Limping QQ under the gun

[akishore]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like limping with QQ UTG/UTG+1 because at these stakes there is alotta limping and people playing Ax and Kx liberally.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry, I never mentioned the stakes. I am specifically talking about stakes between 25c/50c NL (with stacks $100+) and $1/$2 NL (with stacks $500+).

I am curious how the strategy changes as the stakes change. If you say this is not optimal at "small stakes" (meaning $25 NL or $50 NL or smaller??), does it become optimal at higher stakes? Why?

Also, I've addressed the Ax / Kx issue. Yes, raising increases my winning chances, but that doesn't necessarily increase my expectation the most.


[ QUOTE ]
Let's not forget why we raise...

1. To thin the field
2. To get money into the pot
3. For information

Without raising you are probably going to face a large number of opponents OOP without any idea of what kinda hands they have. You'll end paying off hands that wouldn't have called a PFR, losing to hands that you'd be able to fold had you raised and had a read on the situation.

[/ QUOTE ]
I play the hand differently postflop if I limp preflop. Of course I'm not going to pay off a bunch of hands just because I have QQ.

To address the reasons:

1. Thin the field - I have already addressed this. I don't mind if more Ax and Kx comes along. Even though my winning chances decrease, I believe my expectation does not.

2. Build the pot - Not something I want to do when I'm out of position, that's my main point.

3. Information - I've stated that I believe the information gained from raising preflop isn't really reliable in the loose games that I play in. In fact, I've gone so far as to argue that the information gained from limping and making a bet into a small pot on the flop is more reliable than raising and making a continuation bet in a big pot.


Aseem

[akishore]

[ QUOTE ]
you aren't as good out of position postflop, thats why you limp. if you have a big edge postflop against your opponents even out of position, of course you would raise preflop for value.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting.

What I meant was, I believe I still retain a postflop edge if I limp queens and play them selectively passively when I'm out of position.

As in, I can let my overaggressive late position opponents bet and give me money on favorable flops whereas I can just check/fold on unfavorable ones.

I just mean that my postflop edge is smaller if I raise with queens preflop out of position.

So either way, I believe I have an edge postflop, but that doesn't justify raising preflop if I believe limping creates a bigger postflop edge.

Am I making sense?

Aseem

[akishore]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd much rather limp AK out of position than QQ.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you explain?

Thanks,
Aseem

[fuzzbox]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem with playing QQ for no raise is essentially the same problem AK has- any 1 pair hand has little chance of winning in large, multi-way pots.

Take in account the discussion over AK in a recent thread. The amount of hands your opponents can hold are easily disguised, and you will often be in the dark upon their holdings (being OOP with a hand that improves 1-5 by the river). How do you like any Ace, any King, or basically ATC having a good chance of outdrawing you?

So do you play very passively with the hand postflop? I can only see that happening, as you say you don't like being OOP in a larg(er) pot. To me, defining my hand means more to me than pot control/position. Do you raise with AK in this spot?

Edit: the topic title AKo in NL? by DWwarrior sort've reminds me of this.

[/ QUOTE ]

The point of the game is to win money, not to win pots. Limping QQ up front can help you to win money by disguising the strength of your hand, and enabling you to get away from bad flops for cheap when OOP.

AK has the same properties. If you limp, then opponents are much more likely to play AQ/AJ/AT, and you then have a good chance of getting some money out of them on an A-high flop. If you always raise AK utg, then often those hands that you would like to stay in, actually fold.

[NaobisDad]

I remember back in the day in the UB games raising anything other than AA / KK UTG could get you in a lot of trouble. Admittedly the stacks were only 100BB, but the texture of the game just made raising QQ or JJ from EP really unfavorable.

[akishore]

[ QUOTE ]
I remember back in the day in the UB games raising anything other than AA / KK UTG could get you in a lot of trouble. Admittedly the stacks were only 100BB, but the texture of the game just made raising QQ or JJ from EP really unfavorable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you elaborate on what texture those games had?

Aseem

[NaobisDad]

the games were really tight. Lot of nutpeddlers. Now, initially this sounds like a game in which you want to be raising anything from any position, but there is another condition.

I was/am a beginning player. And to LAG it up against very carefull opponents you need a great ounce of skill, and a great ounce of not getting married to your pairs.

For that reason I kept myself out of trickey situations. For example, if I know I'm only going to get called by hands I'm a small favorite or a big dogg against in these games I'm going to refrain from building a big pot with hands that are quite vulnurable, such as QQ or JJ. Escpecially in these games they were hands with which I stood to win a little or lose a whole lot.

So the perfect situation for limping my QQ and JJ UTG was not due to table texture alone, but also had a great deal to do with my own overall skill, or lack thereof.

The reason I thought the texture of the game influenced my decision was as followed: if I raise that QQ UTG, and (apart from me flopping a set) I get action on the hand beyond the flop, more often that not I have to let the hand go. And if this was the case, I might as well have been raising with 72o in that position. Because if it were to come to a showdown with these players I would by far more oftne be looking at a better hand than mine rather than a worse one.

[mjm]

The fact that I am OOP makes me want to play my good hands more strongly pre-flop. I want to define my hand. I will also be betting the flop strongly and will then evaluate my postion after the responce to my flop bet.

I don't like to limp with QQ in early position, AA-KK I will for variation, and will be hoping to get to re-raise pre-flop.

But QQ is too good and too vunerable IMO. I am not playing QQ for set value.

[The_Bends]

Good discussion and its not a terrible idea but I have no doubt that you're leaving money on the table if you do this at small stakes, particulally at NL50/NL100. I base this on a few assumptions.

1)QQ is a very difficult hand to play multiway out of position

2)QQ is a very good hand headsup or three handed even out of position

3) There is no reason you have to go to the wall with just an overpair, you'll get plenty of opportunity to dump it with big stacks

4)People will call a large raise with a wide range of preflop holding, many of which you will be dominating.

5)Althought the preflop range is wide it is predicatable giving you a far greater headstart on hand reading

6)At MHNL there is excellent deception value in limpcalling with QQ because players will struggle to read your hand and will lose big pots down the line, however at SSNL people are not trying to read your hand, they don't care waht you have so the deception value is gone.

7)If you raise and the continuation bet most flops you may not gain that much infomation about your opponents hand but he won't know any more about yours either.

8)People at SSNL arn't complete idiots and will lay hands down, limping and going mental with a set in a multiway pot is only going to stack unfortunates that hit the flop hard but not as hard as you (two pairs and undersets) which is no good.

9) People get attached to big pots. You can get people to the felt with TPTK when you've raised and CBed (because they don't believe you), but that will not happen if you've limped.

10)People love limping Ax and even Kx, espeically if there are lots of other limpers, but probably won't play them for a decent raise, so you're condeming yourself to defeat unnesseccarily on a lot of flops. If you've thinned the field theres no reason an A or K coming down prevents you from taking the pot.

When I first saw this thread I assumed you'd just got burned too often by QQ and were playing passively but that doesn't seem to be the case. Nice hand.

[Hattifnatt]

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.