2bb final table limping Aj ep

[nath]

I don't think there's a miscommunication here; I think the idea is fundamentally flawed. Particularly at this size stack which is so miniscule that whether you limp or call you will probably get the same amount of action.

Look, as a short stack, you want to AVOID confrontations. The idea is to chop away as much as possible, little by little, before you have to actually show down.

Also, holy crap, what happened to knock you down to 2BB? Please don't tell me you got blinded away.

[FlyingSumo]

I can see one point in leaving chips behind. You have the option to reopen the betting for SB, adding an extra chance for you to see a HU-pot for turn and river (if SB decides to isolate with a checkraise).

I believe going allin instead of leaving a small percentage of a big blind is a mistake, as you give up the option to reopen the betting on later streets. This will only mean something when going all-in is = to limping/calling in.

I would rather doubleup a higher percentage of the time, then tripleup a lower percentage of the time. Doubling up leaves you 9 hands to doubleup, and 9 hands for opponents to make the mistake of busting out.

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
I can see one point in leaving chips behind. You have the option to reopen the betting for SB, adding an extra chance for you to see a HU-pot for turn and river (if SB decides to isolate with a checkraise).

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't even understand what you're trying to say here. You leaving money behind will have absolutely zero effect on how the rest of the table plays. You have TWO BIG BLINDS. How are you already jumping to the small blind when you're UTG+1?


[ QUOTE ]
I believe going allin instead of leaving a small percentage of a big blind is a mistake, as you give up the option to reopen the betting on later streets. This will only mean something when going all-in is = to limping/calling in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobody who calls preflop is folding the flop for a minimum bet.

[ QUOTE ]
I would rather doubleup a higher percentage of the time, then tripleup a lower percentage of the time. Doubling up leaves you 9 hands to doubleup, and 9 hands for opponents to make the mistake of busting out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, letting more people in the hand is going to have the opposite effect of what you want. So you're contradicting yourself.

[FlyingSumo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can see one point in leaving chips behind. You have the option to reopen the betting for SB, adding an extra chance for you to see a HU-pot for turn and river (if SB decides to isolate with a checkraise).

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't even understand what you're trying to say here. You leaving money behind will have absolutely zero effect on how the rest of the table plays. You have TWO BIG BLINDS. How are you already jumping to the small blind when you're UTG+1?


[ QUOTE ]
I believe going allin instead of leaving a small percentage of a big blind is a mistake, as you give up the option to reopen the betting on later streets. This will only mean something when going all-in is = to limping/calling in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobody who calls preflop is folding the flop for a minimum bet.

[ QUOTE ]
I would rather doubleup a higher percentage of the time, then tripleup a lower percentage of the time. Doubling up leaves you 9 hands to doubleup, and 9 hands for opponents to make the mistake of busting out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, letting more people in the hand is going to have the opposite effect of what you want. So you're contradicting yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am adding a point that has not been discussed in the thread. People said for instance they "sometimes see people leaving 80 chips behind preflop".

If you leave chips behind, you have the option to reopen the betting for SB/BB (they are the only ones acting before you on flop), while when all-in, SB dont have the option to checkraise your all-in, neither has BB.

I am perfectly aware that noone is folding my flopbet, but they might fold to a checkraise from SB/BB, giving you a headsup-pot, where if all-in the folders might have knocked you out.

My last comment meant that I would go allin with 2 BB's in early position, with 1.00000000000000000001 BB I would limp everytime and leave 1 chip behind.

[FlyingSumo]

In short :

If going all-in has no effect on your opponents actions preflop, you should rather limp in/call, leaving the option to reopen the betting for your opponents on later streets.

[jcm4ccc]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe going allin instead of leaving a small percentage of a big blind is a mistake, as you give up the option to reopen the betting on later streets. This will only mean something when going all-in is = to limping/calling in.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is an interesting point, though I think you have it backwards. You are on the final table with 2BBs. The other players should be interested in knocking you out, since each place up the ladder probably means a significant jump in the money. By limping, you are encouraging other people to bet (who will supposedly bet more than you can), since everybody wants to knock you out. A bet by another player may actually limit the number of players more than your measly 2XBB bet.

This can work on the flop with the following scenario. Let's say you limp with AJo. The button limps with KQo. The BB comes in for free with 96o.

The flop comes T92r. The BB sees you sitting there with 1BB left. He figures you are pot committed and bets. You call of course. The button folds.

Now if you had pushed your measly 2XBB, the button would still be likely to call. The BB will probably call, since it's now about 5:1 to him. Now, when the flop comes, both the button and BB decided to check you down to the river to get you out of the hand. So, by pushing, you ended up with more opponents than you might have had you limped.

I'm interested in what others think. But I am thinking, with only 2BBs, that a limp might be better than a push, since that would encourage others to bet bigger in order to knock you out. With 3BBs, I think a push would be better.

[play2win]

I am having a hard time even thinking about the "limp option".

The only time I would limp with 2BB is if I picked up pocket aces and wanted to make sure I got all the action possible.

Bottom line is that anyone interested in playing their hand would do it for 2BB regardless.

If you throw them all-in you are either going to get isolated by a re-raise, or called. Isolation to a heads up match is a good thing here, it might make ace high stand up for you, or at least give it a better chance.

Someone is surely going to try and knock you out here being that you are at the final table. If it comes around to the SB you have just let him in with whatever junk he is holding lowering your % of doubling up. He won't fold bottom pair to your all-in now if he hits it. But he might have gone away for 1.5BB with his junk before. The same will happen with the BB, but he would call your raise I think no matter what he held because he doesn't have to fear any raises after the flop.

You surely aren't going to fold after the flop. So why even give yourself the option and the pain of folding. Now you get to see all the cards with no decisons.

Push in and dance around your computer doing the "ace-jack chant". [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

[Pepsquad]

Interesting discussion. To be honest, I don't think you can really go too far wrong here between calling/pushing. With 2BB's, I'm leaning toward just calling and encouraging the field to come in (or hopefully an isloation raise from LP after more limpers). My thinking here would be "if AJ is gonna win...it's gonna win." But I also see the merits in pushing. And with 3+BB's I think it is a CLEAR push.