Attacking limpers with marginal hands from cutoff/button

[Malachii]

I like to raise limpers and attack preflop weakness from late position. It's cool when it works, you pick up a small pot with a marginal/crappy hand. But I find that it frequently gets me in trouble because I'm playing marginal hands in large pots. I just doubled up this total moron when I raised with JTs and he called with KJo... unfortunately, because of the large pot that I created, I was getting such good odds that I couldn't possibly get away from the hand when he checkraised me on the turn, even though I was sure my pair of jacks was no good. And I feel horrible about it, because I know I'm better than that and this is the kind of stupid [censored] that I really try to avoid doing.

Is this a play others frequently make? What hands should I be raising with? I find the worst hand for this play to be medium suited connectors because they don't have any real high card strength and if you pick up a draw you usually have to fold them if you get checkraised. Would reasonable standards be ATs+/KJs+/88+? What about low suited connectors? Is it even worth it to pick up a a PTbb or two?

[jkkkk]

Depends how weak the opponents are, how likely can you take this pot down pre-flop or post-flop with a continuation bet?

Don't get too involved against tight players that give resistance, they'll more often than not have the goods.

[xorbie]

Do it with pairs.

[-Skeme-]

I've been doing this a lot lately with nearly anything. Mainly because I'm apparently viewed as the tightest player ever. I rarely, if ever, get action on my big hands, so now I raise more preflop with random [censored] in hopes to create action later. Hasn't really worked in that aspect, but I take down lots of pots preflop and I also win frequently with continuation bets.

[xcrack999]

Do it with 72o and show when they fold. If they call, continuation bet on flop and show when they fold. It pisses people off, and they'll start saying, "You dumbass, I folded 43o, so your bluff wasn't even a bluff!#!#^&*!" And other players say, "Keep doing that fish, and I'll be taking your money." I love when they say that.

[bingledork]

I do it with JT too, but I'd quickly dump it to a checkraise. I play it passive after my continuation bet.

[wadea]

[ QUOTE ]
Do it with 72o and show when they fold. If they call, continuation bet on flop and show when they fold. It pisses people off, and they'll start saying, "You dumbass, I folded 43o, so your bluff wasn't even a bluff!#!#^&*!" And other players say, "Keep doing that fish, and I'll be taking your money." I love when they say that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am beginning to agree with this more and more every day. I used to win consistantly by playing very tight, thinking that it's no use to play junk and advertise since they're not paying attention.

About a week ago, I read a thread in either this or another forum that inspired me to try a new style. The OP was asking why, when he plays against well-known pros, he sees them raise and call raises with hands like K2s or 53o. The overwhelming response was that, because they can outplay people on the flop, it serves many purposes. It makes it hard to put them on a hand, they pick up a lot of blinds and limps with their raises, they win big pots when they flop an unlikely 2-pair or straight and they get crazy action on their legitimate hands.

So I moved down a level and tried this out for a while. While I realize that the players are not as good, the effect of this strategy is still noticeable. Winning with garbage and showing it just kills people and they respond in a variety of -EV ways. Oddly, I don't even feel like my [relative] variance has changed. That may be a result of the steady stream of small pots I'm snatching.

My suspicion is that you still need to use some standards when using this play. I would say that it is best to stay away from "middle cards" and of course easily-dominated hands. I usually try this move with two cards that are under 8 and somewhat close in rank. I think I've seen that being suited actually has more impact on the value of small cards than on high cards, so being sooted is a plus as well. I kind of think two sooted small cards looks even fishier than unsuited b/c it's not as obvious that it's advertising.

I recommend giving this a try if you feel like you can play well post-flop and aren't afraid to make a nice fat bluff-raise.

-w.a.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
I've been doing this a lot lately with nearly anything. Mainly because I'm apparently viewed as the tightest player ever. I rarely, if ever, get action on my big hands, so now I raise more preflop with random [censored] in hopes to create action later. Hasn't really worked in that aspect, but I take down lots of pots preflop and I also win frequently with continuation bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an interesting thread. I was going to make one with somewhat the same point. A couple nights ago when I was playing, I was thinking about a post of fims where he jumped back into the SSNL world to clear some bonues etc and he talked about how he was able to control players and get them to reveal their hand. I thought about how he could do that. Of course if you look at the stats he posted, it becomes clear since he had a relatively high VPIP and a very high PFR%. In conjunction with these thoughts, I realized I just wasnt getting action on my good hands. Id get a little but not much. So I started to be very agressive when I was first in or in position with several limpers. It was great and I had a very profitable night, much of which was generated from not so good hands. So given that long rambling, let me put down some key observations I think I made.

1) We all talk about being TAG, but I am thinking that maybe some of us (myself included) are little more passive then we like to think.
2) Fish are fish, but I think I need to start giving them a little more credit for being somewhat observant. There was a clear difference in the way the people at the tables I was playing at reacted to me before and after I shifted gears.
3) In conjunction with that, the texture of the table clearly matters. If you are at an "action table", there is no reason not to enter the pot without the goods. At the weak tight tables (there are lots of these late at night when I am playing on the West coast), you need to change gears or you arent going to make any money.
4) SSNL players are very transparent with their holdings. This is the whole "control" thing that Fim referred to, althought I dont know if he used that term, and Mason talks about it often when he writing about limit games. By continually putting your weak opponents to the test you are making them react and they generally react predictably. There arent many opponents at SSNL that are going to test you with air and the few that will are very obvious.