Gramps
02-22-2004, 04:20 AM
Long-time lurker, first-time poster.
Due to Party's problems tonight, I crusied to my local B&M to play $3/6 against the "any two cards" crowd. 10-handed, usually at least 7 to every flop, even though I'm sitting there folding most of the time. The kind of crowd that really WANTS to see the flop with their 84o "just in case" it hits them hard, even if they know better. Plus, most of these people play very poorly after the flop, so they're paying you off calling the flop and sometimes Turn bets with nothing. Or raising on the River when they make two pair on a flush/straight board, etc.
The "tightening effect" that sometimes occurs is when people start raising pre-flop. Now, the any two cards players have pay 2 bets to see a flop with their 84o. They start getting upset about the raises and start tightening up, FEARING a raise and the sting of paying 2 bets with their junk, only to have the flop miss them again. Now, only 4-5 people are seeing the flop. Thus, due to the pre-flop raising, these people are playing closer to correct stratgey.
It takes close to an orbit of no pre-flop raising before it's "safe again," and people can revert to their "any two cards ways." Also, when a "tightie" like me raises and shows down a strong hand, that one hand alone is enough to tighten up the game for a number of future hands. Or, my pre-flop raise "reminds" a player with aggressive tendencies that he too can raise pre-flop, and HE is the one who wakes up and raises it up for a couple of hands "for the hell of it," thus causing the aforementioned tightening effect.
The rake at my local club is $4 regardless of pot size, so with this structure, having lots of players paying to see the flop is even more important than normal.
So...given the above, and the "collateral negative effects" of raising, does it make sense to limp with some of the stronger suited hands from early or middle position? (AQs, AJs, KQs, etc.) A hand like TT? Maybe you give up a little expectation in that hand, but you may get more back over the next 5-10 hands by preserving the (very) loose nature of the game. I'm thinking if I'm in LP or on the button and a bunch of people have VP$IP already, don't overthink it and get as much $$ in the pot as you can. But if I don't have position, I don't want to "disturb the nature of the game" on these hands.
For example, tonight I was in MP1 (acting 4th) and pick up K /images/graemlins/heart.gifQ /images/graemlins/heart.gif. Limp, limp, fold...if I raise, I'll probably get one or two cold callers and possibly the blinds (plus UTG & UTG+1)...but...I might tighten up the table for the next number of hands. Maybe I'm giving up a little exepectation on this hand by not raising, but it would seem I may be getting it back and more by helping to keep the game super-loose.
If I have AA/KK/QQ/AKo in that position, I'll risk the collateral tightening effect. It just seems that with the hands that do well against lots of players, it might be wise to limp where under most game conditions you would raise.
All comments and criticism welcome
Due to Party's problems tonight, I crusied to my local B&M to play $3/6 against the "any two cards" crowd. 10-handed, usually at least 7 to every flop, even though I'm sitting there folding most of the time. The kind of crowd that really WANTS to see the flop with their 84o "just in case" it hits them hard, even if they know better. Plus, most of these people play very poorly after the flop, so they're paying you off calling the flop and sometimes Turn bets with nothing. Or raising on the River when they make two pair on a flush/straight board, etc.
The "tightening effect" that sometimes occurs is when people start raising pre-flop. Now, the any two cards players have pay 2 bets to see a flop with their 84o. They start getting upset about the raises and start tightening up, FEARING a raise and the sting of paying 2 bets with their junk, only to have the flop miss them again. Now, only 4-5 people are seeing the flop. Thus, due to the pre-flop raising, these people are playing closer to correct stratgey.
It takes close to an orbit of no pre-flop raising before it's "safe again," and people can revert to their "any two cards ways." Also, when a "tightie" like me raises and shows down a strong hand, that one hand alone is enough to tighten up the game for a number of future hands. Or, my pre-flop raise "reminds" a player with aggressive tendencies that he too can raise pre-flop, and HE is the one who wakes up and raises it up for a couple of hands "for the hell of it," thus causing the aforementioned tightening effect.
The rake at my local club is $4 regardless of pot size, so with this structure, having lots of players paying to see the flop is even more important than normal.
So...given the above, and the "collateral negative effects" of raising, does it make sense to limp with some of the stronger suited hands from early or middle position? (AQs, AJs, KQs, etc.) A hand like TT? Maybe you give up a little expectation in that hand, but you may get more back over the next 5-10 hands by preserving the (very) loose nature of the game. I'm thinking if I'm in LP or on the button and a bunch of people have VP$IP already, don't overthink it and get as much $$ in the pot as you can. But if I don't have position, I don't want to "disturb the nature of the game" on these hands.
For example, tonight I was in MP1 (acting 4th) and pick up K /images/graemlins/heart.gifQ /images/graemlins/heart.gif. Limp, limp, fold...if I raise, I'll probably get one or two cold callers and possibly the blinds (plus UTG & UTG+1)...but...I might tighten up the table for the next number of hands. Maybe I'm giving up a little exepectation on this hand by not raising, but it would seem I may be getting it back and more by helping to keep the game super-loose.
If I have AA/KK/QQ/AKo in that position, I'll risk the collateral tightening effect. It just seems that with the hands that do well against lots of players, it might be wise to limp where under most game conditions you would raise.
All comments and criticism welcome