Limping and Premium Hands

[John]

I have tried to eliminate limping entirely from my game, and I'm doing pretty well so far with that. But there comes a time when I feel I must limp. Here are a couple of points to note:

1. When I have low-medium pocket pairs (5's-8's) and I'm mid-late position with the blinds low enough not to affect my stack size should I choose to limp.

2. Over time, statistically, set mining isn't said to be profitable, so when the blinds are a little bigger (say I have 20-30 big blinds in my stack) I will always fold or raise pocket pairs.

3. If I'm sat in the SB and it's folded round to me I will always fold or raise the BB. I never flat call.

I just can't see much value in limping - what's the objective? By limping into a pot, I am effectively saying "with these two cards I am stating I have an equal chance of winning as the big blind" and so this eliminates limping from the equation giving me only a fold/raise choice.

Lastly, a slightly different take on differing levels of premium hands (Aces, Kings, Queens, AKs, AKo). Now, I know the correct thing to do is raise, raise, raise, every time with premium hands. Or so it may seem...

I'm going to contradict all the above and state that in certain situations it can pay off to limp with premium hands. E.g.

I'm the SB and I've enough chips behind me to last me a long time. It's folded around the me, with the BB to my left who's short stacked. By flat calling him alone, he might just think I'm flat calling him for the sake of seeing a flop, with the intention of winning it off him at the flop or later. He's desperate for chips so if he pushes against me, with a premium hand I'd always call and hopefully see him eliminated. By raising him, yes I'm being the bully, but there's more chance that he'll fold, and I won't get paid off so well.

This strategy could also work the other way round. If you're the small stack and you flat call the big stack, he might think "what an earth is this guy doing by flat calling with only a couple of BB's to his name" and shove over the top of me. So effectively I'd be all in anyway, but is this a better way to play? Assuming here I would get paid off better if he shoves on the flop. If I shove pre-flop, even though he has a bigger stack, depending on his stack size he may fold... thus again I wouldn't be paid off so well.

Heads up this can work similarly - flat calling with a premium hand when the other guy is being a complete shove-monster can see your opponents quickly eliminated.

Thoughts?

[sportingprofit]

I assume we are just talking about SNGs here.


1. When I have low-medium pocket pairs (5's-8's) and I'm mid-late position with the blinds low enough not to affect my stack size should I choose to limp.

2. Over time, statistically, set mining isn't said to be profitable, so when the blinds are a little bigger (say I have 20-30 big blinds in my stack) I will always fold or raise pocket pairs.

I tend to limp 10s and lower in mid-late postion, early in sng's and try to flop a set. In early position depending on how the tables playing I will sometimes limp if I think I can see a cheap flop or just fold otherwise.

At 20-30 bb left I generally still limp behind with 8's or lower in late position but fold in mid position, if folded to me I'll mix it up between raising, calling and folding. T's or better I raise and play for stacks generally. 9's is 50/50 both ways.


3. If I'm sat in the SB and it's folded round to me I will always fold or raise the BB. I never flat call.

I just can't see much value in limping - what's the objective? By limping into a pot, I am effectively saying "with these two cards I am stating I have an equal chance of winning as the big blind" and so this eliminates limping from the equation giving me only a fold/raise choice.

I think this is a case of knowing your opponent, if I can get away if limping with a small pair with 30bb-50bb stacks I will do it, as it's such a hard hand to play after the flop.

In general I agree with raise/fold from the sb.


Lastly, a slightly different take on differing levels of premium hands (Aces, Kings, Queens, AKs, AKo). Now, I know the correct thing to do is raise, raise, raise, every time with premium hands. Or so it may seem...

I'm going to contradict all the above and state that in certain situations it can pay off to limp with premium hands. E.g.

I'm the SB and I've enough chips behind me to last me a long time. It's folded around the me, with the BB to my left who's short stacked. By flat calling him alone, he might just think I'm flat calling him for the sake of seeing a flop, with the intention of winning it off him at the flop or later. He's desperate for chips so if he pushes against me, with a premium hand I'd always call and hopefully see him eliminated. By raising him, yes I'm being the bully, but there's more chance that he'll fold, and I won't get paid off so well.

This strategy could also work the other way round. If you're the small stack and you flat call the big stack, he might think "what an earth is this guy doing by flat calling with only a couple of BB's to his name" and shove over the top of me. So effectively I'd be all in anyway, but is this a better way to play? Assuming here I would get paid off better if he shoves on the flop. If I shove pre-flop, even though he has a bigger stack, depending on his stack size he may fold... thus again I wouldn't be paid off so well.

Heads up this can work similarly - flat calling with a premium hand when the other guy is being a complete shove-monster can see your opponents quickly eliminated.

Thoughts?

I think this is just another case of knowing your opponents (you should be watching and taking notes of how they play different hands)

Against good opponents who have played with you alot this should not work as they will be taking notes of your tendencies and if your always limping premium hands in the sb, there going to call your shoves lighter (as your range will not be as strong). And if your limping AK/AQ after the flop it's going to be tough to play as your only going to flop a pair 33% of the time and you will be out of position. AK/AQ is not a hand I want to be trapping with as against any two cards you only have 65% equity.

Alot of what you are talking about is good as opponents at lower stakes are not going to exploit you, at higher stakes a more balanced range would be needed.

[mathare]

1. When I have low-medium pocket pairs (5's-8's) and I'm mid-late position with the blinds low enough not to affect my stack size should I choose to limp.If you don't think you'll face a raise behind you then it is worth limping with hands like these but throw in the occasional raise to mix up your play. You have to play "fit or fold" on the flop though. If you don't make three of a kind get out (unless you can check it round) as you're likely beaten - by a higher pair if there are overcards or by two pair if the board is low cards. And if someone doesn't have two pair on a low board they have a straight draw.


2. Over time, statistically, set mining isn't said to be profitable, so when the blinds are a little bigger (say I have 20-30 big blinds in my stack) I will always fold or raise pocket pairs.Not sure about the start of that statement but anyway, this play seems sensible to me. I'd throw in the occasional limp to mix your play up and think about the number of players seeing the flop. If you're getting to the flop heads-up or with two opponents they probably have a bigger pair or overcards to your pair so tread carefully. The smaller pairs are basically drawing hands in the same way that suited connectors are as they will need to hit to win a pot almost every time.


3. If I'm sat in the SB and it's folded round to me I will always fold or raise the BB. I never flat call.Never is a strong word and one I wouldn't use in no-limit poker. If you have rags throw in the occasional limp and see if you can hit a miracle hidden two pair or similar. The BB has the same right as everyone else at the table to hit a big hand but this will happen rarely (as it does for everyone). So by folding from the SB a lot you're giving up a lot of chips in the blinds when the BB has a lousy hand. Also by raising from the SB a lot you risk running into a big hand from the BB. I would try to mix up your play more and see how the BB reacts. Will he fold to a steal-raise? Or play back at you? If he calls a raise can you outplay him on the flop? You need to know your BB when it comes to situations like this but I don't see anything wrong with a limp here and there.


I just can't see much value in limping - what's the objective?To minimise the risk on your speculative hands, hoping to hit a monster on the flop. The best way to minimise this risk is with a small bet (so limp in) and do it only when you are pretty sure no-one behind you will raise (so use position) and when you will get paid off when you hit a big hand (pot odds).


By limping into a pot, I am effectively saying "with these two cards I am stating I have an equal chance of winning as the big blind" and so this eliminates limping from the equation giving me only a fold/raise choice.I don't think you're saying that at all. If you never limp with strong hands now and again then when you do limp (as I feel you should sometimes) then your opponents know you don't have a monster starting hand and can exploit that. If you always fold speculative hands you're giving too much away when the blinds are small and stacks are deep. If you always raise with them you're probably paying too high a price to play such hands.


Lastly, a slightly different take on differing levels of premium hands (Aces, Kings, Queens, AKs, AKo). Now, I know the correct thing to do is raise, raise, raise, every time with premium hands.No it's not. As I said above you need to limp occasionally.


I'm the SB and I've enough chips behind me to last me a long time. It's folded around the me, with the BB to my left who's short stacked. By flat calling him alone, he might just think I'm flat calling him for the sake of seeing a flop, with the intention of winning it off him at the flop or later. He's desperate for chips so if he pushes against me, with a premium hand I'd always call and hopefully see him eliminated. By raising him, yes I'm being the bully, but there's more chance that he'll fold, and I won't get paid off so well.That's certainly one option but you need to set plays like this up most of the time. If you only ever fold to or raise the BB from the SB when it's folded to you then this limp will set alarm bells ringing all over the place. You need to mix it up a bit on previous hands so he doesn't immediately smell a rat.


This strategy could also work the other way round. If you're the small stack and you flat call the big stack, he might think "what an earth is this guy doing by flat calling with only a couple of BB's to his name" and shove over the top of me. So effectively I'd be all in anyway, but is this a better way to play?I wouldn't play this way except for very unusual circumstances. If you know the big stack will raise then you could do this but you need a very strong hand. Personally I'd almost always shove due to the gap concept.


Assuming here I would get paid off better if he shoves on the flop. If I shove pre-flop, even though he has a bigger stack, depending on his stack size he may fold... thus again I wouldn't be paid off so well.If his stack is really that much bigger than yours I reckon you'll get a call pre-flop, possibly with any two cards. Get your money in good when you are more sure you're ahead before he has the chance to hit two pair with random cards.


Heads up this can work similarly - flat calling with a premium hand when the other guy is being a complete shove-monster can see your opponents quickly eliminated.That can work, yes.

How many of these plays do you think would work at the tables you play on now though John? You don't want to fall victim to FPS (Fancy Play Syndrome) as I have done in the past.

[Win2Win]

No surprise seeing the words LIMP & HAND in John's post :laugh

[counterfeit]

I have to say that if there's one area I totally disagree with it's playing with a Premium hand in the SB.

To my mind, I read far more weakness in the SB raising than I do if he calls. To me, a call screams strength as does a small raise. For me to go back over the top of the SB when he limps I have to either a) have learnt he is a weak player or b) have a raising hand myself.

One thing you don't mention is what you do to set up plays, that is if you do anything.

If I am playing against people who don't know me then I either play very aggressively or very passively for quite a while. It sets up a table image that you can later exploit.

for example I am playing in a tourney tomorrow night in a new casino (for me). I will deliberately limp into a few pots in a row early on and fold to any re-raise to make myself look like a very bad and weak player. Then, when I do get a good hand people will try to push me off the pot and will not be expecting me to re-raise them. The starting stacks are 10,000 and the first 30 minute level of blinds are only 50/100 so I can really exploit my weak image.

I might lose 500 or 600 chips early on but I can almost guarantee than when I re-raise I will win at least 2 or 3 times that much.

Sometimes I will raise 4 or 5 pots in a row in the first 10 hands just to look like a maniac. When I then get a proper hand nobody believes me and I can use my image to rake a big pot.

To be honest it is more a strategy I use in live play or when I am playing cash online. I don't think the stacks are really big enough in tourneys online. The point being though, that image is as important as cards.

It is highly unlikely that any player will be lucky enough to be a winning player long term bsed on cards alone. There are only three other key areas to be reckoned with; bluffing, image and reading of opponents.

All three need to be worked on and all need to be used in conjunction with good timing.

John, you are a winning player overall in the past few months so I would suggest that you revert back to whatever you were doing and stop being too self critical.

[John]

Yeah, SNGs I was referring to... probably should have made that clear at the start!

SP, I agree generally with what you're saying, particularly regarding making notes on your opponents and trying to gather as much information about them during table play as possible. Sometimes it can be tricky to create an impression of them if they are rarely involved in pots, but then this is something I'd make a note of. I've even been thinking of making player notes for every single player in every single tournament with something like "Played X, Won X, Drawn X, Lost X" against everyone's name, and updating this for each time I meet them again. I often see the same faces at the tables I play and I don't want to get over-familiar with players. Anyway that's another thing completely.

Mat, yeah I used to use position and limp in mid-late position if I didn't think I'd face any raises behind me, but I stopped doing this because more often than not I wouldn't hit anything on the flop anyway. So I was getting my stacked chipped away by playing this technique.

By 'set mining' I meant that over time, if you forever limp small-medium pocket pairs hoping to flop trips, I think you're only roughly 10/1 thereabouts to make it. And in doing so, even with, let's assume a 1 in 10 hit rate, I'd say it's fairly unlikely you'd profit long term with this approach. Unless of course you only set mine when the blinds are tiddly, and you make a massive pay off from the pot every time you hit. But that's more likely than Grimsby winning the FA Cup. I guess also what you say about a 'limp here and there' in the SB isn't as barmy as I first thought. For a while now I've accepted that losing my blind money is fine, because I know I can make it back and more in better situations. So it's not a problem for me to throw my blinds away. I do steal quite often, so it balances itself out - and I'm aggressive - sometimes too aggressive at the later levels. But I feel having an aggressive image on the approach to the bubble is very important.

Speculative hands - the A7s+, the TJs, etc. Depends really. Often I'll fold, but if I'm in middle position with nothing in front of me then I'll probably raise especially from the button. If I get a caller or re-raised then it doesn't always go to plan but I know I can make the chips back.

You'll find this odd and I make no intentions to play this way - but often if i find myself short stacked I quite like it - when there are only a few players remaining it can get the adrenaline pumping to know that you can either fold or raise only. There's a good feeling too in stealing from the button with semi-awful cards too. Trying to keep yourself afloat can be such a good challenge.

I see what you're saying about setting up plays too - I tend to do this a lot as it is, with the most common probably being a minimum raise hoping to get re-raised. Or the famous check-raise but that will often set alarm bells ringing for opponents to fold anyway, depending on how frequent it is.

The 'oddities' I posted (e.g. short stacked SB to flat call the big stacked BB) do work surprisingly more often than I thought they would at the level I play at. I mean it depends on who's at the table, often there's a massive wide range of abilities so it depends on who you're in the pot with. What I think I need to do more is mix up my play, and perhaps with a few more limps in the pots I'm playing I can make myself appear much less predictable and readable.

[John]

Counterfeit,

The first thing that struck out for me was that you feel a minimum raise from the SB to the BB screams strength... perhaps it does, but in my opinion it would surely also scream anywhere between a lousy and strong attempt at a steal (lousy-strong depending on the quality of the field). On the other hand, like you said, if he flat calls the raise, or comes back over the top with a re-raise/shove then you have to have a strong hand in the first place to play back with.

Also, I have learnt to adopt the thinking that folding to a re-raise in this kind of scenario means that you have control and some degree of sense. If you don't think you can beat the guy after his re-raise then you should fold. Gotta be careful though, as it can also project weakness.

I like the way you've mentioned setting up a false table image that you can later exploit. I've actually tried that with little success (the agression one) but this can often work if I'm dealt a few decent hands in a row and I win a few small pots on the bounce. It becomes easier and easier to raise before the flop, and your table image is enhanced.

Good luck for tomorrow night's tournament - I guess when the blinds are that short in comparison, you really have a lot of time to project whatever image you like and by playing in the way you described you'll be able to exploit it well. There's no reason why this can't be done online in tournaments too, I should try it more than I do.

[John]

I probably am being a bit too self critical but any blip in my play and I think the world is ending. My confidence can go through the roof when I'm playing well and the results are flowing (early December I think it was) but when I'm on a bleak spell I get myself and my mindset into all sorts of silly troubles. I should just play my game, and I try to do that and put anything that doesn't actively affect the poker table out of my mind. It's like a horse racing system, you don't start betting like a crazy person if you hit 5 winners on the trot and your bank goes up. You still stick to the same system rules and that's the kind of ruling I need to apply to my mindset with a strong assertion. I'm getting better at it - much better than I was in fact - but I still need to improve it.

I think I'll always be self critical, I don't think that will change but I also think at times, I need to stop worrying and just stick to what has worked in the past. Results show I'm up since I started, but late December and January have been dismal and it's knocking me. With more experience I'll learn to deal with ups and downs a lot better.

[counterfeit]

I think you need to be able to sort out in your head the difference between self-analysis and self-criticism.

You tend to be critical more than analytical of yourself and really there is no need unless you start to lose constantly. We all have dips in form and I regularly have losing days but I know that overall I am a decent player and will win.

I never go over the top with self-criticism. Yes, sometimes I play a hand very badly and that does tend to be when I am trying to be too clever for my own good. I am always looking to improve but as long as I know the maths of every situation then I know that I will generally make good decisions.

I think my biggest strength as a player is that I am able to get away from hands if I am in trouble. My biggest weakness is my tournament play. In all the years I have been playing online I have cashed hundreds of times in MTTs but I have only ever won 3.

From the descriptions of your play I would say that you don't have too much to worry about but ... perhaps you could just be a bit more creative and less ABC. Apart from that you just need to carry on as you are.

[mathare]

Sometimes it can be tricky to create an impression of them if they are rarely involved in pots,That's your note - tight. Premium starting hands, most likely, and unlikely to be bluffing based on their play so far. Worth bearing in mind. You can raise such players more often - if they have a premium hand you'll know about it soon enough but you can also steal from them.


I've even been thinking of making player notes for every single player in every single tournament with something like "Played X, Won X, Drawn X, Lost X" against everyone's name, and updating this for each time I meet them again. You're using some form of tracking software right? When playing cash games I tend to update the notes on each player at my table every 50 hands they play, recording the number of hands of theirs I have tracked, their VP$IP, PFR% and C-Bet%. Then when I open a table I know where players sit on the loose-tight passive-aggressive scales if I have played at least 50 hands with them. I can check these notes before I sit down. Incidentally when I do sit down I wait for the BB to come round rather than posting right away allowing me to double-check notes and watch the first few hands. This won't work in SnGs of course but you should think about recording some tracked stats for each player. I'm not sure doing it at the tourney level (played X, won X, lost X) is right though. When you bust out do you keep the tracker running to the end of the event to get the full result? If not then you won't know who won an event you busted out of thus the stats are distorted. Also an opponent may have played 100s of SnGs and won 60% of them but played only 3 with you and lost them all. Your stats may suggest he's a loser but he's most definitely not. If I were you I'd consider recording different notes. If you can do this easily record a player's VP$IP and PFR% (at least) for the first few levels only. When it gets short-handed and short-stacked relative to the blinds everyone plays more hands and shoves more so these stats get distorted. If you can easily get the stats for the first few levels or when there are 6/7+ players at the table then you'll get a better idea of how these players play initially allowing you to then modify your impression of them as the game goes on but this way you have a first impression of the player from your notes. Also check for multi-tablers and note those (they are concentrating less on each table). Note also hands that are shown at the end and how a player played them. Look for questionable raises from early position, strange calls/limps etc and note those too. Go back over hand histories outside the game if you have to and make further notes (in another package that you later copy over to the poker room notes facility).


Mat, yeah I used to use position and limp in mid-late position if I didn't think I'd face any raises behind me, but I stopped doing this because more often than not I wouldn't hit anything on the flop anyway. So I was getting my stacked chipped away by playing this technique.Then you're probably playing the hand wrong on the flop. If you're limping medium-small pairs in mid-late and missing the flop you can fold in the face of action but if it is checked around (and you know you face passive opponents) then bet out as though the flop hit you. OK, be wary of scare cards and be sure you know what you're representing etc but you can steal pots this way. If you're losing overall by limping medium pairs in mid-late you might not have the right pot odds to be limping anyway. I'd only limp these pairs with 3-4 callers before me. Other than that I'd be folding/raising.


By 'set mining' I meant that over time, if you forever limp small-medium pocket pairs hoping to flop trips, I think you're only roughly 10/1 thereabouts to make it.I thought it was closer to 15/2 or 8/1


And in doing so, even with, let's assume a 1 in 10 hit rate, I'd say it's fairly unlikely you'd profit long term with this approach.If your strike rate exceeds the percentage chance of making the hand then you are profiting. You made a value bet. If the chances of hitting a set on the flop are 8/1 then you only need to hit one out of every 9 to breakeven, better than that and you're profiting.


I guess also what you say about a 'limp here and there' in the SB isn't as barmy as I first thought.Of course it's not barmy, how dare you think it was :laugh I'd say you should raise the BB with any big card if it is folded round to you. Any A or K is massive here. But call with some hands to mix it up a bit. Don't let the BB (or any player) get a good read on your play; stay unpredictable.


But I feel having an aggressive image on the approach to the bubble is very important.It is! :)


Speculative hands - the A7s+, the TJs, etc. Depends really. Often I'll fold, but if I'm in middle position with nothing in front of me then I'll probably raise especially from the button. If I get a caller or re-raised then it doesn't always go to plan but I know I can make the chips back.Watch out with a raise from the button - it smacks of a steal if it has been folded round to you. A decent player in the blinds (especially the SB) will three-bet you light on a resteal, knowing you're likely to be raising light. I'm not saying don't steal but have an idea (based on who is in the blinds) of how often you can get away with it. If you succeed in stealing the blinds a couple of times but then fold to a reraise you've probably lost chips overall. It comes back to knowing your opponents, as it so often does. That said, if you've been stealing with air then by all means raise with a decent hand from the button hoping that the blinds make a stand against the thief so you can trap them for more bets.


You'll find this odd and I make no intentions to play this way - but often if i find myself short stacked I quite like it - when there are only a few players remaining it can get the adrenaline pumping to know that you can either fold or raise only. I know exactly what you mean, and I am similar. This is partly why I found NLHE cash games so difficult as you're almost always deep stacked.


What I think I need to do more is mix up my play, and perhaps with a few more limps in the pots I'm playing I can make myself appear much less predictable and readable.Sounds like a positive move to me. Anything that makes you harder to play against is good.

Good luck with all this Johnny boy. Keep us informed with how it goes :thumbs