Raising Question(semi-long)

I know this question has been asked before but I don't recall a mathmatical answer given. How much are you giving up by limping with most hands you decide to play instead of raising with the standard hands? After limping you play accordingly including limp-reraising when appropriate. The reason I ask their is an individual at a local casino that plays in this manner and I find it difficult to put him on a hand and where I stand. I know the typical answer is going to be raise with two strong cards because you usually have the best starting hand and your raising for value. If you want to add some deception then raise with some marginal hands. But my question is there a % or amount your giving up in the long run by playing this way, such as .15 BB/hr. Or is the conventional method of raising with strong starting hands just excepted just like the earth is flat?

Last sentence: excepted should read accepted.

A more important factor than raising for value would be knocking out potential hands that could beat you. That is, you can win some extra bets by the deception of limping in with weak hands, but this is offset by the pots you lose by having someone who would have dropped out beat you had you raised. That's the real value of raising.


So the answer would have to depend on how players in the particular game play. For example, I believe Caro has advocated limping in with certain strong hands (such as AK I think, and maybe others) when raising has no chance of knocking out anyone.


BTW, last time I checked, the conventional wisdom was that the earth is round /images/smile.gif

S&M says we should to limp EP with our big suited cards 1/3 of the time for deception.


Of course, if you're playing against people that are too stupid to be deceived, then you can rise all the time, since they'll expect the ATo hand they would raise with.


To limp all the time with the things is both giving up bets and giving people easy releases if they shouldn't be playing after the flop.


But consider limping with AA. let's say you're at a loose table, 5 callers if you limp, 3 players if you raise.


AA wins 73% of the time with 2 opponents, 56% against 5, assuming everyone plays to the end. Let's use that as an estimate.


2 player in for 2 small bets- EV = (pot size * chance fo winning) - (cost of bet). 3BB * 73% - 1BB = 1.19 BB.


5 players in for 1 small bet- 2.5BB * 56% - .5BB = .9 BB.


That's about .3 big bets you give up by not raising there, but this is probably a fairly innacurate simulation.


2ndGoat