T9o behind 2 bad limpers, poll

[Danenania]

That's true but later in his post under another answer he mentions something to the effect of "this is my play in 30/60 or 50/100" which gave me the impression that that's how he was evaluating every question. If you read the thread you find that's in fact how most posters answered the quiz, for the limits they themselves played. I could be wrong of course.

[ QUOTE ]
Why is it obviously different? I thought we had a decent grasp on the players from their statistics. It's not like players with those stats will play a whole different range of hands, or suddenly become postflop wizards when they're playing something other than 10/20.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty much. Players with similar stats stand to be much tougher and smarter on average at 30/60 or 50/100 compared to 10/20(especially back when this post was written before Party expanded high limit game selection) almost across the board. My real point though was not this, but that what constitutes a "loose MP limper" in a 30/60 or 50/100 game of those days VPIP/PFR-wise is a much different animal than than the two loose limpers we see in this 10/20 scenario.

[Lmn55d]

what do you mean the equity of the two are identical? Against which range? My feeling is that the high card power of J9 (more likely to flop top pair, dominates one additional hand, less top pair redraws) makes up for slightly lower straight potentional. 9T makes 4 straights using both cards compared to 3 for J9.

[Danenania]

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 25.0509 % 24.21% 01.36% { 22+, A2s+, K2s+, Q4s+, J6s+, T6s+, 96s+, 86s+, 76s, 65s, A2o+, K7o+, Q8o+, J8o+, T8o+, 98o }
Hand 2: 17.7517 % 16.89% 01.23% { 66-22, A6s-A2s, K7s-K2s, Q8s-Q2s, J9s-J2s, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, A8o-A2o, K9o-K2o, Q9o-Q2o, J9o-J4o, T6o+, 96o+, 86o+, 75o+, 65o }
Hand 3: 18.2443 % 17.45% 01.17% { random }
Hand 4: 18.1296 % 17.34% 01.16% { random }
Hand 5: 20.8235 % 19.94% 01.31% { T9o }


----------------------------------------------------------

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 25.0210 % 23.70% 01.32% { 22+, A2s+, K2s+, Q4s+, J6s+, T6s+, 96s+, 86s+, 76s, 65s, A2o+, K7o+, Q8o+, J8o+, T8o+, 98o }
Hand 2: 17.6832 % 16.44% 01.24% { 66-22, A6s-A2s, K7s-K2s, Q8s-Q2s, J9s-J2s, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, A8o-A2o, K9o-K2o, Q9o-Q2o, J9o-J4o, T6o+, 96o+, 86o+, 75o+, 65o }
Hand 3: 18.2795 % 17.14% 01.14% { random }
Hand 4: 18.3109 % 17.17% 01.14% { random }
Hand 5: 20.7053 % 19.43% 01.28% { J9o }


Btw, I think J9o is also an easy limp so I'm just arguing theory.

Makes sense.

Generalizing the term "loose limper" may have some value differences.

Nonetheless, after running a stove on the hand.......

Limper 1 (making him a 40 VPIP from HJ): 23.9927 % 22.69% 01.35% { 44+, A2s+, K2s+, Q4s+, J7s+, T7s+, 97s+, 87s, A3o+, K7o+, Q8o+, J8o+, T9o }
Limper 2 (making him a 60 VPIP from CO): 20.8727 % 19.65% 01.27% { 22+, A2s+, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T3s+, 95s+, 85s+, 75s+, 64s+, 54s, A2o+, K3o+, Q5o+, J7o+, T7o+, 97o+, 87o }
US (T9o): 18.9528 % 17.81% 01.18% { T9o }
SB (80 VPIP to complete): 18.8541 % 17.75% 01.14% { 22+, A2s+, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 73s+, 62s+, 52s+, 43s, A2o+, K2o+, Q2o+, J3o+, T5o+, 95o+, 85o+, 75o+, 65o, 54o }
BB (random): 17.3278 % 16.36% 01.01% { random }

I did not remove premium holdings from either of the limpers for 2 reasons:

1) Guys who play that loose don't always raise only the top hands that their PFR indicates. They raise more or less when they feel like it.

2) Not accounting for premium hands from the limpers will be offset by not accounting for SB or BB raising (which is as equally bad for us as the other (limpers not having premiums) is good.

Given that, it looks like we are greater than a 1% field underdog. This, of course, doesn't account for the times we fold on bad flops and turns and don't get to the SD or the times we can drag the pot on a steal bet (which is happening substantially less than the times we fold).

Can we make up this difference with expert postflop play? I'm not sure. No one is really a Nikla when it comes to that, and I'm sure everyone over-rates the quality of their own postflop play (to a certain degree) as an attempt to get closer to 30/20 and as justification for playing more hands.

[pal=m]

No reason this hand can't be played for a modest profit considering your position, card strength, and #players together. Playing for 2-bets would not be pleasant, but you have the button. If this hand is playable in similar situations in full ring (which it is), it MUST be playable short also. Easy limp IMO. Not a huge money maker, and the manytablers may dump it for other reasons, but no reason T9o can't be played on the button for likely 1-bet.

pal

[Danenania]

I agree with removing no premiums from the first limper obviously since his PFR is 0, but leaving them ALL in the second limper's range majorly skews your results. His PFR is 14 and he's in an isolating position. I agree that it's possible for him to not raise a big hand on occasion, but bringing his raising range all the way down to 0 from the 15-20 that it would realistically be is way overdoing it and makes your equity numbers worthless. Also for every time this guy doesn't raise AA on a whim he probably raises 72o or 32s some other time on a similar one.

[MAxx]

i'd limp. think it's a good situation for the button. i'd like the BB be a little less agg pf, but i'd still take it here. i do not think folding is all that bad. it's just an extra opportunity to play against the bad players with posistion.

i'd prefer T-9 for similar reasons as D pointed out. i'd take J-9 also. similar equities, neither have much showdown value unimproved.

[mex78753]

I believe it's a close limp and the more aggressive the limpers are the easier of a call this is (implied odds).

[ddubois]

[ QUOTE ]
Someone's PFR won't even be close to their VPIP just because they don't limp with this hand or other hands like it.

[/ QUOTE ]
I did not mean to imply that this is the only logical limp of all poker situations (nor do I think any reasonable person would interpret what I said in that way), but rather, that the act of declining to limp here could be indicative of someone who has an excessive hatred of limping, and will do so with a less than optimal rate.

Let's say T9o is 20% in the pokerstove calcs (rather than quibble 18.9 vs 20.8), because it's a nice round number that demonstrates a situation where we are in a hypothetical "break-even".

Do you play a hand that you know to be no better than a break-even gamble hot-n-cold? Look at this PokerStove, in which you will have position, and you play better than your opponent post-flop, and tell me if you will play it:
Hand 1: 50.0032 % 47.97% 02.03% { random }
Hand 2: 49.9968 % 47.97% 02.03% { random }