close but no cigar

[charlie_t_jr]

[ QUOTE ]
Isn't this particular preflop situation why you would immediately muck 44 UTG?

This particular preflop action is why you would muck any small pair, any suited connector, any weak ace... When it comes back to you. Not the first time around.

There are hands that are worth limping UTG in loose passive games.

[/ QUOTE ]

That preflop action doesn't look like a loose passive game [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[bmedwar]

[ QUOTE ]
J9s UTG -0.09
44 UTG -0.08

Overall position by position winner? 44
Overall EP winner? 44

[/ QUOTE ]

Strange definition of "winner". From these stats, the only winner is the player that folds them both UTG (my advice).

[blackaces13]

I also feel it needs to be added that most low-limit players play pocket pairs HORRIBLY. They simply connnot release them. How many times have you seen a guy call all the way with a board of A-K-2-7-T only to flip up pocket 4's? It happens all the time and if you check the hand histories you'd see it happens a lot when you can't see what they had.

I was actually very surprised by how close J9s compared to 44 according to the pookerroom stats. However, I feel that the 44's are probably misplayed more by calling stations than J9s, at least I hope so. If not it seems they are about equal hands in EP and that 44 is a loser from most postions, including the button [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]! I refuse to believe either of those things.

[bisonbison]

I'm wary of advice about playing hands because they are "easy" and "fun".

I don't know if you're willfully blind to what I'm trying to communicate here or what.

Keys for beginning players:

A) Good starting hand selection
Flexible but tight standards for preflop hand selection that take the importance of position into account. All potential limping hands benefit from position, because the player's better able to gauge how many opponents he'll have and how cheaply he'll be able to see the flop.

However, certain types of hands demand position in order to play well postflop, medium suited connectors and low suited aces being primary among them. Low pairs do not rely as heavily on postflop position (though they definitely benefit from it) because there are few circumstances in which you flop a hand and err by betting or raising as much as possible.

B) Straightforward play
Don't worry about advertising, bluffing, stealing, buying pots or mixing it up. At the microlimits these efforts are high-variance money pits.


Playing medium suited one-gaps UTG is far far more marginal than playing small pairs. It's higher variance, is hurt much more by the presence of other strong hands (because it's pair value disappears and its straight and flush value diminishes) and it presumes that the player can consistently outplay his opponents postflop. J9s is not an easy hand UTG.

[bisonbison]

Strange definition of "winner". From these stats, the only winner is the player that folds them both UTG (my advice).

If you're gonna nitpick my posts rather than addressing the core argument, I don't know what to tell you.

If the average pokerroom player (who is a losing player), finds it easier to make a profit (or lose less) with small pairs than with J9s, then it stands to reason that a player who is a beginner and trying to improve his or her game will find it similarly easier.

How hard is this for you to understand?

edit: and if you are not at a table (particularly a party .5/1 table) where an UTG limp consistently means a 5 or 6 handed pot, then you are at the wrong table.

[afs]

[ QUOTE ]
This page of Pre-Flop Income Rates shows...

# of opponents
1 3 6
--- --- ---
44 142 52 67
J9s 113 248 377

So it seems that I am correct (based on this info, and HFAP groupings).

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're reading the table wrong. Sure, J9s has a higher EV than 44 if played well. But J9s is much harder to play well. At a loose passive table, low pp are unquestionably the easiest hands to play. J9s is much more situational, and requires much more finesse. Low pp are +EV. You won't make the majority of your money w/ them, but you will make money. So you should play them. Cut and dry.

This hand is very much an exception.

[DoctorDrew]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Isn't this particular preflop situation why you would immediately muck 44 UTG?

This particular preflop action is why you would muck any small pair, any suited connector, any weak ace... When it comes back to you. Not the first time around.

There are hands that are worth limping UTG in loose passive games.

[/ QUOTE ]

That preflop action doesn't look like a loose passive game [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me take a stab at this before bison. If you read one of bob's earlier posts, he does state this HAD been a pretty passive table up until this hand. So, most here agree Bob's initial play limping UTG=good; calling 2 bets back (and not closing the action)=bad (or at least marginal). But, based on Bob's read of the table and general history at party, he should be able to limp with small pp from UTG.

[charlie_t_jr]

[ QUOTE ]
[edit: and if you are not at a table (particularly a party .5/1 table) where an UTG limp consistently means a 5 or 6 handed pot, then you are at the wrong table.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bison,

Not to get in the middle of a battle here, because I agree with what you are saying for the most part, but I do have a question.

When small pp are played, aren't we relying on a few limpers and no raises to make this a profitable play overall. So if from time to time call with small pairs and don't get enough callers behind us, or as happened in Bobs situtation, it cost us more than we wanted, if either of these situations happens often enough, it'll make small pp unprofitable...no?

Point taken about the 5-6 limpers in every hand, but I've been playing mostly 1/2 lately, and these games just seem a bit tighter than that, and sometimes the same table will play super tight one orbit, then super loose the next.

But I think most of us are striving to better our games to the point, that we don't have to rely on 5 or 6 poker dummies blindly limping in every hand. And I think part of improving my game is not playing loose up front unless I know whats coming behind me.

Great posts and good discussion...

[bisonbison]

sometimes you miss and only get two other callers, sometimes the whole table follows.

But basically, what I'm suggesting isn't really playing loose up front, because you're not really adding a lot of hands to your reportoire. And (as long as the table is loose) the earlier position you are, I think the better a case can be made for open-limping with small pairs because of the odds that others will follow you.

I don't open limp with small pairs in MP2, MP3, CO or on the button.

[bisonbison]

Hey guys,

sorry for getting a little vehement in this thread. I wanted to point out that a lot of the small stakes posters feel that the 2nd preflop call is a good one, because you're going to get enough callers to give you odds and definitely enough postflop action.

See, even when I'm loose I'm weak-tight.