[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
I think limping is quite a bit better than raising, contrary to what everybody else says.

I would really like an explanation as to why limping and raising are about the same EV as people are saying. I think that is simply a copout because people don't want to figure out which is better. The options may be close but in my opinion they definitely aren't, limping is quite a bit better.

[/ QUOTE ]

We'll start with this idea:

If it were not for the posters, raising in an attempt to isolate a very weak player against whom you have a clear equity edge would be correct. In fact, without posters, limping might be worse than folding as playing this hand out of position without initiative is hard.

So let's consider why limping becomes a more viable option in this pot:

1. With the posters behind us, raising is unlikely to buy us position.

2. With the posters behind us, raising is unlikely to keep the pot short-handed.

3. Because of the extra money in the pot, it becomes much more viable to play this hand for it's "fit-or-fold" value alone.

Now let's consider ways in which raising still has value, even with the posters.

1. The posters, because they are posting, will often call raises with much inferior hands than they normally would. Thus, when we raise and they call, in general our equity edge will be higher against their range of calling hands than it would be if no one had posted and players are simply cold-calling. Hence raising has more value in that sense.

2. Raising still forces the non-posters to face two bets cold, which will often encourage folds from hands we might like to fold (AT, A9, maybe KQo, small pairs, maybe suited As, and so on and so forth). Though in some sense that effect is lessened because the posters often won't fold and the pot is bloated, it still must be considered.

3. The extra money in the pot makes the additional fold equity we generate in this pot by raising pre-flop more valueable. Because there's more money in there to begin with, we want to be able to have as much leverage in winning that extra money on future streets.


So, there are some reasons. I honestly don't know which one's better and I really didn't even want to give an explanation for why I thought they were basically the same. Ultimately, I am pretty confident that they are quite close and it's the kind of decision that has little to no material effect on your bottom line in the long-run.