What maximizes variance more: limping or shoving preflop?
lol… well, if we were to compare limping every hand with going all in preflop every hand, I think the variance would clearly be higher with the latter (though i’ve seen post flop play wild enough to maybe make it close). And even if you pick any normal range, variance will be higher going all in versus limping (I’m assuming it’s the same range for both). But higher variance, while a large liability in a tournament, isn’t necessarily bad in a cash game if you are bank rolled for it. On the lowest levels here, I’d suggest just jamming with the following range: 77 and higher pairs, AK and AQ, and AJ suited. It can get fairly boring, but when you get a lot of calls from KJ, A7, and even completely random hands, all of those hands will be +EV. Note that if you have multiple all in moves in front of you, you’ll want to drop some of the weaker hands out of that range, or if you know anyone all-in in front of you is tighter.
1 Like
“Is there ever a circumstance when you would raise with 72 preflop?”
Yes occasionally, in an MTT at late level (10+) when the table has folded around and im on the button or in SB and so long as the stacks to my left are equal to or smaller than mine, even a min raise can induce folds alot of the time especially when its just outside the bubble. If its called, fine, they wont be putting you on 72 so it can give a slight advantage. If they re-raise fold. Like Sun Tzu said “When your weak act strong”
2 Likes
Actually, raising 7/2o at some frequency in the BB after the SB completes is not an EV- play under certain circumstances. Its such a bad hand that turning it into a bluff immediately can be sound. Now, if SB never folds to a raise once he completes, its problematic but workable (if you can force folds on the flop). If the SB is raising all his strong hands and completing with only garbage, then attacking his range with any 2 cards becomes instantly profitable. Grab those 2-3BB in the middle with a 3-4x raise to force the fold. Your bet only needs to work a little more than half the time to be EV+. If he calls, you are still in position and should have a chance to outplay him postflop. Just be cautious once you have forced them to tighten their range substantially.
True - that is why playing robust ranges is important. You wont have a large opening range from EP under most circumstances but it can’t just be QQ+, AK or you’re way too predictable. There’s a big difference between playing a 3% range and an 8-10% one, especially if its properly constructed. From late position, unless the players left to act are really strong (will 3-bet me a ton) or total stations, my deeper stacked MTT opening range expands to 50%+ on the BTN.
One of the biggest problems many recreational players have is that they have static ranges from all positions and stack depths. Its too loose in many spots and too tight in others. Mostly its just too easy to predict which boards they will hit and which they won’t.
2 Likes
Of all my range by position charts, the BTN is huge. I have a whole swath of marginal hands dedicated to limp behinds on weak tables simply because position is such an advantage. Even the lowly 52s will see play against soft players.
On the other side of the spectrum, I’m very careful about what I open raise from UTG/UTG+1. I don’t limit myself to the nuclear 5 (AK, QQ+) but I’m typically not playing any two paint cards either. I throw in some hands that can clean house multi-way on limp bingo tables and I’ll occasionally set mine with lower pocket pairs if I’ve been card dry for an orbit.
2 Likes
As explained in an earlier post, I’m very much an amateur who just likes to win or lose a few chips for fun. I am not (and have no wish to be) conversant with all the theories, game plans and, to me, incomprehensible poker terms that the usual posters here seem to be, but I respect that this is the way they like to play.
However, with regard to the sentiments expressed by some posters over what they refer to as “limpers”, it seems as though they don’t want to try to build a good hand but want other players to fold before the flop every time they are dealt two aces or two kings. In other words, the so-called superior players think that we mere mortals should obey their wishes and that every so often,when they announce that they have two good cards, bow to their greater wisdom, fold our lesser hands and allow them to win with minimum risk.
My apologies if I’ve missed some subtle nuance in the arguments, but
as an amateur who hasn’t been playing long this is the impression I get.
Sorry, but I don’t see that as playing poker: there are seven cards dealt in Hold’em and if I’m able to win a pot using the best of all of them then that’s what I’ll do.
Not really. If you pick up AA you want to get paid off, not just pick up the blinds.
The point is that by limping you really have no game plan. Lets say you limp QTs from early position, not a bad hand, but how are you going to win the pot unless the flop connects with your hand, which is less than a 50/50 chance. Now the Button raises to 3BB, SB and BB fold, and you are forced to call. The flop comes Axx rainbow, and you are pretty much forced to check to the button who bets and you fold.
Now if you raise to 3BB and the button calls, maybe with suited connectors or a pocket pair, and the same flop comes Axx rainbow, you can bet, representing that you have an Ace, and he will probably believe you. If BOTH of you have QT suited, he will win the first hand and you will win the second hand. See the difference?
Of course, in the second hand example, even though he does not have an ace, he may not believe that you have the Ace either so may reraise you. You may not believe that he has anything either and you raise all in and maybe he folds. There are various levels of play and bluff and couter bluff in poker.
If you just limp any kind of promising hand, you will sometimes win some big pots, but you will not be an overall winning player.
I have won 190 million chips on RP since the end of July 2019, and I am no expert, but I do know a bit about poker. As you say, you are an amateur who just plays for fun, which is fair enough if you just want to see if you can flop a straight, but the game is even more fun if you win and win more than other players!
3 Likes
MekonKing,
Good post, and the jist I get is by being the highest preflop better, that player has the ability to “rep” top hand on flop. ( any preflop raisers also have that ability ).
The flipside of that is , that the preflop better… when the flop comes 269… prolly didn’t hit the flop and are subject to being bluff’d off a hand like AQ.
Someone who limps/flatcalls preflop, is repp’n a non premium hand… so they can rep that 269 flop, but can’t rep a AJ4 flop…
This is all well and good, and str8fwd, untill a player consistantly is willing to limp/flatcall preflop with strong/premium hands and complete junk. Players that have a robust limp’n strategy can cause havok to anyone just playing std ABC poker.
Its the classic agressive vs passive strategy. When the ppl with the hands allow other players to stick around, bad things happen.
A while back I ran up against a player who consistently limp’d or flat’d. I had a harder time reading them due to lack of information. So I decided to develop this style of play, and work it into my overall stratagies. I have turned a tidy profit using this style on certain tables.
a MTT player must win enuff, to both pay for and stay ahead of… the blinds.
a Ring player just has to win enuff to pay for the blinds.
Both players must win enuff to play a few hands, & stay above thier buyin/start stack.
If the pots you win , you are gett’n paid off enuff… odds are its profitable. The best way to get paid by good players is to get them to mis-read you, or not believe you.
There are times when a player that is a Limper, who builds a decent stack, while blindside’n the pot a few times, effects the table enuff … that future preflop raises end up subdue’d. Which only helps the Limper’s strategy by making future flops cheaper to see.
Sassy
Why is it, though, that whenever I get dealt the heavy pocket pairs, the V who calls no matter what they’re holding always hits a better-than-pair hand right on the flop and under no circumstances will fold, though? It’s hard to get paid off on these hands when I can’t beat anyone else’s with them.
QQ, KK tonight, losers both times.
I can’t hit draws either.
You are not tipping the dealer enough. I played a 5K/10K ring game tonight and limped in three times with QQ and made sets on the flop three times, and won three large pots. Perhaps you should change your username to something like DealerLover.
1 Like
Hi MekongKing, thanks for your reply.
I didn’t understand all the pokerspeak, but I think you’re pointing out that mathematically speaking certain cards hold advantages over others and that 2 aces is worth a bigger bet than, say queen ten. I have absolutely no problem with that and if people want to play rigidly to this system, I wish them all the best: Live long and prosper!
What I’m uncomfortable with is that there seems to be a faction on the forums (which doesn’t include you, from the posts that I’ve read) that thinks that because this is the “correct” way of playing, everybody should be forced to play that way and that if someone chooses to “limp” and picks up the cards for three of a kind, or a flush, or whatever, then they have somehow cheated the “correct” player out of their winnings. Several posters have stated that they don’t want “lesser players” (okay, that’s just my translation) interfering with their right to win with the two cards they were dealt.
Poker is gambling: Hold’em is making the best five card hand out of the seven cards dealt and if an “expert” who folds anything lower than a pair of kings is then beaten by someone who has made a straight or flush on the river, then surely that’s part and parcel of the gamble? Do the experts really feel entitled to win every hand in which they’re dealt two good cards?
Again, I’m a complete amateur and I may well be missing something, but I remember something posted on another board just after I joined, albeit on a different topic:
“Nobody can tell YOU how to play YOUR chips”; and that’s what some people seem to be doing.
Vaya con dios
1 Like
@voluntares, if you want to win chips in the long run, you need to make moves that have a positive “Expected Value,” or EV. You may win a pot here or there while making negative-EV plays, but in the long run, those plays will lose you chips. When players here post about “correct” ways of playing, we’re talking about making plays that will maximize EV.
Preflop limping will almost always have a lower EV than raising or folding. Often, it is because you are “overcommitting your equity,” or putting more chips into the pot than your chance of winning the pot would dictate. In this case, folding would be a better move, because you wouldn’t be giving up the portion of the big blind that you don’t stand to make back in the long run. Other times, you’re not giving your opponents a chance to fold off their equity, making it cheaper/free for them to realize their chance at winning the pot.
You may enjoy playing weak hands, like 63 offsuit. Sometimes, you’ll make a big hand with that, like a straight. Far more often than not, though you’ll end up having to give up the blinds you’ve committed.
Those of us who want to improve and win at poker strive to understand what the most-positive EV plays are in any given situation. We recognize that there’s a lot of variance in poker - hands with low probability of winning will still occasionally win, and hands that often win will still occasionally lose. For some of us, these bad beats may be difficult to handle emotionally. In the long run, though, good players are able to set aside the pain of being on luck’s wrong side and losing big hands, and continue to make smart plays that maximize EV.
Two Aces ARE worth more than QT, but if you bet them higher, you’re giving away your hand to your opponents, who will respond by folding to your Aces-sized bets, denying you their value, and calling your QT-sized bets, when they can beat QT. You want your opponent to not be able to tell what you are holding, and therefore not know whether to bet or fold, and thereby make mistakes both ways, which will profit you over the long term.
2 Likes
Yes, but gambling is about betting a lot when the odds are in your favor, and minimizing your losings when the odds are against you.
If you play slot machines, you will always lose money in the long run, but occasionally you might hit a jackpot that wipes out all your losses. However if everyone plays in that manner not everyone will win the jackpot that wipes out the losses. This is why it is profitable for the house to provide slot machines for you to play with.
When we talk about AA being a better starting hand than QT, it is because it starts ahead. If you have QT and you are up against AA, you will lose if you do not make a minimum of 2 pairs, and it is in the nature of poker that you will make less than 2 pairs more than half the time. Preflop the odds of an overpair beating two lower cards is never less than 77%.
The “rules” about the size of preflop bets with which hands in which positions are aimed at giving players the highest probability of winning.
Imagine you were forced to play for one hour against a computer that was programed with the best rules that the best poker players in the world could devise, and which never made mistakes, and your starting stack was every penny of your net worth (whatever that is). Would you not want to at least try to master the strategy that would give you the best chance of not losing all your money before the hour was up, and of doubling your net worth and knocking out the computer before the hour was up, or would you just play the cards how you wanted to play them and hope for the best without any real plan?
You could, for example, decide that you would negate any skill advantage the computer had, by shoving all-in on every hand until either you had won all the computer’s chips, or vice versa. But probably with a little bit of thought, you would want to refine this strategy a bit to avoid shoving the hands that have the lowest probability of winning, particularly those hands like 2-3 with cards so low that they would have to come from behind versus any random hand. This would improve your chances of winning.
1 Like
Absolutely.
I suppose I could ask nicely, but i doubt that would get me very far. that means my only recourse is to bet enough chips that the odds against you drawing to a better hand makes you think twice about if it’s worth the risk.
I’m a beginner, as well. In the past year that i’ve been playing, you have no ideal how often I’ve heard “WAID…language” from my wife, from across the room, because an opponent got all seven of his cards, and his three deuces, (completed on the river) just sank my pair of kings. Or something along those lines.
I would never try to tell someone how to play holdem poker. I have way too little experience, or knowledge.
I can make sure that the next time i get my one in a dozen set, and someone is looking to fill a straight on the turn, or river…they can go for… it, but it’s gonna cost em.
1 Like
Oh, So You’re the one responsible for all the NOOB’s going All-In before the Flop, Thanks!
I agree with Mr. Coder’s breakdown of why preflop limping is bad. But these points are dependent on assumptions that don’t always hold, such as expecting your opponents to fold garbage hands or bet with strong ones.
Often people will limp in (and flat call) with anything from garbage hands to incredibly strong ones. I find that playing against such opponents can be quite confusing. How do you put these players on a hand range?
In particular, I struggle with how to play marginal hands (for example, QJs or a middle pair) when multiple players have limped in ahead of me. In ring games, even with a bet of 8-10 BBs (risking more than this is usually not worth it), it is not uncommon to get two or more callers.
I am generally wary of getting involved in these situations. Playing these hands weakly (2-3 BB raise) gives your opponents a wide opening to call and is perhaps not that much better than limping in. This implies that raising large is the solution, but this should never be done without having a strategy for how to act if you get called.
I heard somewhere that recreational players either play too many or too few hands. I am trying to extricate myself from the latter category. I’ve got to learn to play better in situations where multiple players have limped in ahead of me.
1 Like
In short, fewer bluffs and more value betting.
I tend to fight fire with fire instead of tightening up against loose passives. Pre-flop I open a wider range to a set amount (in ring games: using either 3x or “pot”) and have a specific limp behind range depending on my position (tighter early, extremely loose on button).
This lets me get into more hands, maybe get a few opponents to fold, and bloat the pot a bit for later streets. 3-betting is almost non-existent among limp bingo players – but if it occurs – you can always tighten your range a bit.
Post-flop, you should make any bets or raises for value based on your hand strength, strength of prior betting action and remaining opponents (essentially, play about 1 “level” above your opponents, don’t try to overthink it). Once you’ve made specific reads on players, you can begin to bluff the overfolders if the calling stations are out of the hand.
So, you mostly want to allow them to make -EV calls by overcharging them for things like backdoor straight/flush draws and floating second/third pair if you connect with the board or are in a position to connect. Avoid c-betting if you miss (you’ll probably get donk bet into by someone OOP anyway) and muck your hand if the betting action suggests you’re beat or behind.
Also, watch for what I call “sappers”. These are folks who typically limp in or min raise the BB, then make min bets on every street until the river. Upon reaching the river, they will either check or make a giant overbet depending on what they perceive their relative hand strength to be. This can be exploited if you make a strong hand and raise the overbet or attempt to bluff if they check the river – just get a good read on the player first before you risk a lot (so you don’t get a surprise check-raise).
As always, variance applies, so go for value, don’t risk more than you can afford to lose, and expect to get beat on the river relatively often. This pretty much summarizes my strategy for slogging through most ring games below 1K/2K.
2 Likes
Hello Fozman,
This is all good general advise. Thanks for that input.
I suppose I could have been more precise in my question. I was specifically wondering how to play a decent drawing hand (like QJ suited or J10 suited) or a pair (55 to 88) preflop from middle position when 2-3 players have already limped in. On “high stakes” ring games (10k/20k blinds and 20k/40k blinds) there is still a lot of limping going on, including players who can afford to lose lot and don’t hesitate to call a 3X raise.
I don’t think think there is a single answer to this question – the solution, as you elude to, depends largely on making specific reads on the players who have already acted and also on those who have yet to act, but that is difficult to do when facing opponents who consistently limp in with a wide range.
Yeah, I don’t play at that level yet – and I know things change a bit @ 2K/4K on up – but I think my tl;dr advice stands for any limp bingo stakes… bluff less, bet for value more.
Given your specific situation – drawing hands in multiway pots from MP – I’d probably pull the limp bingo lever and spin the pRNG slot machine. Muck it at the flop if it doesn’t make sense to continue. The pot will get plenty big with that many players, with relatively less coming from your stack.