Theoretical justification for limping

[William Jockusch]

Suppose I am playing some form of poker that has blinds, such as limit HE, or NL HE. Also suppose that I have decided to play my hand, and no one has entered the pot in front of me.

Why would I ever want to limp in?

It seems to me that by limping, as opposed to raising, I am just taking money out of my pocket and giving it to the big blind.

Why would I do this?

I am aware that S+M consistently recommend limping in with certain hands in certain situations. But what is the theoretical justification for it?

[jackfrost]

Certain hands like small pairs and suited connectors are more profitable against larger fields. Raising narrows the field which is counterproductive.
But i guess it depend on the players. I open much more often when tight players are yet to act.

[William Jockusch]

Does that mean that limping is basically counting on my opponents to play badly? [If I expect a large field, I think that means they are definitely playing badly.]

I can agree that if my opponents tend to make a lot of mistakes, limping might be correct.

[jackfrost]

That pretty much means that for that play to be profitable you need a better chance of stealing the blinds. My blind defense increases against a player who raises every time they come in in late/mid posistion. So good players will also give you trouble after they see you coming in with 44 for a raise in mid.
My statement or based on limit hold'em, not sure about nl.

[BluffTHIS!]

The question here is are there hands which are worth playing in early position but which you would not like to call a reraise with. Hands like TT/99/KQs or possibly AJo if the game is not too aggressive. The problem with them is that they are unlikely to be the best hand at the moment and that even if they are, raising with them in early position could induce several callers each of whom make it more correct for others to call and to call with draws on the flop because of the resulting pot size. And if you are reraised behind by a tight-aggressive player who might hold a range of hands, with you holding TT and resulting in a heads up pot, you are often just better off investing fewer bets in the pot and checking and calling to the river versus a rag board losing less money to an overpair and inducing bets from someone who will keep betting AK with no improvement.

This all assumes the game in question is limit. If you are playing pot or no-limit, especially shorthanded, then there is more of a need to raise with those type of hands to get out overcards and drawing hands so that you don't have to play a mulitway pot out of position with them when your whole stack is at stake. And if you are reraised by a very tight player you can often fold to avoid the trap of a rag board and an overpair dominating you, where in limit you would merely be able to check/call for 2.5 BB more rather than possibly your entire stack.

[emonrad87]

[ QUOTE ]
The question here is are there hands which are worth playing in early position but which you would not like to call a reraise with. Hands like TT/99/KQs or possibly AJo if the game is not too aggressive. The problem with them is that they are unlikely to be the best hand at the moment and that even if they are, raising with them in early position could induce several callers each of whom make it more correct for others to call and to call with draws on the flop because of the resulting pot size. And if you are reraised behind by a tight-aggressive player who might hold a range of hands, with you holding TT and resulting in a heads up pot, you are often just better off investing fewer bets in the pot and checking and calling to the river versus a rag board losing less money to an overpair and inducing bets from someone who will keep betting AK with no improvement.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is just wrong. All of the hands you list ARE likely to be the best, or damn close to it. Furthermore, by limping in you make a terrible mistake - letting people see a very cheap (and for the BB, free) flop. You need to be raising with ALL of these hands in early position EVERY time.

[K C]

This is a very interesting topic [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

When's it better to limp in first in the pot seems to be the question. Often times it will be corrrect to raise, and I don't think anyone will disagree with that.

One of the obvious considerations here is putting in a raise when you really can't stand a re-raise. While you want to take into account hands not strong enough for calling raises, when you're raising yourself, you're doubling the risk here. Let's say you have KQ in MP. Now, this is a hand you would consider playing, and more often than not you'll get away with the limp. But there's a chance that someone may raise downstream of course, and you've now wasted two bets instead of one here. If you call the re-raise of course, you're getting yourself into all sorts of potential trouble [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Another consideration, and a fairly significant one I might add, is that not all hands worth calling with are worth raising with. And when we're on a draw, which is going to be the case unless we have a high PP, then we want to pay attention to the odds we're getting on the extra bet.

There's some concern for the blinds here and while it is valid to a point. As you normally have the advantage over them, which is going to be true most of the time, sometimes you want them in the hand (gasp) [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Sure, they'll get lucky on you and take your money once in awhile, but as long as the game is loose, with a lot of calling stations, you'll take more of theirs than they will take of yours. This is going to be true in cases where people often will stay in the hand with things like second or third pair. Everyone hates losing to the blinds though [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Ultimately, it comes down to your needing a reason to raise, which is the case whether it's pre-flop or post flop. You need to look at the advantages and disadvantages of putting in the extra bet. And, very often, it's going to be better to put that raise in pre-flop, and if you play very tight, it's going to be almost all the time. Those who don't play so tight though need to be a lot more careful [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

KC
kingcobrapoker.com

[PokrLikeItsProse]

The theoretical justification is that you give up some EV before the flop in order to gain a greater magnitude of EV after the flop. It is the same principle as not calling a tournament all-in even when you are probably slightly ahead because you expect to have a greater edge later on.

It's been said that a good player at a weak no-limit table will limp into almost a third of the pots for this reason.

[KidNapster]

[ QUOTE ]
But there's a chance that someone may raise downstream of course, and you've now wasted two bets instead of one here. If you call the re-raise of course, you're getting yourself into all sorts of potential trouble

[/ QUOTE ]

This doesn't make any sense and it's a very weak-passive way of looking at this decision. You haven't "wasted" any bets by raising. If anything, you're more likely to be "getting yourself into all sorts of potential trouble" by NOT raising.

[binions]

[ QUOTE ]
Does that mean that limping is basically counting on my opponents to play badly? [If I expect a large field, I think that means they are definitely playing badly.]

I can agree that if my opponents tend to make a lot of mistakes, limping might be correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. The reason you want a large field with certain hands is all about odds.

For example, with 88 UTG, you generally need to flop a set or better to keep playing. That's 7.5:1 against. If you limp, and induce say 3 other limpers plus the blinds, you are getting 5:1 on your limp. You need only make 2.5 small bets when you hit your set or better to break even.

However, if you raise 88 UTG, and only get 2 callers (including BB), now you are getting 2.25:1 odds on your 7.5:1 shot. But the "1" is twice as much as the first example. For the hand to be profitable, you must win 10.5 small bets (5.25 big bets) when you hit your set or better to break even.