy with KQ on Qxx board
-you can always trap somebody by limp-callin (good stack size are needed for that) and take his stack if he flop TPTK or overpair


[/ QUOTE ]

I have a hard time believing you're maximizing EV if you are routinely getting your stack in on the flop/turn with AA in a limped pot. I would wager you would be behind a large percentage of the time here. At best this is highly player dependent.

These guys who are paying you off with KQ on Qxx for their stack in a limped pot are the same guys who will be calling your UTG raise with KQo.

KoW

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a hard time believing you're maximizing EV if you are routinely getting your stack in on the flop/turn with AA in a limped pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true. You wont stack anybody here but you can still win decent 3bets there.

[ QUOTE ]
These guys who are paying you off with KQ on Qxx for their stack in a limped pot are the same guys who will be calling your UTG raise with KQo.


[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm I agree. This is situation when raising is better. In pots when nobody raise but somebody would still call your raise and then payoff with some crappy TPnK hand you lose value by limping.

[wdeadwyler]

What do you do on a board of 27j when you lead and you are reraised? How do you have any idea where you are. I believe only limping UTG is horrible strategy and is -ev

[wdeadwyler]

Shania Twain??? What does this have to do with poker? PLease give a more thorough explanation.

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
What do you do on a board of 27j when you lead and you are reraised? How do you have any idea where you are.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jesus.
When you raise , got called and then raised on the flop, how do you have any idea where you are ? In second scenario you gave more info to your opponents than in first. You just play poker, know habits of your opponents etc. How the hell they know when they are when you lead the flop or 3bet them ?

[ QUOTE ]
I believe only limping UTG is horrible strategy and is -ev

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. It cant be EV- do you think you can actually lose money by playing AA and KK for a call ? its ridiculous, these are the best hands, if you cant play them for profit in unraised pot who will show profit there ? a guy who limped with 85o ? or a guy who just decided to give it a shot with 23s ? or maybe solid guy who limped with KQs. If you, sitting there with AA are in -EV situation one of these guys must be in +EV situation. Could you please explain which of them.
Did you ever actually think about these situations or you just hate the idea cause its against conventional wisdom ?
If you think that limping with AA UTG is EV- you dont have a clue about SSNL and poker in general. Its possible that my strategy is inferior to some other strategy but its for sure not EV-.

[nietzreznor]

I don't think there's anything wrong with limping UTG/UTG+1 in 6 max, just so long as it doesn't define your hand.

What I will limp in EP depends a lot upon what "gear" I'm in, but if I'm playing tightish I tend to limp small PPs (22-77) and maybe things like KJs, A9s, maybe some suited connectors. If Im doing this then I'm also occasionally limp-reraising AA/KK/bluff as well.

Other times I raise all of these hands.

[swolfe]

[ QUOTE ]
Shania Twain??? What does this have to do with poker? PLease give a more thorough explanation.

[/ QUOTE ]
isn't this in the FAQ?

Think About Shania (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=533592&page=&view=&sb=5&o =&vc=1)

[wdeadwyler]

Yea on the way to class I realized it wasnt -ev. Its less +ev than raising though, so as for as oppurtunity cost is concerened, its -ev.

I really dont see the incentive to limping AA utg, you have the best hand, lets begin to build a pot...

[wdeadwyler]

[ QUOTE ]

Did you ever actually think about these situations or you just hate the idea cause its against conventional wisdom ?
If you think that limping with AA UTG is EV- you dont have a clue about SSNL and poker in general. Its possible that my strategy is inferior to some other strategy but its for sure not EV-.

[/ QUOTE ]

Grow up. I typed something I didnt mean in a rush. No reason to attack me. I have extended you courtesy in this discussion and I would appreciate the same respect

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
Grow up. I typed something I didnt mean in a rush. No reason to attack me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm ok. I just read all your comments when in all of them you stated that this is very bad withouth arguments ("we are talking about 6max"... and owned comment) now Ive read this and I had some doubt about this "courtesy". Good it was "in rush" comment, no hard feelings, mine was quick response too.
I dont think discussion make any sense here its all about experience. You can now understand which situation are +EV in my strategy I can see +EV situations in yours. Only SSNL experience can give you a clue which is more profitable there.
My experience tell me that limping is far superior. As I dont play SSNL anymore it probably wont change.

Best wishes

[swolfe]

[ QUOTE ]
Yea on the way to class I realized it wasnt -ev. Its less +ev than raising though, so as for as oppurtunity cost is concerened, its -ev.

I really dont see the incentive to limping AA utg, you have the best hand, lets begin to build a pot...

[/ QUOTE ]

it's game dependant. in a loose-agressive game (which many 6M are) where i expect to get 3 or 4 callers to my UTG raise AND where i can pretty well expect a raise behind me at least half the time, i like a limp-reraise.

[punter11235]

I am a bit confused now.
I thought these comments are about fullring game.
In 6max I agree with you its game dependent and probably very close in general.

Best wishes

[elus2]

shania (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=533592&page=&view=&sb =5&o=&vc=1)

[wdeadwyler]

I think discussion can make sense here. If we raise UTG with AA (along with kk, qq, aks, and then throw in some others based on preference, 78s, 56s, 22, etc). Then our opponents are gonna have a hard time putting us on the hands. They may think we have a big pair each time, but they will be wrong. If you are only raising the big 4 UTG, then I think you are costing yourself money (just read the Shania post, gold) since observant players will own you (not you or me, but you in a general sense).

Now, as for aa specifically. Raising AA utg forces your opponents to pay a price to see a flop. Since you have the best hand, a portion of that price (depending on their hand) is pure EV profit. Not raising AA here is costing yourself that pure EV profit, minus whatever you lose when some random 73s wins a pot from you.
On the other hand, there are times you raise AA utg and lose a hand too. However, if you are good enough at poker, you should be able to raise AA utg, pot dry flop, and get away from execessive resistance. So, assuming you dont pay off more than you invested (thus making someones call with 67s +ev, instead of -ev), than raising UTG with AA is pure profit. If you cannot get away from the AA after raising UTG, obviously you will have problems against other players. Now, as for limping AA utg, then reraising, I dont like this either. Any semi-observant opponent will pick up on this the 2nd time you do it, and muck pp and AKs to your limp reraises. Now, you've gained a small pot preflop, but at the expense of a large pot you COULD have won on the flop/turn/river.

Surely you understand my point about how raising AA utg nets you ev with every call you get? Now, why do you think limping AA utg is more +ev than raising?

[wdeadwyler]

Comments began about full ring but when you said nothing could make you raise with big 4 utg in full ring is when we started talking about that. Full ring we are talking about now (though I can see incentive to limp with aa in full ring much more so than I could ever in 6max)

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
Surely you understand my point about how raising AA utg nets you ev with every call you get? Now, why do you think limping AA utg is more +ev than raising?

[/ QUOTE ]

I listed the reasons in previous post (they are listed one after the other, just search the thread). In general I think limping with AA creates more very juicy situations. Mainly when somebody raises and you can reraise, now its very difficult for people in SSNl to lay down hands like AK preflop and they almost always wont, sometimes they even go allin with that. If you raise when first to enter the pot they will almost always just call with this AK and then wont give too much action if they wont flop a pair.
You can see that every call you get after limpreraise is worth more than call you get after raise (for simple reason that its for bigger money).
Ideal situation is when your limp encourage future limps and then somebody raises. or better yet somebody raises get 3 or 4 callers and then you can reraise. People in general hate putting some money into the pot and then give up. Limpreraising is perfect for exploating this tendency.

When you limp with all hands your opponents face some difficult decisions when they consider raising in LP after your limp, on one hand they dont want your casual limping hands to see cheap flop on the other they fear a reraise. These reasons are less valuable in 6max game (except the point with AK, which is still valid) so its much closer then. I just like limping but I am not convinced that its better strategy as I said Iam experimenting with both now.
Maybe I have wrong idea about 200NL because I had very good table selection there (simple: I played in very soft Paradise games and just a little at Party) I tried many things preflop. Once I even tried open pushing AA/KK in any position (including UTG) and got calls from AK. Now if you limp reraise you will still get call from that hand (or even AQ or anything) but if you raise you will get a call for less money and then these hands will give up after not hitting the flop.

Best wishes

[soah]

[ QUOTE ]
Now, as for aa specifically. Raising AA utg forces your opponents to pay a price to see a flop. Since you have the best hand, a portion of that price (depending on their hand) is pure EV profit. Not raising AA here is costing yourself that pure EV profit

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you watch the WSOP this week?

Blinds t25/t50, Anthony Curtis raises to t1000 (didn't see his position) with AA, Sam Farha calls with 33. Flop has a 3 in it, Curtis bets t6000 and Farha puts him all-in, he calls and goes home.

I challenge you to defend Curtis's play as +EV. Let's assume he started the hand with t12,000 because as far as I know, ESPN never gave us an exact figure.

[ericlambi]

You can be sure all you want, but limping 100% is not optimal strategy for AA, KK, and QQ. Especially at lower limits where the need to be tricky is essentially not existant.

[wdeadwyler]

Curtis's play was not +ev if he cant fold to resistance after the flop. Its also retarded. I dont like 33's call either because he is getting like 10-1 on his stack, and if they go set over set he loses, so its BARELY a +ev play to call strictly in cash terms

[ericlambi]

That was the worst hand of poker I've ever seen for that type of stakes. Farha didn't really have odds to call and try and hit a set. Blackjack man clearly sucks at poker and is an uber-donk. I was laughing my ass off when I saw that though.

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
You can be sure all you want, but limping 100% is not optimal strategy for AA, KK, and QQ.

[/ QUOTE ]

As all this thread is about this and some arguments were given for both sides its interesting you come up with your opinion stating this as a fact. Could you pls explain what lead you to believe that its not optimal strategy ?

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
Curtis's play was not +ev if he cant fold to resistance after the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm so you fold every time when somebody raises, you never pay off more than 8 (odds of hitting the set) *( raise size) but still you can make much money with AA when charging worse hands.
Interesting.
The problem is that caller has position and its much easier to play from his position (both bluffs and extracting value are easier) when stacks are reasonably deep. Especially if you gave up too much information about your hand range by a raise.

[Raven]

My general strategy regarding limping UTG and UTG+1 is to do it with hands that prefer to be in a limped pot, but that I can call a raise with.

[wdeadwyler]

I would never raise 20bb with aa utg. If I was raised on the flop I would call lead turn adn fold to another raise. If I were to make a donkish pfr, i might as well make it 50bb an insure no one has the remote odds to chase my hand. The entire hand is retarded and a poor example to discuss.

[soah]

[ QUOTE ]
Curtis's play was not +ev if he cant fold to resistance after the flop. Its also retarded. I dont like 33's call either because he is getting like 10-1 on his stack, and if they go set over set he loses, so its BARELY a +ev play to call strictly in cash terms

[/ QUOTE ]

So you believe it is +EV to put close to 10% of your stack in preflop with AA and not go to showdown? You don't think that is exploitable?

[soah]

[ QUOTE ]
I would never raise 20bb with aa utg. If I was raised on the flop I would call lead turn adn fold to another raise. If I were to make a donkish pfr, i might as well make it 50bb an insure no one has the remote odds to chase my hand. The entire hand is retarded and a poor example to discuss.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is a perfect example to discuss. It shows why NL poker is about implied odds. It doesn't matter how much money you get in with the nuts; what matters is how much you lose when you get drawn out on. It also shows why giving away your hand against a smart opponent will put you in -EV situations.

The other day someone limped in, the sb called, and I checked in the BB with AA. The flop came QJx and the limper called 3/4 pot on all three streets with KQ. Had I raised preflop I would have only stolen the blinds plus his limp (the reason I checked was because I had been on a cold stretch of cards and my raise there would have received enough respect to get KQ out of the pot). NL isn't just a math problem. Getting money in preflop means nothing (unless it's a huge amount). Being a winning player means getting the big bets in as a favorite. And a major component of this is knowing more about your opponent's hand than he knows about yours. Getting a few more dollars in preflop as a big favorite means nothing compared to getting your whole stack in.

[KowCiller]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would never raise 20bb with aa utg. If I was raised on the flop I would call lead turn adn fold to another raise. If I were to make a donkish pfr, i might as well make it 50bb an insure no one has the remote odds to chase my hand. The entire hand is retarded and a poor example to discuss.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is a perfect example to discuss. It shows why NL poker is about implied odds. It doesn't matter how much money you get in with the nuts; what matters is how much you lose when you get drawn out on. It also shows why giving away your hand against a smart opponent will put you in -EV situations.

The other day someone limped in, the sb called, and I checked in the BB with AA. The flop came QJx and the limper called 3/4 pot on all three streets with KQ. Had I raised preflop I would have only stolen the blinds plus his limp (the reason I checked was because I had been on a cold stretch of cards and my raise there would have received enough respect to get KQ out of the pot). NL isn't just a math problem. Getting money in preflop means nothing (unless it's a huge amount). Being a winning player means getting the big bets in as a favorite. And a major component of this is knowing more about your opponent's hand than he knows about yours. Getting a few more dollars in preflop as a big favorite means nothing compared to getting your whole stack in.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I agree with what you're saying, it does matter how much money you get in with the nuts because that directly relates to the amount of your stack you lose when getting drawn out on over the long haul.

In the farha hand, let's make some assumptions:
-We say Other Guy (OG) has $12,000 in his stack
-Farha covers and is 8:1 against hitting his set
-OG is going to back his stack with AA no matter what (which I believe he will)

Then we notice that when raising:

Farha misses: -$1000 x 8 = -$8000
Farha hits: $12,000 x 1 = $12,000
Farha's EV: (12,000 - 8000)/9 = $444.44

Limp:

Farha misses: 8 x -$50 = -$400
Farha hits: 1 x $12,000 = $12,000
Farha's EV: (12,000 - 400)/9 = 1288.88

So it's clearly better (based on above assumptions) for OG to raise as it reduces Farha's ROI on the preflop call.

However, as Soah points out, there are cases where giving up some of this PF expectation can lead to forcing your opponents into making larger postflop mistakes (which is where most of the money is made in NL).

KoW

[ QUOTE ]
Farha hits: $12,000 x 1 = $12,000

[/ QUOTE ]

Some of the time it's set over set, so I think this line should be more like:

Farha hits: $12,000 x 1 = $8,000

[ QUOTE ]
My general strategy regarding limping UTG and UTG+1 is to do it with hands that prefer to be in a limped pot, but that I can call a raise with.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like this philosphy most out of what I've read so far, except for the problem on shania.

I would only ever like calling a raise with a small pp OOP.

[soah]

[ QUOTE ]
While I agree with what you're saying, it does matter how much money you get in with the nuts because that directly relates to the amount of your stack you lose when getting drawn out on over the long haul.

[/ QUOTE ]

I meant it to be in relative terms, although I didn't actually say so.

[ QUOTE ]
Farha misses: 8 x -$50 = -$400
Farha hits: 1 x $12,000 = $12,000
Farha's EV: (12,000 - 400)/9 = 1288.88

So it's clearly better (based on above assumptions) for OG to raise as it reduces Farha's ROI on the preflop call.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you limp in with it you should be prepared to let it go sometimes. When you limp UTG and fire into a field of people on the flop, most (thinking) players will strongly consider the possibility that you have a set... they will not play back at you lightly. If you're facing a lot of action, your hand is probably no good, and you can chuck it.

[KowCiller]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
While I agree with what you're saying, it does matter how much money you get in with the nuts because that directly relates to the amount of your stack you lose when getting drawn out on over the long haul.

[/ QUOTE ]

I meant it to be in relative terms, although I didn't actually say so.

[ QUOTE ]
Farha misses: 8 x -$50 = -$400
Farha hits: 1 x $12,000 = $12,000
Farha's EV: (12,000 - 400)/9 = 1288.88

So it's clearly better (based on above assumptions) for OG to raise as it reduces Farha's ROI on the preflop call.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you limp in with it you should be prepared to let it go sometimes. When you limp UTG and fire into a field of people on the flop, most (thinking) players will strongly consider the possibility that you have a set... they will not play back at you lightly. If you're facing a lot of action, your hand is probably no good, and you can chuck it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes absolutely. I agree with what you're saying, which is why I was qualifying my statements with those above assumptions (namely that this guy in the WSOP was probably going to back his stack with AA regardless of preflop/postflop action).

KoW

[wtfsvi]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar på:</font><hr />
NL isn't just a math problem.

[/ QUOTE ] Well. That's a sketchy statement, no?

I would say that it is. Except for part of the specific hand reading. That's a pretty important part of NL, but not what was discussed here.

[soah]

I would say that limit hold'em is a math problem. It is very easy to quantify the EV of every decision that you make.

In NL you can call a big bet on the flop with a gutshot because you know it's 50/50 that he check-folds the turn... you can't justify the flop call with math; you can only go by your instincts that tell you that your steal equity is enough to make it worthwhile.

You can teach a bot to play limit hold'em, but I've never heard of one that can play NL (beyond small stakes shortstack situations)... because it's more than just math.

[Maulik]

[ QUOTE ]
I would like to limp 22-77 in EP, but should I be limping anything else in EP for shania? At what limits should I even care about shania?

[/ QUOTE ]

to OP, is shania a poster? I have no idea what you're talking about.

2+2 has defined the word shania to pretty much mean having a well balanced hand range, so as not to be too predictable

If you only raise preflop with AA you have bad shania, because people can call with all sorts of hands, and it will be -EV for you (if it's just a pot-raise your making it preflop)