Limping QQ under the gun

[akishore]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Suited connectors? Low PP? Am I making sense? Do you see why?

[/ QUOTE ]

no you're not.

istead of saying "Am I making sense? " or "Do you see why?"

why don't you just come out with it?

[/ QUOTE ]

He just means that Hattifnat is leaving money on the table by folding 22 under the gun, for example.

There is nothing wrong with limping low pocket pairs in early position--position isn't nearly as much of an issue when you have a hand with such a huge informational advantage. This hand thrives both multiway as well as heads-up when the stacks are even slightly deep.

Suited connectors... eh. These hands can be limped up front in loose/passive games, but they tend to flop too many marginal hands that get tough to play out of position. Plus, a lot of straight/flush draws are tough to chase profitably out of position.

Same thing with Axs. Under certain conditions you can be limping these under the gun, but the problem becomes chasing draws profitably when you're out of position.

Aseem

[akishore]

[ QUOTE ]
The hand's value is dependent of the dominated action it gets in any situation it is at. Preflop it has only the set value here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting statement. Not sure I understand it. Can you elaborate?

Thanks,
Aseem

[GrunchCan]

I agree with what you've said, but I disagree with what you haven't said, and what seems to be getting lost:

The hands that you choose not to steal with are just as important -- or more important -- as the hands you choose to get a cheap flop with.

[akishore]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with what you've said, but I disagree with what you haven't said, and what seems to be getting lost:

The hands that you choose not to steal with are just as important -- or more important -- as the hands you choose to get a cheap flop with.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I don't understand this statement.

What hands am I choosing to not steal with?

FWIW, I never steal from under the gun. Maybe it's just my games--that is practically impossible in any given hand.

I practice good table selection. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Aseem

[GrunchCan]

I'm not actually adressing your specific play. I'm addressing the axiom "never open-limp from EP." By following that advice, I suspect that some players make what ammounts to a steal move from early position with hands they shouldn't be stealing with.

[BigBiceps]

I disagree, you should fold those hands, because if someone raises behind you, you are going to have to fold anyway.

Also, the games are tight, so there is not going to be more than 4 way action even if you limp.

Although, sometimes with the suited connectors I raise (not limp), that my hand range cannot be easilty predicted to hold cards ten or higher.

Low pocket pairs 55 or less, I fold, and sometimes I raise with 66-88 (sometimes fold depends who is in the game), always raise with 99-AA.

[BigBiceps]

[ QUOTE ]
... and I have some confidence that the pot won't be raised PF behind me.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is the whole point of not limping UTG. You are first to act. <font color="red"> Nine </font> people are going to act after you, how can you be confident that no one is going to raise. If you are in some loose passive newbie fish game that is fine, but if you are playing with some decent players more than half of the pots should have some sort of preflop raising going on.

Personally, preflop I am raising about 15% of my hands, and calling about 10% of my hands. I am just not limping(calling) from UTG.

[4_2_it]

[ QUOTE ]

Low pocket pairs 55 or less, I fold, because I hate stacking people when I flop a set

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

I would be interested in Aseem's thoughts on set mining in deep stack games.

[GrunchCan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
... and I have some confidence that the pot won't be raised PF behind me.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is the whole point of not limping UTG. You are first to act. <font color="red"> Nine </font> people are going to act after you, how can you be confident that no one is going to raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have essentially made the same argument as me when I claim that by "never open-limping" many people will inadvertantly open-steal hands they should not open-steal with.

In other words, I agree. But I see a slightly different set of trees.

I haven't finished reading all the posts yet, but this has been an excellent discussion. Thanks for posting it.

I understand everything that you're saying. I hate being out of position too. And I also don't want to play for a big pot with QQ, or KK, or AA--in position or OOP unless the situation/opponent is right.

I would add this though. Because you play better than your opponents postflop is exactly the reason, in my opinion, that you should raise. After all, you in all likelyhood have the best hand preflop, so get more money in the pot--ie, let your opponents make a mistake by calling with 99, AJo, etc. And then continue to exploit their weakness after the flop. There's no reason why you have to go wild after the flop. If you get a couple of callers, especially behind you, and the flop comes Ah Kh 8s, there's no reason why you can't check/fold. I c/f the flop all the time after raising from OOP. Too many people, especially on this board get caught up in continuation bets, IMO, even when the situation seems to mandate a c/f.

Again, I don't really have a problem with limping with QQ from UTG, but to play devil's advocate, you should put your money in with the best hand. But putting your money in with the best hand preflop isn't the same as then continuing to dump money in after the flop. If you really feel you can make better decisions than your opponents after the flop, then that seems to be a reason to raise QQ preflop from UTG. You can also exercise pot control by c/c the turn and river. I do this plenty too. But you shouldn't shy away from raising preflop with the best hand under the pretense that you'll make better decisions than your opponents after the flop. In fact, this seems like the exact reason to raise preflop.