11 replies to this topic

[pokerkid]

2/4 FR on bodog (Not like 2/4 on stars at all!)

Ajo on the button. Three limps in front of me. I raise/limp?

[Zach6668]

100% raise.

SB, I could see a limp.

Button is an instaraise.

It's for value. The fact that the players are looser makes raising even more attractive, believe it or not.

[pokerkid]

100% raise.

SB, I could see a limp.

Button is an instaraise.

It's for value. The fact that the players are looser makes raising even more attractive, believe it or not.

Thanks for the encouragment. Just getting back into limit and believe it or not, post flop is fine but i've become ridiculously passive preflop.

How about a-10 o here? call with a-9o or muck?

[Zach6668]

Thanks for the encouragment. Just getting back into limit and believe it or not, post flop is fine but i've become ridiculously passive preflop.

How about a-10 o here? call with a-9o or muck?

A9o is borderline. I may limp it along.

ATo is close too, it's either a raise or limp for me. I suppose it depends on the tightness of the blinds. I probably limp AT.

The more I think of it, the more I want to say that we should actually be raising fewer hands at looser tables, sorta. Well, raising different hands. Maybe look into raising something like a QJs there instead of an ATo.

My PFR is insanely high at a place like AP since we're opening so much from LP, and 3-betting a lot lighter, since everyone is opening lighter.

At a site like Bodog, you play a bit more like SSHE would advocate, so you're looking to build pots with monsters and monster draws, etc.

I still raise AJo in both cases though.

[antistuff]

you raise when you have positive equity. what are they limping with? a10+ is usually a raise after limpers. crazies like me raise it utg.

[TheCinciKid]

This should be a raise almost all the time. FWIW, I think I limp ATo, fold A9o or below. Limp behind with KJo and KQo as well. Raise with any of those hands (including AT) if they're suited.

[MrNiceGuy]

This is not such an easy raise IMO.

(I used to always raise in these spots. Now I almost always limp.)

Suppose the big blind will call, and we'll have about 25% equity in the 5-handed pot. That means the immediate value of a raise is 1/4 SB (and that assumes we never get reraised). In a 2/4 game, that's $0.50 (that might even be negated by increased rake due to increased pot size).

Of course, most profit in poker comes from repeatedly making correct decisions which, individually, each only produce a small profit. Also, raising with modest hands can, to some degree, generate more action in future hands when we have monsters. But, there are drawbacks to raising which could easily make it -EV versus limping.

For one, the raise gives information about our hand, which could easily cost us bets later in the hand.

But a more important consideration is how the limpers play after the flop. If they tend to play too loosely (as many limpers do), then keeping the pot small will give us an advantage, as we will be more likely to fold than they will. Our folds will be more correct if the pot is smaller, and their loose calls will be more incorrect (or less correct, or incorrect instead of correct) if the pot is smaller.

On the other hand, if the limpers tend to readily fold postflop, then I'd be more inclined to raise preflop, particularly if I happen to have a rocky image.

[MightyLouse]

This is not such an easy raise IMO.

(I used to always raise in these spots. Now I almost always limp.)

Suppose the big blind will call, and we'll have about 25% equity in the 5-handed pot. That means the immediate value of a raise is 1/4 SB (and that assumes we never get reraised). In a 2/4 game, that's $0.50 (that might even be negated by increased rake due to increased pot size).

This misses the point as I would understand it. First, our equity is always higher than our absolute equity if we just run the hand, because we're in position. We're likely to win more bets when ahead, and lose fewer when behind. One could make an argument that his is a rap in the big, but even if your hand-equity is exactly 20% break even if the hand ended preflop, we'll still show a profit since we have position and the ability to play after the flop.

There is something to be said for keeping the pot smaller to force our opponents to play worse if they're too loose, but if they're very badly loose, they'll call drawing to 3 or fewer outs on the flop very, very often, no matter the size of the pot. In these cases, we should be getting value when we can.

Also, letting the SB complete correctly is bad, as is allowing the BB to see a flop with a random hand.

Finally, in a 5 handed pot, I'd guess our equity is closer to 30ish percent than 25, which is important I think

We also gain some fold equity throughout the hand. This is less important here, as the pot will be played multiway

[TheCinciKid]

This misses the point as I would understand it. First, our equity is always higher than our absolute equity if we just run the hand, because we're in position. We're likely to win more bets when ahead, and lose fewer when behind. One could make an argument that his is a rap in the big, but even if your hand-equity is exactly 20% break even if the hand ended preflop, we'll still show a profit since we have position and the ability to play after the flop.

There is something to be said for keeping the pot smaller to force our opponents to play worse if they're too loose, but if they're very badly loose, they'll call drawing to 3 or fewer outs on the flop very, very often, no matter the size of the pot. In these cases, we should be getting value when we can.

Also, letting the SB complete correctly is bad, as is allowing the BB to see a flop with a random hand.

Finally, in a 5 handed pot, I'd guess our equity is closer to 30ish percent than 25, which is important I think

We also gain some fold equity throughout the hand. This is less important here, as the pot will be played multiway

All very good points.

Also, FWIW...I never raise this out of the blinds. Our position sucks, and there's no reason to bloat the pot with this hand. The button is an entirely different story for the reasons you mentioned though.

[MrNiceGuy]

This misses the point as I would understand it. First, our equity is always higher than our absolute equity if we just run the hand, because we're in position. We're likely to win more bets when ahead, and lose fewer when behind. One could make an argument that his is a rap in the big, but even if your hand-equity is exactly 20% break even if the hand ended preflop, we'll still show a profit since we have position and the ability to play after the flop.

Our equity is our chances, based on our opponents' ranges of possible hands, of winning the pot at showdown; the only way raising preflop increases our equity is if it gets other players to fold. It is true that our EV (expected value for the hand) should be larger than our equity due to our position (provided we play at least as well as our opponents). But, this is true whether or not we raise preflop.

Still, raising preflop may cost us money if the flop hits us, since our opponents will have some idea that our hand is strong.

And, if we are more likely to fold marginal hands after the flop than our opponents, then our actual equity is not as high as our preflop equity, since we are more likely to fold a hand postflop that might have eventually won a showdown (say, by spiking on the river) than our opponents are.

There is something to be said for keeping the pot smaller to force our opponents to play worse if they're too loose, but if they're very badly loose, they'll call drawing to 3 or fewer outs on the flop very, very often, no matter the size of the pot. In these cases, we should be getting value when we can.

I used to feel this way too, but now I believe I understand this differently. I'm not advocating keeping the pot so much as to cause our opponents to play worse; I'm advocating keeping it small to allow us to play better. Remember that most flops will miss us.

Also, letting the SB complete correctly is bad, as is allowing the BB to see a flop with a random hand.

This I'll concede. And I'd say that how well the blinds play is one factor to be considered in deciding whether to raise (in general, the better the players in the blinds play, the more inclined we should be to raise). But, if the SB plays badly postflop, a "correct" completion on his part in terms of equity may actually cost him money (and gain you money) if he will chase weak hands like bottom pair postflop without proper odds.

Finally, in a 5 handed pot, I'd guess our equity is closer to 30ish percent than 25, which is important I think

I get about 27% against 3 limpers with: TT-22,AJs-A2s,K2s+,Q2s+,J2s+,T2s+,92s+,82s+,72s+,62s+,52s+,42s+,32s,AQo-A2o,K2o+,Q8o+,J8o+,T8o+,97o+,86o+,75o+,65o,54o and one BB with a random hand.

We also gain some fold equity throughout the hand. This is less important here, as the pot will be played multiway

I mentioned in my original response that, if the limpers will likely play weak-tight after the flop (due to some combination of their tendencies and my image), then I'd go ahead and raise. But, in general, building a bigger pot encourages loose opponents to chase, not to fold.

And I'd like to reiterate a point that I made before- in a low limit game, where the rake is often > 1 small bet, a raise before the flop with a small equity edge that gives an EV of only a fraction of a small bet doesn't actually gain you anything if it causes the rake to increase due to the bigger pot.

[MightyLouse]

Our equity is our chances, based on our opponents' ranges of possible hands, of winning the pot at showdown; the only way raising preflop increases our equity is if it gets other players to fold. It is true that our EV (expected value for the hand) should be larger than our equity due to our position (provided we play at least as well as our opponents). But, this is true whether or not we raise preflop.

Still, raising preflop may cost us money if the flop hits us, since our opponents will have some idea that our hand is strong.

And, if we are more likely to fold marginal hands after the flop than our opponents, then our actual equity is not as high as our preflop equity, since we are more likely to fold a hand postflop that might have eventually won a showdown (say, by spiking on the river) than our opponents are.

I used to feel this way too, but now I believe I understand this differently. I'm not advocating keeping the pot so much as to cause our opponents to play worse; I'm advocating keeping it small to allow us to play better. Remember that most flops will miss us.
This I'll concede. And I'd say that how well the blinds play is one factor to be considered in deciding whether to raise (in general, the better the players in the blinds play, the more inclined we should be to raise). But, if the SB plays badly postflop, a "correct" completion on his part in terms of equity may actually cost him money (and gain you money) if he will chase weak hands like bottom pair postflop without proper odds.

I get about 27% against 3 limpers with: TT-22,AJs-A2s,K2s+,Q2s+,J2s+,T2s+,92s+,82s+,72s+,62s+,52s+,42s+,32s,AQo-A2o,K2o+,Q8o+,J8o+,T8o+,97o+,86o+,75o+,65o,54o and one BB with a random hand.
I mentioned in my original response that, if the limpers will likely play weak-tight after the flop (due to some combination of their tendencies and my image), then I'd go ahead and raise. But, in general, building a bigger pot encourages loose opponents to chase, not to fold.

And I'd like to reiterate a point that I made before- in a low limit game, where the rake is often > 1 small bet, a raise before the flop with a small equity edge that gives an EV of only a fraction of a small bet doesn't actually gain you anything if it causes the rake to increase due to the bigger pot.

I disagree in theory with most of what you say, but I'm unwilling to care enough to have a whole thing. You make good points. As long as anybody who plays the hand like you do thinks about it as much as you do, it's fine (even though I'm still right).

I do have a problem with our opponents' ranges. I mean, all suited one, two, and THREE AND FOUR AND FIVE AND SIX AND SEVEN (etc) gappers? ALL suited cards? That's a tad loose, no?

[Zach6668]

See, I'm still in the easy raise camp here, but MNG has proven to be nothing but a poker genius in these forums....