Is Limping UTG w/ AA Bad?

I've been clearing the Bet365 bonus playing 1/2. I've noticed as a whole the games have been very tight/passive. I'd just assume its because there are a bunch of bonus whores there. Twice before I've picked up AA either UTG or UTG+1, and I've raised, only to have everyone fold. I saw a guy limp with aces and take quite a nice pot off the unsupsecting BB a few days ago, so I figured I'd give it a try.
This is my first orbit at the table, and I don't recognize anyone so I don't have any reads. I have no idea how to get the hand histories from Prima sites, but I'll work on it.

10 handed 1/2 Prima Network

Hero- UTG, black aces, call.
4 limpers
one off the button raises, button folds, SB call, BB folds
Hero-3 bets, all limpers fold, raiser and SB call

flop
AQ9 rainbow
check, hero bets, call, call
turn- 7 completing rainbow
check, bet, call, call
river- 2
check, bet, fold, call


Sorry if it is a little confusing, like I said I'll try to get the hand history. Obviously I got exactly what I wanted preflop, a bunch of limpers, a raiser, and a caller. All other streets were good for me I think. I flopped top set, and had two along for the ride.

I'm looking for feedback, especially preflop. Obviously limping/reraising worked well, but its only result oriented. In this specific case I built up a huge pot and got some help on the flop. However, I won't always get a raiser, which then allows me to thin the field. I also won't always flop top set.

Thanks for your advice.

[UATrewqaz]

If you are very very sure someone behind you will raise and you can as a result get a large portion of the field trapped for 2 or 3 bets preflop then limping with AA in EP is fine.

But you have to have the specific read that the above scenario will occur.

There are more people in the pot thus reducing your chance of winning the hand but the larger pot more than compinsates for this. However if you let a bunch of hands in and the extra money doesn't go it, that's a disaster.

In a game where people are likely to call your initial raise anyway then you should raise.

I don't think it is a good play - especially in a passive game. I've taken down some very nice pots from the blind because people didn't raise with premium hands preflop. By the time they got aggressive on the flop, my trash was good and I made them pay for it. In general, raise preflop, get rid of the blind trash and take your small pot if know one wants to play. In an aggressive game, where most hands are raised preflop you might be able to get away with limping and then 3-betting preflop.

[macdaddy991]

When you limp/3 bet PF in a low limit game, you will scream AA or KK. Any reasonable player will fold. I think that you will be better off raising AA UTG and getting loose calls along the way.

[car ramrod]

yes

[detruncate]

You could go a few different ways. First would be to start to take better advantage of their pf tighness by opening up your EP/MP raising standards -- raise anything you'd play until they start to adjust. This is especially useful if they're weak/tight post flop since you'll be able to win a lot of pots UI.

The second is mixing in some l/rr'es. The problem is that you need to be sure that you're much more likely to get calls/raises when you limp than when you raise. You're risking quite a bit of value with a hand that makes most of its money on the early streets (i.e., faces reverse implied odds). But if you think the table conditions are right, have a go.

I'd also l/rr with more than just monsters. It's probably not that important if the player base is relatively large, but people remember it when you drag big pots this way and if they catch on to the fact that you only do it with monsters you're not much better off than if you just raised pf in the first place. Try adding some mid-suited connectors -- your outs are likely to be live (no real fear of domination) and they play pretty well in a crowd anyway, even OOP, since a large pot tends to reduce positional advantage -- i.e., you often won't have to worry about raises behind you since you'll still be able to see the turn and/or river profitably + you're likely to get calls/coldcalls with a draw that will often be strong enough to pump for value.

[UATrewqaz]

I agree this screams AA or KK, when the player is decent.

If the players is bad it normally means they have total junk.

I rarely see a mediocre hand (say a TT, or KQs) pull this move.

If the player has solid TAG stats I think AA/KK.

If they are LAG'gy I usually see them having T9o and stuff.

* NL this play (limp/reraise) is much better than limit, because you can fanagle ALOT of chips to the middle with your AA preflop, which is why most NL books advise limping with AA in EP every now and then to mix things up.

Missed bets in limit are hard to make up.

[Eeegah]

[ QUOTE ]
When you limp/3 bet PF in a low limit game, you will scream AA or KK. Any reasonable player will fold. I think that you will be better off raising AA UTG and getting loose calls along the way.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not the reasonable players we're extracting the most from anyway [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

That said, the only LRR'ing I'd probably do is if I notice someone on my left acquiring some sort of grudge against me an trying to iso-raise me when I limp.

Grunch:

To answer your posted question - Yes, limping a monster is bad and esp. with no reads on the table as you describe. You cannot control other people's cards, so play your own when first to act. If after enough orbits you have a really passive table, then try stealing a bit more from LP (and get caught once or twice!) - Then your other raises will see more action. Being a LAG isn't always bad, esp if you change gears back to TAG when the conditions warrant.

[crovax4444]

remember, the times they all fold will be nothing in comparison to the time you go against KK, or when it flops trips and takes down a large pot

Crovax