Limp re-raising QQ + stop-n'go

[bobdibble]

[ QUOTE ]
LAME!

1. Limp-reraising in limit hold'em usually sucks, IMO. It's general purpose is to get huge amounts of money into a multi-way pot. This rules when you flop top set, but it is bad when you allow weak A- and K- high hands to see that flop that wouldn't have to beat you.


[/ QUOTE ]

The lag would most likely only call my raise unless he actually had a good hand. Most of the table would call my raise as well, so rather than seeing the flop 8 handed for 3 bets, if I had raised, PF, we would have seen the flop 6 handed for 2 bets, probably.

[ QUOTE ]

1a. QQ plays better short-handed. You should not be trying to trap multiple players to pots when you have QQ. It does have good big-pot potential because of the sets, but its value will increase with fewer players.


[/ QUOTE ]

See above. The choice is between 6 players for 2 bets v.s. 8 players for 3 bets.

[ QUOTE ]

2. Three-bet the flop! The lag and perhaps some of the other flop limpers as well will come along. No reason to wait to get your money in. These players have shown a willingness to call for multiple bets already. People like to call; you should let them.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is a live game. People crap their pants when someone 3-bets. So, I only called the flop for 2 reaons. 1) I would have been facing the callers with calling two bets cold -- some of these guys would have dropped at that point. 2) If I 3-bet the flop, I am likely to shutdown the LP raiser, whereas, if I call, and lead the turn, I can trap some more people on the turn, and can likely get to 3-bet the turn.

[ QUOTE ]

This hand was one of the most egregious examples of FPS I've seen in awhile.

[/ QUOTE ]

The flop/turn stop-n-go, maybe.. but given that I would ahve shutdown the LP raiser, I think it is borderline.

I am pretty sure the LRR given the way the game was playing at the time is hugely +EV. As I said, I think it is the difference betwen a 6 way 12 SB pot, v.s. an 8 way 24 SB pot on the flop... which would you rather have with QQ?

[Padawan Learner]

bobdibble:

FWIW, I will disagree with the prevailing sentiment...I really like the flop/turn stop and go. With that board, and the position of the flop raiser, and 3 trapped in the middle, I think it is a perfect spot for it.

[W. Deranged]

Bob,

I think you make some excellent points but I am still confused about a few things:

1. Will your hand really get 6 ways to the flop if you raise UTG? If so, I think it's important to note this in the original post. Your reads were based on how opponents reacted to raises from the turbo-LAG, not to legit raises from tight players. At 20-40 many players are kind of clueless but they will observe that you are a reasonably tight player raising in EP. They might give you much more credit for a hand than they would the turbo-LAG.

In a complete limp-fest where you are absolutely positive that your raise will not get the hand short-handed, I can understand your logic. I will concede there are times this would be ideal (clearly I prefer an 8-way 24SB pot to a 6-way 12SB pot).

2. I think that you are being a little inconsistent about how your represent your opponents. You claim they will all freely call two cold pre-flop but all of a sudden get terrified of the flop three-bet and dump on the flop. I'm just not sure how this all resolves; a player who will play extremely loose pre-flop but then extremely tight on the flop is not a hugely common entity, and I find it a little hard to believe that you will find a table basically full of players like that. It seems that you are sort of describing your opponents in a bit of a results-oriented way.

Another thing to consider is pot size. The line you took pre-flop meant that the pot is already gigantic. Players will be calling two on the flop very freely with just about anything. The stop'n'go is way too fancy for a pot this size. You'll be able to lead the flop anyway after the flop three-bet, and passing it up is just letting bets go away. Players who don't improve on the turn may dump to your turn-donk bet regardless of whether you three-bet the flop or not, and so you may be losing customers. The late position bettor may be just as confused/scared by the donk-bet as he would by a three-bet lead. Get the bets in now and be consistent on the flop with the line you implied with your pre-flop play.


This is a clear example of the big-pot = straightforward play principle. There is no need to manufacture bets here. Money's going in no matter what you do, and the only mistake you can really make is waiting until everyone has lost interest in their hand before charging them.

[Entity]

I'd 3-bet the flop but I love the rest.

Rob

[B Dids]

Because he wants to play a huge pot with the 3rd best possible starting hand.

I do not understand people advocating a raise here. If you think the bad players will call two cold, but not three, a limp re-raise seems like a very nice play in this spot.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
Because he wants to play a huge pot with the 3rd best possible starting hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't see anything in the OP that wouldn't suggest that the *turbo LAG* would only raise PF and never 3-bets. So, explain to me why we would want to forgoe protecting our hand by raising into a LAG who will probably 3-bet a reasonable amount of the time forcing out the majority of the field.

I'm never dissapointed to play a large pot with many players with a large premium pair. However, I'm hard pressed to be convinced that in the long run we're better off encouraging huge pots, with multiple players, with just a large pair in the hole (where we will typically need to improve our hand) vs. using good relative position to protect our hand, play against fewer opponents, including loose/aggressive players who are still going to substantially pay off our hands (in many more cases where we don't need to improve to be best at showdown)

I'd love to see some solid evidence that limp-reraising has a greater EV than raising outright - but, I just don't believe that this can be substantiated.

[W. Deranged]

It seems like Crunchy and I are sort of in the same boat as this one.

A lot of the argument comes down to reads. If hero has a very clear reason to believe that:

a) TurboLag will often raise pre-flop but not three-bet
b) Many players will call two cold from TurboLag
c) Hero raising pre-flop will primarily reduce pot size but not field size (number of players)

then I think the limp-reraise line might be better. Many of these were not clearly stated pre-flop and are huge factors in the pre-flop decision.

[bobdibble]

[ QUOTE ]
2. I think that you are being a little inconsistent about how your represent your opponents. You claim they will all freely call two cold pre-flop but all of a sudden get terrified of the flop three-bet and dump on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, where I play live people equate a 3-bet with the nuts and will start folding post flop. And I am certain that most of the time the LP raiser will slow down if I 3-bet unless he has a set or better. But while they give a post flop 3-bet a lot of respect, they don't respect a raise pre-flop. 4-8 to the flop for 2 bets is pretty common in these games.

[sthief09]

nice hand. I think since the pot is so huge you could 3-bet the flop, but I like your logic behind the stop n go, to trap everyone in. if they're the type to call 1 bet with anything but fold for another 2 then I like it. I feel like most people are attached when then call for 1

anything other than a limp reraise here is terrible

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
I feel like most people are attached when then call for 1


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I agree. That's why I 3-bet. But if you had a really solid read counter to that, I don't mind the stop and go.

Rob