Playing fewer tables, limp-reraising more, may be an idiot
 

So my shorthanded 10/20 graph has been looking like a crackhead's EKG lately, and as a result I've been playing fewer tables (1 or 2). A play I've been finding myself liking lately when I'm out of position against multiple loose callers is open limping with smaller pairs and suited aces. They tend to be more likely to overlimp, which gives me the appropriate amount of multiway action where I think it's +EV to play these hands.

Occasionally, they fold, and and the small blind or big blind raises. Since I have position on these guys I have had the instinct to limp-reraise for a couple reasons, depending on who's raising.

1. If it's the SB, he may be looking to get heads-up with a limper (me) who's shown weakness by limping. LRR'ing seems to spook them.

2. If it's the BB and the SB has completed, a LRR will likely knock him out. I'd rather do this with the PPs than suited aces.

3. I find I get either very little or too much postflop action, and it's pretty easy to get away from these hands with position. When I catch a big hand, it's very well-disguised.

4. If a showdown happens, I look like a clown in a play that's likely to get noticed.

I should say this is a RARE play for me, but if it's idiotic I might as well make it one I never make. Since I seem to be having success, I figured I'd check in and make sure I wasn't setting myself up for a hurtin'.

Does anybody else do something similar? Is this dumb, and if so, why?

Re: Playing fewer tables, limp-reraising more, may be an idiot
 

[ QUOTE ]
I should say this is a RARE play for me....

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get this. If you have the 'right' table conditions for your play and the range includes small suited aces and small pairs, on what premise do you base your decision for playing? You are UTG and no one has acted yet. You either play or you don't play. Let's say you get dealt hands like these for several orbits when you are UTG. How do you choose which ones to limp with? I'd like to hear a system. If you don't pick and choose, then the situation can't be 'rare' like you say.

Re: Playing fewer tables, limp-reraising more, may be an idiot
 

It´s rare because:
1) Table conditions must be such that he can limp UTG with these hands.
2) He must be dealth one of them.
3) He is only UTG 1/6th of the time
4) He expected a multiway pot, so it´s not that often it gets folded around to someone who raise, so he has the option.

Re: Playing fewer tables, limp-reraising more, may be an idiot
 

It's rare because multiple loose players have to decide not to over limp. I also avoid tables that have LPPs on my left and TAGs on my right. When I'm only playing one or two tables, I'll likely be more selective, since I'm comfortable playing an orbit or two with 2-3 tables, then sticking with the best one.

Edit: Trix summed it up.

Re: Playing fewer tables, limp-reraising more, may be an idiot
 

[ QUOTE ]
So my shorthanded 10/20 graph has been looking like a crackhead's EKG lately, and as a result I've been playing fewer tables (1 or 2). A play I've been finding myself liking lately when I'm out of position against multiple loose callers is open limping with smaller pairs and suited aces. They tend to be more likely to overlimp, which gives me the appropriate amount of multiway action where I think it's +EV to play these hands.

Occasionally, they fold, and and the small blind or big blind raises. Since I have position on these guys I have had the instinct to limp-reraise for a couple reasons, depending on who's raising.

1. If it's the SB, he may be looking to get heads-up with a limper (me) who's shown weakness by limping. LRR'ing seems to spook them.

2. If it's the BB and the SB has completed, a LRR will likely knock him out. I'd rather do this with the PPs than suited aces.

3. I find I get either very little or too much postflop action, and it's pretty easy to get away from these hands with position. When I catch a big hand, it's very well-disguised.

4. If a showdown happens, I look like a clown in a play that's likely to get noticed.

I should say this is a RARE play for me, but if it's idiotic I might as well make it one I never make. Since I seem to be having success, I figured I'd check in and make sure I wasn't setting myself up for a hurtin'.

Does anybody else do something similar? Is this dumb, and if so, why?

[/ QUOTE ]

I took that statement to mean the whole situation is rare. Were you just referring to #4?

Re: Playing fewer tables, limp-reraising more, may be an idiot
 

The whole situation leading to the LRR is rare. If I limp and other players limp, I don't reraise. Every loose player behind me must fold, and a blind has to raise. If I get my multiple limpers and a blind raises, I don't reraise because now I want the multi-way action I was going for in the first place. If the blinds complete/check, my hand looks exactly like what it is, a smaller pair or weakish suited ace.

Re: Playing fewer tables, limp-reraising more, may be an idiot
 

I really don't like it. You're saying that you limp in UTG with small pairs and suited aces and LRR if its folded to the blinds who try to "isolate the weak limper." I think you're missing a lot of problems with this play.

1.) If this in fact works you still just have a shaky hand, likely to make/be bottom pair, against an aggressive opponent. A position I'd rather not be in.
2.) It's probably going to be a tough hand to play when you limp, everyone folds, and the blinds complete and check. What do you do if the flop is rags and face some aggression? It's easier to make mistakes in a small pot where your mistakes will be amplified
3.) When there's a few callers and someone raises in position its going to be harder to extract the most value when you make a set/flush.
4.) Sometimes you'll get isolated by a single PFR in position and in that case these hands just burn money.

So given my above reasons, unless the game is loose-passive, I would fold these hands in EP and just overlimp and perhaps iso-raise them in position. Playing these hands and playing them like this is probably why your graph looks like a crackhead's EKG. Just my 2 pesos

- GT1T

Re: Playing fewer tables, limp-reraising more, may be an idiot
 

Thanks for the thoughts. If I could ask for a clarification or two.

[ QUOTE ]
1.) If this in fact works you still just have a shaky hand, likely to make/be bottom pair, against an aggressive opponent. A position I'd rather not be in.

[/ QUOTE ]
I've represented a ton of strength and I have position. If I miss and he wakes up, I'm comfortable letting this hand go. Up until now, I find it takes a very good flop (for the opponent) to show postflop agression against a limp-reraiser. Lots of them are check/folding here.

[ QUOTE ]
2.) It's probably going to be a tough hand to play when you limp, everyone folds, and the blinds complete and check. What do you do if the flop is rags and face some aggression?

[/ QUOTE ]
I fold. The pot is small, and my hand is exactly what it looks like based on the PF limp.

[ QUOTE ]
3.) When there's a few callers and someone raises in position its going to be harder to extract the most value when you make a set/flush.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'd posit the opposite. I have a loose passive player with a good hand in this scenario. I'm getting paid. Unfortunately, I usually won't hit, so:

[ QUOTE ]
4.) Sometimes you'll get isolated by a single PFR in position and in that case these hands just burn money.

[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely. I don't want a loose passive player raising behind me.

[ QUOTE ]
Playing these hands and playing them like this is probably why your graph looks like a crackhead's EKG.

[/ QUOTE ] This is a new play for me, post-Tyrone Biggun's trip to the clinic. I have other problems leading to that [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Still, maybe this is a dumb play. I'll never get a statistically significant sample size, and I can't do a pokerstove that reflects the aggression of a LRR.

Re: Playing fewer tables, limp-reraising more, may be an idiot
 

This is pretty interesting play. I can see how it would work in ideal circumstances, but I can't see it being +EV overall at 10/20. I think you would get looked up too often with your marginal holding. At 10/20 I see people holding onto pairs or a piece of the board because they're "sure" that your raising a naked Ace or you're just FOS. In your experience does your LRRing scare them enough to give you fold equity?

Re: Playing fewer tables, limp-reraising more, may be an idiot
 

[ QUOTE ]
In your experience does your LRRing scare them enough to give you fold equity?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've heard the term "fold equity" used in some confusing ways lately, my understanding is that it means they'll be more likely to fold a decent hand on a later street. In that case, absolutely. The limp-reraise seems like the last play at 10/20 that all players seem to really respect except when it's from a 70/40/2 player. Lots of them are check/folding the flop or turn. In the case of a showdown, win or lose I get lots of value betting in on subsequent hands, as I get pegged as a maniac.

edit: Not that I have nearly the sample size to say I know this is profitable. Just that a LRR from a TAG UTG seems to put the brakes on in my limited experience doing so. It's part of the reason I stopped doing it with AA or KK.