![]() |
|
View Poll Results: You are in MP2 with KJs, UTG+1 limps, folds round to you who.. | |||
raise |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
13 | 13.54% |
limp |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
61 | 63.54% |
fold |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
22 | 22.92% |
Voters: 96. You may not vote on this poll |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I really hate KTo. Can somebody convince me to play this? [/ QUOTE ] Sure, if you enjoy the aggravation of burning up chips when you hit against the passive limper who doesn't raise with A 10, KJ and KQ. Miniscule ev at best- not worth getting into trouble over IMO. [/ QUOTE ] How about when we hit vs dominated hands like JT/QT/K9s, which are more likely to have been limped in than AT and KQ. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Here's a question: Take the same instance of the KT examples but make it KTs.
Is this a raise in both situations? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I apologize that the original post was a little bit vague, as I had intended to include necessary preflop information. The intention was supposed to be that the loose-bad player was limping in EP while the loose/decent player was in MP. The loose/decent player would have a greater range of limping hands, but will generally play them well postflop.
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Here's a question: Take the same instance of the KT examples but make it KTs. Is this a raise in both situations? [/ QUOTE ] This is probably right on the cutoff as well. I'd probably raise it with 3 limpers with KTs, limp with only 2. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Here's a question: Take the same instance of the KT examples but make it KTs. Is this a raise in both situations? [/ QUOTE ] yes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Here's a question: Take the same instance of the KT examples but make it KTs. Is this a raise in both situations? [/ QUOTE ] With salivating enthusiasm. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I really hate KTo. Can somebody convince me to play this? [/ QUOTE ] Sure, if you enjoy the aggravation of burning up chips when you hit against the passive limper who doesn't raise with A 10, KJ and KQ. Miniscule ev at best- not worth getting into trouble over IMO. [/ QUOTE ] How about when we hit vs dominated hands like JT/QT/K9s, which are more likely to have been limped in than AT and KQ. [/ QUOTE ] Point taken. The personal comfort level is what I was getting at. It would be nice to see some big databases chime in. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If there was some chance of getting the blinds out I would raise AT. If there isn't... MAYBE I'd still raise with 2 limpers.
I am not playing KT at all in this situation. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The only item that really surprises me in these results is that people are more willing to play KTo, a hand that doesn't play well multiway, when there are 3 limpers instead of 2. Is this because the additional player is poor or because you (the people who called with 3 but not 2 limpers) like this hand against more players?
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
The only item that really surprises me in these results is that people are more willing to play KTo, a hand that doesn't play well multiway, when there are 3 limpers instead of 2. Is this because the additional player is poor or because you (the people who called with 3 but not 2 limpers) like this hand against more players? [/ QUOTE ] According to SSHE, top pair hands benefit more from dead money than they lose to the pot being multiway. |
![]() |
|
|