|
|
#41
10-04-2005, 08:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Limping QQ under the gun
[ QUOTE ]
I think limping with QQ (unless the stack is thin, like 40 bb) utg is always wrong, with KK or AA it might be a good play to limp if the conditions is right. [/ QUOTE ] Why is it always wrong. What, exactly, is wrong with it? 
|
|
#42
10-04-2005, 08:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Limping QQ under the gun
Hi Aseem, I play exclusively small stakes. The more I do, the more I agree with you as I come to appreciate the power of position.
I raise AJ from MP, to buy position, and hopefully fold out hands behind me. If I get callers behind, I go into control mode. But that's MP. UTG, a raise is very unlikely to buy you good position through the rest of the hand. Chances are too good that you will wind up playing OOP. And with QQ (and JJ) in particular, chances are just too good that you will see an overcard on the flop, and your opponents with position will be able to toy with you. Now you're OOP in a raised pot, with overcards on the board, little hope for improvement, and you wind up either playing for your stack or giving away that preflop raise money. Yuck. To me the big question is when you hit your set, because that's when the real money flows. Are you giving up value simply because the pot is smaller, hence harder to build, on the flop?
|
|
#43
10-04-2005, 09:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Limping QQ under the gun
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I think limping with QQ (unless the stack is thin, like 40 bb) utg is always wrong, with KK or AA it might be a good play to limp if the conditions is right. [/ QUOTE ] Why is it always wrong. What, exactly, is wrong with it? [/ QUOTE ] I think it's wrong because it's not strong enought to limp-reraise with (and giving away that you have a big PP) but definitely strong enough to raise with (and prob. call a reraise). Some other arguments can you find in the other answers in this thread.
|
|
#44
10-04-2005, 09:20 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Limping QQ under the gun
This has been an amazing discussion so I just wanted to ask Aseem a couple questions....
#1 Do the players not pick up on the nature of your play? Such as limping OOP with anything other than AA/KK or even those....and adjusting their play accordingly? (and trying to push you around with their position) #2 How do you adjust your play vs aggressive players who pick up on your strategy? (especially those willing to make the pot bigger preflop with connectors) #3 How do you make any money when overcards flop? #4 You do this to disguise your hand and control the size of the pot...but if you do this most of the time don't you think you lose the guise of the play?(same as doing any type of play repeatedly vs oppents, who tend to pick up on them and make those plays much less profitable or even losing) Hope I made sense Thanks in a advance
|
|
#45
10-04-2005, 09:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Limping QQ under the gun
Wow I've tightend alot up EP lately as I too have begun to really appriciate position, but this looks ultra tight. What do you guys do with AQ UTG? My cheeks almost goes red to say that I raise it often.
It thought winning play was supposed to be TAG, all this limping makes me confused
|
|
#46
10-04-2005, 09:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Limping QQ under the gun
The hand's value is dependent of the dominated action it gets in any situation it is at. Preflop it has only the set value here.
|
|
#48
10-04-2005, 09:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Limping QQ under the gun
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] In poker, there are never any absolutes. [/ QUOTE ] so it is absolute that there are no absolutes in poker? [/ QUOTE ] There is an absolute that I'm not gonna muck the nutflush on the river.
|
|
#49
10-04-2005, 10:54 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Limping QQ under the gun
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I think limping with QQ (unless the stack is thin, like 40 bb) utg is always wrong, with KK or AA it might be a good play to limp if the conditions is right. [/ QUOTE ] Why is it always wrong. What, exactly, is wrong with it? [/ QUOTE ] I think it's wrong because it's not strong enought to limp-reraise with (and giving away that you have a big PP) but definitely strong enough to raise with (and prob. call a reraise). Some other arguments can you find in the other answers in this thread. [/ QUOTE ] Why is it strong enough to raise and call a reraise, but not strong enough to limp and then reraise? What is the difference between those two, other than in case 2 - we have a chance to win the pot right there. Also - hero never mentioned limping with the intention of reraising. He is just limping. What does raising UTG in a full ring game do ? Does it give away that you have a big pp (or AK). What does limp-reraising do thats different? And more to the point - what, exactly, is WRONG with limping, how does it lose me money, or not make me more money when I limp QQ up front ? Thats the part Im interested in ... can you explain how this works.
|
|
#50
10-04-2005, 11:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Limping QQ under the gun
you just repeated everything I said. the biggest problem with being out of position is you have less control over potsize so you do it earlier by limping and starting with a smaller pot. at the same time you get some disguise value for your hand. Problem with limping is that disguised 2 pairs have a chance at hitting your overpair for 3 streets of betting and it is hard to distinguish 2 pair from TPTK from an aggressive opponent.
please don't use phrases like "am I making sense? " or "do you see why?" its very condescending.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
