First Post - raising with drawing hands PF in late pos

[brianpower]

I've being lurking around here for quite a while and have learned loads from you guys, so thanks in advance.

My question applies to a typical passive game where people often check to the preflop raiser.

Say you have a marginal drawing hand like 67s,J,10o or A4s in LP. and 4 or 5 people limp in, so usually you're quite happy to limp along with them cos you're getting the odds require for your drawing hand.

Is it a good idea to raise here to a) increase the pot size and almost guarantee you'll have the odds to chase your draw (if you flop one of course),and b) allow you to take a free card if it's checked around, and
c) if you get a hand that needs protecting and some one to your immedite right bets you can raise to protect it.

Obviuosly C) is the least likely result of the three.

Is my thinking correct here,what do you guys think?


Brian

[Marquis]

I like a cheap flop with those hands you mentioned. With that many limpers I might start to raise JTs or A8s.

High card strength, suitedness, connectedness.

[brianpower]

But, if we assume we're not going to get reraised, then is it not correct to raise here for the benifits i mentioned above, plus the fact that if its EV+ to get 6/1 preflop with 56s etc, then we should get as much of this 6/1 as we can.

Thoughts?

[jrz1972]

The hands you mentioned might have a very small PF equity edge, but that edge will usually change a lot depending on the flop. Limping PF allows you to push a bigger edge later (if one emerges).

There are other reasons for limping. Raising self-destructs your implied odds. Also, raising for the purpose of tying yourself to the pot is a bad idea.

[jrz1972]

[ QUOTE ]
But, if we assume we're not going to get reraised, then is it not correct to raise here for the benifits i mentioned above, plus the fact that if its EV+ to get 6/1 preflop with 56s etc, then we should get as much of this 6/1 as we can.

Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

The exact same logic in the "Two Overpair Hands" section of SSH applies here.

[dozer]

In situations where your opponents are really bad and if you play very good postflop, raising might not be a bad idea for suited connectors 10 and higher and probably 89 suited too, But I think anything lower is pushing it. Also if you flop a open ended straight or a flush draw, you wouldn't want to take a free card because you will have equity on the flop and should be betting for value if checked to.

I wouldn't raise any low offsuit connectors or even play them.

[diebitter]

Hmmm - raising like this with medium hands not too good. You'll drive out some I suspect, and ruin your implied odds, and leave the better hands in. They'll have you on better hole cards than you actually have, so there's some deception value.

Think about it - if you flop a made hand or a draw, wouldn't it be better to have more in?

An exception to this I'd consider is doing it once in a while (say 25%) to mix up your play - it's good not to be predictable. Do it if your first card is a spade, say...
Or better still, do it with the top 25% of your marginals.

Another exception is holding a smallish pair. They have some small value on their own anyway, but representing a higher hand will deceive the players staying in. If you hit trips, you don't really want the drawing hands in anyway...

If you make trips, they won't have trips on you, and if you don't make trips you just fold before throwing in money anyway - no brainer. You may even get a free card and make trips then if everyone checks as they don't want to be raised (and they won't have you on trips then either)!

If they don't have trips on you, and the flop is all low eg (943 to a 33 you're holding), they'll have you on a high pair with draw at best, or something like AK-AJ/KQ without draw at worst.

So that's nice.

[brianpower]

[ QUOTE ]


Think about it - if you flop a made hand or a draw, wouldn't it be better to have more in?


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm only considering a raise where im in LP after 4/5 limpers. If i thought the raise would cause some to fold, then limping is the clear option.

The worst case scenario is if the one of the blinds reraises, and you end up going to the flop with <4 players. This, to my mind, is the biggest flaw in "my idea".

Brian

[atnels]

Here's the problem I see with this.

Say you have 44 in the CO. Three limpers to you, and you limp. Button limps, SB completes, and BB checks. You're heading to the flop (7 SB) for 1 SB. Your odds to hit a set on the flop are 7.5 to 1, but 9 to 1 are usually the default estimate for implied odds calculations - since a set won't win every pot. That's conservative, I know.

Let's say that instead action is the same, but you raise. Button folds, SB folds, BB calls, and all others call. Now you're heading to the flop (5.25 BB) for 1 BB. Much worse than before.

Of course, your aggression alone might allow you to pick up the pot, plus you've bought the button. But I think that the tables full of players who are this loose preflop will usually also tend to stick around postflop. Chances are slim everyone will fold to a flop bet when you are unimproved. Plus, since you were the agressor preflop, you won't be able to raise and/or reraise other players (if you hit your set) who may bet into you or raise you had you just limped.

I'm not saying it's a good idea or a bad idea, but I would not recommend making raising a bunch of limpers with speculative hands a default play.

Welcome to the forum!