A question about big hand limpers...

[coffeecrazy1]

I have noticed that some limit players, particularly weak-tight ones, have a tendency to limp into pots with hands that I consider to be preflop raising hands most of the time(AQo, AJ, AT, or KQs as examples). I have found myself losing on the river due to being outkicked because I limped in reasonable position with a decent holding like QJ, but one I would most likely have folded preflop, or on the flop if I figured that the raiser had me kicked.

Is there any way to get out of the way of these, or is this just a situation where you're going to get stung every once in a while, shake your head about the stupidity of the play, then win your money back off them later?

*Note: I am not complaining that the presence of such players is -EV...far from it. I just wonder if I'm missing something that I should be picking up on...since flatcalls to the river are common with inferior hands in small stakes limit.

[W. Deranged]

I find this to be one of the most frustrating things in poker.

Basically, what is happening is that your opponent's are playing a less-than optimal style which will tend to extract far less than maximum value from the table but which happens to extract close to maximum value from you, since you "play good."

I often get frustrated in situations like this, particularly when I value bet the river and get showed a winner, because I often feel that an opponent who played more aggressively would have played back earlier and allowed me to get away from the hand cheaper. Don't worry about this.

What you need simply to do is:

1. Identify what players will do this.
2. Recognize that their pre-flop limps are much more dangerous than those of others and play fewer hands that are likely to be dominated.
3. Make adjustments on the later streets such that you are not paying them off too heavily; particularly, remember to value bet more selectively against them on the river.


Many, many weak players are very much of the "I had a good hand but I couldn't raise because he might have _______, so I just call." It is your job to figure out which players at the table do this and to play accordingly.

If you are playing against big fish who will play both big hands and weak hands in similarly bitchy, passive fashion, you probably just have to play your standard aggressive game and have faith that the bets they're paying you off on their weak hands more than cover the extras they get from you by playing bigger hands weakly.

[Paxosmotic]

It's called implicit collusion and it's a bitch. W's point about identifying these people is very important. You need to have a read that an individual is passive preflop and adjust the range of hands you're putting him on accordingly.

"And that's my first tip: Always make sure the other players know they're playing poker the wrong way. I mean they probably haven't even read my book! (Be smart! Tell other players what they did wrong! Shout out odds! Tell them you read books!)"

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
Is there any way to get out of the way of these, or is this just a situation where you're going to get stung every once in a while, shake your head about the stupidity of the play, then win your money back off them later?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you pretty much nailed it here.

In addition to the fine points that WD made, pay attention to how (if at all) their game changes postflop. A passive preflop player is likely to be fairly passive postflop as well, particularly when it comes to betting draws. If you're holding QhTc on a flop of Qs4d7s and that 12/1/1 player to your right leads into you, this is probably not a good spot to raise to "protect your hand".

But for the most part, I think you do have to just take the odd loss to a passively played premium hand and silenty thank your opponent for letting you draw on him.

[hellite]

Anybody ever stop to think that these players are not playing wrong? You very well may raise AQ, AJ, A10 and KQ every time from early position or as the first one in. That is ok. Just do not think that it is the only way or the RIGHT way because it isn't. There is no one particular right way to play. Period! As a matter of fact, if you are looking for some argument relying upon an authority, take a look at a few of your little two plus two books to see what raising standards they have. I assure you, I have yet to see one that says raise these hands every time. Good players, can limp in tougher games with very good hands that can handle heads up or multiway situations. Sometimes a raise thins the field, and reduces your profits to rubish. There are many factors here, but to criticize someones play who is disguising the strength of their hand by not raising is rather ludicrous.

You might want to look at your own play - rather than the player who is outplaying you - when you think about why it is you are losing these hands. You see, if they raise preflop, you fold. They don't raise, you play along, and pay them off with a mediocre hand like QJ that is only a mildly profitable hand in certain situations. Think about that. You are criticizing their play because they are not raising with very good hands, and not even criticizing yourself for playing mediocre hands just because someone didn't raise.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
Anybody ever stop to think that these players are not playing wrong? You very well may raise AQ, AJ, A10 and KQ every time from early position or as the first one in. That is ok. Just do not think that it is the only way or the RIGHT way because it isn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is wrong.

You raise with hands that stand to have a big equity advantage because, A) you are making money by doing so every time an opponent calls with an inferior hand (which will happen very often in SS games), and B) you want to protect your hand from being drawn out on postflop. If you are regularly limping AQ from any position, you are losing money.

Many 2+2 books do give examples of where it is correct to limp with these hands. These examples are the exceptions, and in each case you will see that there is are a very specific set of circumstances laid out which make it correct to limp (i.e., you are on an extremely passive, loose table with AJo in EP. You can expect at least 5 players to the flop regardless of what you do. It is correct to limp in this situation).

[ QUOTE ]
You might want to look at your own play - rather than the player who is outplaying you - when you think about why it is you are losing these hands. You see, if they raise preflop, you fold. They don't raise, you play along, and pay them off with a mediocre hand like QJ that is only a mildly profitable hand in certain situations. Think about that. You are criticizing their play because they are not raising with very good hands, and not even criticizing yourself for playing mediocre hands just because someone didn't raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is even more wrong than your first paragraph.

[W. Deranged]

1. While I understand what you mean by saying there is no "right way to play," there are better ways and worse ways. Players may deviate from the most +EV move in certain situations, and this qualifies as a different way to play, but that doesn't make it equally good. Limping AQs in middle position is not the best play there in 99% of situations playing small stakes, for example. On this forum we are all looking to find the BEST way to play, not just ways that have certain advantages or are profitable.

2. I think your characterization that hero's opponents are outplaying him is an interesting one (and by this I don't necessarily mean incorrect). Basically, playing in such a tight-weak fashion will have a couple of advantages. First, it is low variance, as you risk fewer chips. Second, it tends to be a pretty good line against thinking, aggressive players. The problem is that most tables are not dominated by thinking, aggressive players. They are dominated by lags, tight-weakies, calling stations, and other species of bad players. The big hand limpers basically play in a way that will occassionally end up being near optimal aganist the best players at the table (who there are few of) and will nearly always be significantly sub-optimal against all of the other players at the table.

3. It is important to realize that these players are not the most profitable players at the table, but they are not outplaying us in any serious sense. We will win more money than they will. By playing like they do, they do not take enough money from the fish. Letting the fish keep their money if basically the same as giving it to us.

[hellite]

I'd like to specify this. If you play a hand (lets say QJ) that you would not have played if you KNEW the early limper was playing AQ you are making a mistake. Now when you hit the flop, playing as though you have the best hand, and you do not you are making further mistakes. When you show down your hand and lost to this player you are making an even further mistake. The reason I say you are being oputplayed is this: If you knew what the other player was holding you would have folded. Instead, they gained from your mistakes. In thisn particular hand they maximized their hand by not raising preflop. I am not saying that this is a good way to play all the time, but sometimes it is more profitable. Here is Sklansky's take.

Sklansky's Fundamental Theorem of Poker:
Every time you play a hand differently from the way you would have played it if you could see all your opponents' cards, they gain; and every time you play your hand the same way you would have played it if you could see all their cards, they lose. Conversely, every time opponents play their hands differently from the way they would have if they could see all your cards, you gain; and every time they play their hands the same way they would have played if they could see all your cards, you lose.

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]

Sklansky's Fundamental Theorem of Poker:
Every time you play a hand differently from the way you would have played it if you could see all your opponents' cards, they gain; and every time you play your hand the same way you would have played it if you could see all their cards, they lose. Conversely, every time opponents play their hands differently from the way they would have if they could see all your cards, you gain; and every time they play their hands the same way they would have played if they could see all your cards, you lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

This simply can't be right...

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd like to specify this. If you play a hand (lets say QJ) that you would not have played if you KNEW the early limper was playing AQ you are making a mistake. Now when you hit the flop, playing as though you have the best hand, and you do not you are making further mistakes. When you show down your hand and lost to this player you are making an even further mistake. The reason I say you are being oputplayed is this: If you knew what the other player was holding you would have folded. Instead, they gained from your mistakes. In thisn particular hand they maximized their hand by not raising preflop. I am not saying that this is a good way to play all the time, but sometimes it is more profitable. Here is Sklansky's take.

[/ QUOTE ]

As WD said, it is more profitable in a very few, very specific instances. These instances are extremely unlikely to occur on a SS table.

Try another example: Villian limps first in from EP with AQo. Folded to Hero who calls on the button with JTo. Who misplayed their hand?

The times when the limper induces a player to call with a dominated hand, when that same player would fold that same hand for a raise, are so rare as to be unworthy of consideration at these limits. Far more often, you will give players the correct odds to limp behind with inferior hands in an effort to draw out on you and/or miss bets from players who would've called 2 with their inferior hands anyway.

This is one of the most basic principles of tight/aggressive poker, and one of the reasons that it works so well.