[bcubed72]

I've just finished reading Harrington on Hold Em (vols 1&2), and feel that it has improved my game. I do take issue with one of his strategies. I don't know: mabye I'm missing a fine point.

He says HU in the small blind, you are getting 3:1 on your call (true). He says that, because any hand is less than a 3:1 dog to win (against a random hand), you should call w/ any two.

I agree that this logic is true, but with one caveat: It is only true if you KNOW you won't be raised. The way I play,I like to come in for a raise most often. Occasionally, I'll limp w/ a monster, but usually raise to get fold equity and win w/o a showdown. It would seem that, limping w/ a trash hand (say 52o), I'd look very suspicious and most knowledgeable players would put in a healthy raise. This puts me in the situation of either 1. Putting more money in the pot with a hand that's a dog to win, or 2. Folding after putting extra money in the pot to call the BB. I use just this strategy against players unable to fold in the SB, raising w/ basically any paint w/ a 7 kicker or so.

Don't get me wrong: I've loosened my calling requirements considerably as I've gained experience; I'll usually call down to T6 or 98s. I just feel that you'll get raised too often to make that 52o playable.