Should I ever.....

[rwanger]

If you end up having set over set, it's not going to matter whether or not you raised preflop...you're still going to get all of their money. So, if you are just limping in, it shouldn't be with the intention of trying to sneak in a set over set.

The only situation I would say to go for it is if there were some guy who always bet in position when checked to, and you thought you could check call him the whole way with your AA. This of course assumes that he will bail if you raise preflop, and if the guy truly does bet every time, you run the risk of another player taking the same line with a better hand than yours that he got a free flop with.

[PrayingMantis]

Jason,

I can't think of any "normal" full-table conditions where slow-playing your big pairs PF in such a manner will lead you to long-term higher profitability than other routes, however, I suspect that if the stacks are deep enough and you're playing against very tough all-around players (preferably regulars) there could be reasons to try it sometimes, even if only to practice your post-flop folding abilities... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[durron597]

I think the problem letting these pairs go multiway is Reverse Implied Odds. I think that one single factor really makes them a must-raise preflop.

[tpir90036]

[ QUOTE ]
Complete with big pairs in the small blind or check them in the big blind in larger multi-way pots in standard 50-200bb online stacks or should I wait for much deeper 500bb stacks before playing with this.

-Jason

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you raising with anything other than big pairs out of the blinds? This fact alone makes the answer "yes" for me since I don't usually fire out a big steal raise in deep stack (read: non-tournament) situations.

Then again, on a few rare occasions I have been known to limp big pairs in LP after several limpers. But I have reasons for doing this in the games that I play that might not apply in some of the tougher on-line games.

[Prevaricator]

see thats the thing. Deep stack people still call anyway, so you still get your reverse implied odds. The difference is that the pot is larger and now everyone has a general idea of what you've got. That's why I think that checking might be better than raising if you havent been raising from that spot often, but that raising a wide range of hands is the best possible option with very deep stacks (think shania).

[Lucky]

I like the thinking behind the idea for limping with big pairs in BB, etc.

However, practically, I think it'll hurt your earn. Yes you may get the giant score of AAA over 888, but you may get that 800bb score playing normally.

Additionally, you'll hurt your regular earn on all those 30bb pots you should be dragging where you raise PF, bet flop, then take it down with turn bet.

[fsuplayer]

with deep stacks in tough games, I have checked JJ, QQ, and even KK once when I wasnt too excited about who limped along with the stack sizes.

once you figure in the reverse implied odds of raising (assuming you dont raise from the blinds much), I dont think its a mistake to do so in tough deep stacked games. (im talking over 300BB for the solid players involved).

[tpir90036]

[ QUOTE ]
see thats the thing. Deep stack people still call anyway, so you still get your reverse implied odds. The difference is that the pot is larger and now everyone has a general idea of what you've got. That's why I think that checking might be better than raising if you havent been raising from that spot often, but that raising a wide range of hands is the best possible option with very deep stacks (think shania).

[/ QUOTE ]
I was definitely thinking shania... but I doubt that most people are raising 87s out of the BB into 5 people with huge stacks. I think it's a play that has merit if used sparingly... but I still think it will be tough to get monster action unless you cold deck someone since your opponents think you have a strong hand anyway.

[TheWorstPlayer]

I always thought that raising huge out of the blinds against a bunch of limpers was the easiest example of game theory in holdem. Do it with big pairs. Do it with your worst trash. Don't do it with stuff in the middle that will have positive expectation if you just limp but you won't know what to do with if re-raised. And if re-raised, generally push big pairs and fold trash. But sometimes push trash. And sometimes call big pairs. I don't see why you would ever limp big pairs when you have such a profitable alternative of raising really big.

[Prevaricator]

[ QUOTE ]
I like the thinking behind the idea for limping with big pairs in BB, etc.

However, practically, I think it'll hurt your earn. Yes you may get the giant score of AAA over 888, but you may get that 800bb score playing normally.

Additionally, you'll hurt your regular earn on all those 30bb pots you should be dragging where you raise PF, bet flop, then take it down with turn bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you raise more hands you still drag in those pots when people give up. People are only going to continue past the flop if they can beat AA, so basically you are just raising two cards banking on your opponents not having anything. Thats why I think raising a wider range of hands with these very deep stacks is the solution, but that not raising with those big pairs for deception is better than only raising with them and basically playing your hand face up.