Raising vs. Limping

[tech]

The biggest difference in the way I play at typical Party tables and the way most 2+2ers play is that my pre-flop raise percentage is much lower than most -- I limp a lot. My reasoning mostly follows that of S&M in their chapter on loose games. For example, they advocate rarely raising with AQo and even give examples where they recommend that you not raise with KK. I don't usually go to that extreme, but you get the idea.

The discussion I would like to initiate is on the topic of "why" most 2+2ers feel that raising pre-flop is so important. In other words, what is it that we are trying to accomplish by raising so much?

(a) Is it that the players are so terrible that you simply HAVE to raise (a possibility mentioned by S&M)?

(b) Is it trying to limit the field (doesn't seem to make sense, since it rarely happens)?

(c) Is it simply to get more money in the pot when you have an edge (counter to S&M's arguments)?

(d) Something else?

All comments welcome. Just trying to understand.

[JDErickson]

my opinion.

All of the above.

You raise because you likely have the best hand. You are a better player post flop than they are and you can limit the field.

Theres nothing wrong with limping with more hands in a loose passive game. But you still should be raising the good hands. don't fall into the limp with big hands crowd. It will only lose you money.

Jim

[bisonbison]

Depending on the table texture, you may be raising for value or raising to drive people out, or a little of both.

With big pairs as low as TT and 99 (and especially those that are bigger) you're raising for value, hoping many people will call, because you will win more than your share of hands.

With big suited cards (AKs, KQs, QJs, AJs...), you're raising for value, because whether its just 3 players or all 10, your big cards have some big hand potential and some high pair value.

With big unsuited cards, there comes a point where too many opponents nullifies a lot of their value, and it may be necessary to limp or fold a hand you might raise if you could thin the field (ATo, KJo). Given that, in any ace games, you are sacrificing too much of an edge if you fail to raise AKo, AQo or even AJo.

Basically, you raise because bad players at every level will call raises with an incredible array of crap. When you're at a table with many of these bad players, who are unconcerned with odds, the edge that they give up preflop is simply too great to make up by "properly" chasing their hands postflops. So you raise.

Plus, raising is fun.

[Sarge85]

Hmm - granted I'm no expert, but it sounds like you may be heading down a road you don't want to.

I think you pretty much hit on all the reasons you want to be raising. NO - check that - NEED to be raising if you want to win money.

[ QUOTE ]
(a) Is it that the players are so terrible that you simply HAVE to raise (a possibility mentioned by S&M)?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes - If players want to play their A7o against your AKs all the more reason to raise.

[ QUOTE ]
(b) Is it trying to limit the field (doesn't seem to make sense, since it rarely happens)?

[/ QUOTE ]

PF - probably not as much, I find myself raising PF because I feel I either have the best hand, or I'm putting in a value based raise. Either way, I'm not necessarily looking to limit the field. - save that for post flop.

Of course there are expections. If I feel I can isolate a loose raiser by a 3-bet - alot of the time, I'm hoping that the others just fold.

[ QUOTE ]
(c) Is it simply to get more money in the pot when you have an edge (counter to S&M's arguments)?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. - but I guess you need to realize why you have an edge.
I'll raise 9Ts from the button after several limpers, - not because I have the best hand, but because I have the edge of having a strong multiway hand that I can play better on the flop and beyond than others.

I raise JJ because its a strong hand, etc...

[ QUOTE ]
(d) Something else?

[/ QUOTE ]

You indicated that thining the field in your opinion isn't really worth it because people will call anyway. Keep showing them preium hands, and you'll find they'll start to take you seriously....which opens up even more doors for you.

Sarge/images/graemlins/diamond.gif

[Sam T.]

In addition to the reasons given by others, a PF raise is important because it puts you in control of the hand, giving you a range of options on later streets.

In an answer to a similar query, sthief pointed out that games which S&M consider loose or terrible are far tighter and better than anything we play, so we have to make some modifications.

[Zetack]

First, there are a lot of limping hands. Go ahead and limp with them. But raise with your raising hands. Be careful of HPFAP's advice. Generally its not aimed at the games we play. It has lots of sophisticated, tricky ways of playing and some of its plays are actually contradictory to other plays. Its a fantastic piece of work, but you have to be careful with it. Without looking for it, I'm pretty sure that somewhere in there it says that often straightforward, solid poker is the way to play. Part of being an expert player is figuring out when to be tricky.

Raise with your big hands for value and because ordinarily you do knock somebody out. But I'd do it just for value if that's all I had (in the BB with A-Ko and six limpers --raise it up, buttercup.)


[ QUOTE ]

(c) Is it simply to get more money in the pot when you have an edge (counter to S&M's arguments)?


[/ QUOTE ]

See if you can reconcile this statement with what Sklansky has said in these forums about edges:
Sklansky Speaks (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=493173&page=&view=&sb =5&o=&vc=1)

--Zetack

[MortalNuts]

I don't have much to add to the good replies you've received already. But you might be interested in looking at this post by Mason (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=mediumholdem&Number=60 3401&Forum=CatSearch-2&Words=two%20edged%20sword&Match=And&Searchpage=0 &Limit=25&Old=3months&Main=600563&Search=true#Post 603401).

In it, he mentions the following passage from HPFAP:

[ QUOTE ]
There is a bit of a two-edged sword here. If you’re playing against extremely terrible opponents, it’s hard not to raise with pretty good hands because even though you’re costing yourself money on the later streets, your’re gaining so much before the flop because your hand is usually so much better than theirs. In other words, if people are coming in with absolutely everything, you have got to raise with an AQ simply because your hand is so much better on average than so many of the other players.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think this applies to an awful lot of situations at an awful lot of low-limit tables. The hands that your opponents hold are just so bad relative to your own that you must raise.

When you have an edge, it's right to push it. By not doing so, you are making a mistake, unless you believe that you will be able to recoup more EV on later streets by not raising than you are giving up right now.

I think that most of us, playing in most low-limit games, are not going to be able to do that. So, raise.

cheers,

mn

[StellarWind]

Just about everything that has been said so far about why we raise is true and I won't repeat it. But let's discuss

[ QUOTE ]
(d) Something else?

[/ QUOTE ]

A basic principle of poker is to encourage your opponents to take their excesses even further. For example, if he bluffs too much, make plays that encourage him to bluff even more. If he bluffs too little, reinforce that instead so that he never bluffs.

Micro players cold call *way* too much. When you open raise UTG with a hand like AJo or 99 you gain advantages a., b., and c. as previously discussed. You also gain the long-term advantage of encouraging even more cold calls. They rationalize their next call with KTo because "he's a loose raiser, he had 99 when he raised last orbit." Only this time you have AA and the earlier raise just got you paid.

Before everyone starts up, micro players do notice players who raise with junk even when they are oblivious to everything else.

It's not all fun and games however. Micro players need to tighten up on the LP steal raises because they don't work. Any two will not do when you are open raising from the button. You are going to be called. You will have to play the hand so it is important to have actual useful cards. You can't justify playing with "No problem, it *is* +EV, he might fold and I might flop a boat". You have to fold the worst of the cheese you might otherwise play.

The same reasoning applies to the ever-popular isolation raises. Fold if you think you need to be heads up for the play to be profitable. You won't get rid of both blinds very often, especially if you are only making it two bets.

[SoCalPat]

[ QUOTE ]
My reasoning mostly follows that of S&M in their chapter on loose games.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know exactly the chapter you're talking about, and while there's some great advice there, you have to remember two things: The info there doesn't necessarily translate well in all facets to micro-limits and Internet games (the example of not raising with AQ on the button being Exhibit A).

Also, please point out to me in HPFAP and TOP where the authors even hint at limping with KK.

S&M make great points about waiting out good hands until you get to the expensive streets, and then raising there. Don't put in any "delay" tactics on the flop with your great hands. Raise PF, bet the flop and use the turn to get creative. Your play on the flop with big hands should be pretty straightforward 99.9 percent of the time.

[tech]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, please point out to me in HPFAP and TOP where the authors even hint at limping with KK.

[/ QUOTE ]

I apologize for the unclear wording of my other post. The example from HPFAP using KK is the following (p. 167, 2nd para.):

"For instance, suppose you have two kings or two queens in the big blind. The player under the gun raises, and six people call. Our preferred way to play this hand is to not reraise, and then when the flop comes to bet out, unless it includes an ace."

Not exactly my original question, but still the same basic idea. Just curious ... anybody here play this hand this way, or do you 3-bet every time here?

[tech]

Thanks for all the replies. Seems to me that the "everyone else is terrible" assumption is the key component. Otherwise there would be more incentive to disguise your hands, etc. Anyway, thanks again.