keep Raising?

Let"s say you're running bad and can't hit a flop to save your life. Each time it involves a total of 3bets because you're probably going to bet the flop whether you hit or not.At this point I start to feel like it's useless to raise,so why not see the flop as cheaplyas possible by limping in. I know that most of you won't like this idea because all of you are pretty aggresive. But is this such a bad idea. I would really like to know how you feel,since i respect your opinions. I forgot to add that I wouldn't limp with High pairs.


thank you for your imputs if you deign to reply.


Dancer

What happened on the last flop has no bearing on what will happen on the next flop. Each case should be considered on its own merits. Also, you're under no obligation to bet a flop that misses you.


What does change, when you are either missing a lot or hitting a lot, is your opponents' perceptions of you and how they play against you. This might be a valid reason to change your pre-flop play.


But if I've lost with A-A six times in a row, and I'm down 3 racks, and everyone knows it, I'm still going to raise with it the seventh time.


It is tough, psychologically, to keep yourself playing your A game both when you're missing every flop and when you're hitting every one. During a recent losing streak, I found myself looking at my first card and, upon finding it was an Ace, almost wishing the next card was not a King or a Queen so I wouldn't have to raise and then miss the flop. On the other hand, I had an orgasmic run of cards yesterday and found myself hoping for the opposite as soon as I saw an Ace in front. Both attitudes are wrong.

"Let's say you're running bad and can't hit a flop to save your life"


let's say the above is true but you dont let it effect the way you play. instead you play each hand like you just sat down at the table. you play with a clear head and precise strategies, unclouded by the fact you are down a rack and a half.


let's also say that when you start to play contrary to what clear, rational, educated thinking would dictate, you get up and leave immediately and don't look back.

The other posters have the best points about past luck not affecting future results. But I'd like to point out other reasons to raise. A preflop raise makes postflop play easier when you miss the flop, because:


1. If you're in early position, or there aren't a lot of callers yet, then you might keep it shorthanded. You then might not need to hit the flop to win.


2. If you're in late position, or there are already callers, then a raise might drive out the remaining players. Then you might be able to take a free card on the flop if you want it.


3. You maintain an aggressive image, which means that people are less willing to take shots at you and less willing to dispute the pot.

I agree with this:


"Also, you're under no obligation to bet a flop that misses you."


Dancer, that you feel committed to a bet after the flop after raising before the flop is a common and major leak, IMO.


But I disagree with Andy and Mike's sentiment, here expressed by Andy:


"Each case should be considered on its own merits."


I think Andy contradicted himself right away:


"What does change, when you are either missing a lot or hitting a lot, is your opponents' perceptions of you and how they play against you. This might be a valid reason to change your pre-flop play."


Might be? Let's say we see a guy who is normally solid go on tilt. Are we going to play against him the same way as if he were solid? What if he is on inverse tilt, playing TOO tight and scared. Would that affect how we play against him? Of course it would, right? Now, let's say it is WE whose game is shakey, or the cards are cruel, or for whatever reason, the respect we are used to is gone for the day. To pretend that it's just as if we sat down fresh is crazy. Of course we need to adjust, to account for the opponent's adjustments.


I suppose this qualifies as "each case considered on its own merits." But what you imply with those words is that perception is not one of the merits, or at least not a significant one, where I feel it is a often THE primary one. When we have power and dominance, this affects our preflop decisions, as it should. Likewise when we are weakened by recent events. My way of handling that second thing is to just up and quit. I do this a LOT. I don't do this to clear my head, though it is a residual benefit when needed. I do it in order to come back later against a different combo of players that don't percieve me as running bad.


Perception is nine-tenths of the flaw, or something like that. lol


Tommy

"Let's say we see a guy who is normally solid go on tilt. Are we going to play against him the same way as if he were solid? What if he is on inverse tilt, playing TOO tight and scared."


the former is so much easier to recognize than the latter, making the latter much harder to take advantage of.


"My way of handling that second thing is to just up and quit. I do this a LOT."


this is what i was suggesting as an alternative to playing well despite the situation.


"I don't do this to clear my head, though it is a residual benefit when needed. I do it in order to come back later against a different combo of players that don't percieve me as running bad."


since Dancer's intital post didn't say anything about the players picking up on his failure to connect with flops (many tables lack players that are even this astute), i decided not to comment on the perception issue. it makes sense though that it would come up automatically when disussing this topic.

. . . to hope that an Ace on top contains a K, Q or other A below?

"I think Andy contradicted himself right away"


I've been trying to work on that, instead of waiting a coupe of paragraphs to contradict myself. I'm honored that a gifted writer like you has picked up on this improvement. :-)


"When we have power and dominance, this affects our preflop decisions, as it should." Indeed. If I see a player has switched gears and is being super-aggressive, it affects my decisions: for example, I'll avoid drawing hands, knowing it's going to cost a lot more than it might when he's in a less offensive gear to get to the river; I'll be super-wary of playing from middle positions where I might get sandwiched between Mr. Fast Gear and Mr. Angelo on the button; etc.


"when we are weakened by recent events. My way of handling that second thing is to just up and quit. I do this a LOT."


As a pro, I assume you play nearly every day. For some of us, poker is an event: I go to play for 5-6 hours, as my wife told me to be home at 6:00. So I'm less prone to just up and quit.

This is clearly wrong. If you're not at your best, for whatever reason, upping and quitting is a helluva lot better idea than not raising because you're missing a lot of flops.

Wishing for a card to come is wasted energy. If it comes, it comes; if it doesn't, it doesn't. Craving action is dangerous.


Yesterday, during my big rush, the pot was opened, raised and re-raised when it got back to me in the small blind. I saw an Ace and then squeezed out a King. But then I thought, wait a minute, yeah, I've been winning every hand I've played for an hour, but Mr. Tight raised the UTG opener and now Mr. Good Player, knowing Mr. Tight raised UTG has re-raised. Into the muck with the A-K.


Under "normal" conditions, I wouldn't have even had to think about it.

I read all the posts to my question and I want to thank you all for your imputs. You all seem to be of the same mind, that Stopping to raise is not the answer. For a long time I have wondered what good players would think of my limping strategy. Now I know. Of course quitting has always been an option when going bad and perhaps that's the best solution.


Thank you again


Dancer

This is a nice dialog between you fellas; I like what you're saying. A corollary to all this perception talk is to not give off clues that you are running bad. Sure, the cards tell the story but I think it's a huge mistake to mutter, slump, pound the table etc. (or even worse, to type something in the chat space online) that confirms that you are running bad and are steaming up. Consciously or unconsciously, this encourages others to be more courageous against you.


I have a temper and I'm impatient by nature so I struggle with this, and I know it has cost me.