Question from a NL player....

[kurto]

I normally play NL and haven't played limit for a while. I was reading the digest and read through the quiz. I completely don't understand one of the answers that everyone seemed to almost universally agree upon...

[ QUOTE ]
(Full table) 10. You are in the big blind with ATs. UTG, UTG+2, MP2, MP3, and the button all limp. The SB completes.
a. Check
b. Raise


[/ QUOTE ]

Almost everyone universally picked 'b raise'.

I know the games (NL vs Limit) are different... but I would never raise A10 (suited or not) into 5-6 players from the BB. Your raise isn't likely to get anyone out. And unless you flop a flush (or pair and flush draw)/straight/2 pair... you can't feel good about your hand on most flops.

How is this a raise?

Thanks in advance.

[mike_sharpe]

Because of all the limpers, no one has indicated they have much of a hand.

You're not looking to knock people out, but rather build a pot for when you hit a flop.

This is something I have problems executing in a game.

[djhoneybear]

This is an example of an pot equity problem. When no one raises before the flop and you look down to see A10 suited with six limpers you can expect to win the pot more than your fair share (1/7th of the time). By raising you are increasing your overall expectation. UTG however this would be a bad raise.

[Elevens]

[ QUOTE ]
UTG however this would be a bad raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not necessarily.

[JinX11]

[ QUOTE ]
This is an example of an pot equity problem. When no one raises before the flop and you look down to see A10 suited with six limpers you can expect to win the pot more than your fair share (1/7th of the time). By raising you are increasing your overall expectation.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you so far...

[ QUOTE ]
UTG however this would be a bad raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

not so sure about this, though....

[shant]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
UTG however this would be a bad raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

[lerxst337]

If you are new to this forum, you will quickly learn that Small Stakes Hold 'Em is largely considered akin to the Bible here. This very holding is discussed as the quintessential example of a "marginal" hand that has a superior equity edge against many opponents. You don't necessarily expect to have the best hand, but in the above examply, you expect to win more than 1 in 6 times, so you are making money on the extra bets going into the pot. Also, building the pot (with an equity edge) will aid in your pot odds to draw a little thinner than if you would just have called in the case where you don't hit the flop perfectly. In your previous experience, the likelyhood that someone can limp-reraise a large amount in NL would indicate a call is necessary, a risk you don't incur in the limit game.

If you intend on playing limit, particularly live low limit, Small Stakes Hold 'Em is a must read.

[lerxst337]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
UTG however this would be a bad raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

For the sake of answering a question from someone not familiar with the limit game, perhaps this blanket statement may not be perfectly suitable. There are many games were this raise may be OK, either very weak-tight, or very fishy. But I am sure we can all think of games where we would not want to routinely make this play. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[shant]

Yeah, but I raise alot more than I call more than I fold it.

[lerxst337]

Alright, sorry for the hijack, but I'm trying to post more, and this topic intrigues me. It would be fair to say that I tend to play very tightly from EP. Most of the time this hand goes to the muck for me (fold alot more than raise alot more than call--the way you put it /images/graemlins/wink.gif) Can you discuss perhaps the limit/type of table/etc. that you are comfortable playing this from up front? Do others try to isolate you? I often feel paranoid with this holding up front, and pretty much go into call down mode against most opponents when faced with aggression after the flop when I hit my ace, and my selective memory recalls paying off AQo and AK too much.

Thanks in advance.

[Elevens]

You need to read SSHE.

[lerxst337]

[ QUOTE ]
You need to read SSHE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whether this is a response to my UTG question or the OP, I can't imagine this illuminates the discussion at all.

For the record, unless the game is VERY loose (6-8 to the flop), SSHE advocates PLAYING ATs from EP, but not raising--likely assuming the game while not overly loose, is not aggressive. (pg 80) Shant and many others here seem to deviate from this somewhat. Most of the games discussed here (at least of the online variety) don't seem to meet the loose requirements where SSHE would recommend a raise.

[smoove]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You need to read SSHE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whether this is a response to my UTG question or the OP, I can't imagine this illuminates the discussion at all.

For the record, unless the game is VERY loose (6-8 to the flop), SSHE advocates PLAYING ATs from EP, but not raising--likely assuming the game while not overly loose, is not aggressive. (pg 80) Shant and many others here seem to deviate from this somewhat. Most of the games discussed here (at least of the online variety) don't seem to meet the loose requirements where SSHE would recommend a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's a reply (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Board=smallholdem&Number=42 98385&Searchpage=2&Main=4296410&Words=Harv72b&topi c=&Search=true#Post4298385) by Harv72b from just last week.

[Elevens]

[ QUOTE ]
and pretty much go into call down mode against most opponents when faced with aggression after the flop when I hit my ace, and my selective memory recalls paying off AQo and AK too much.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
You need to read SSHE.

[/ QUOTE ]

EDIT: Let me clarify. If you find yourself going into calldown mode often with this hand, then something is wrong with the way you're playing ATs. Whether you're counting outs incorrectly, not raising in the right spots, or not folding when you need to, then there is a problem here. Without knowing specifics of your problem, then I suggest for you to reread SSHE.

[brettbrettr]

[ QUOTE ]
I normally play NL and haven't played limit for a while. I was reading the digest and read through the quiz. I completely don't understand one of the answers that everyone seemed to almost universally agree upon...

[ QUOTE ]
(Full table) 10. You are in the big blind with ATs. UTG, UTG+2, MP2, MP3, and the button all limp. The SB completes.
a. Check
b. Raise


[/ QUOTE ]

Almost everyone universally picked 'b raise'.

I know the games (NL vs Limit) are different... but I would never raise A10 (suited or not) into 5-6 players from the BB. Your raise isn't likely to get anyone out. And unless you flop a flush (or pair and flush draw)/straight/2 pair... you can't feel good about your hand on most flops.

How is this a raise?

Thanks in advance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey bud,

I don't think anyone has answered your question at all. Generally, you have an equity edge because you have big suited cards in a large multiway pot. In loose low limit games, these are very good hands.

In NL, you're going to have to fold a lot of flops because people won't make small enough bets for you to profitably peel. But in limit, there are a lot of flops that, while not helping your hand, won't hurt it enough that peeling isn't warranted.

The pre-flop raise is allowing you to get in 6 more small bets with what is likely the best hand. These are bets that you just won't be able to get in on the flop should you hit.

You also don't have to feel beholden to leading any flop. Its clearly a value play: when the flop is good, you gain a lot from the pre-flop raise (an extra 3 bbs is a ton in limit); when it isn't, you lose very, very little.

There's probably clearer and better ways of explaining this, but this, I think, is the gist of it.

brett

For all you SS posters: When someone who knows how to play poker asks a question, you can answer without telling them to read a book. People who understand poker can understand new poker concepts pretty easily. I'm sure if OP is serious about playing limit, he'd read the book anyway. Seems like he just has a question...

[brettbrettr]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, building the pot (with an equity edge) will aid in your pot odds to draw a little thinner than if you would just have called in the case where you don't hit the flop perfectly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Riasing to give yourself odds to draw is never a good reason to raise. The equity edge is. Yes, I know that sometimes your raise *does* give you odds. But artificially inflating pots so you odn't have to fold is dumb.

[Elevens]

[ QUOTE ]
For all you SS posters: When someone who knows how to play poker asks a question, you can answer without telling them to read a book. People who understand poker can understand new poker concepts pretty easily. I'm sure if OP is serious about playing limit, he'd read the book anyway. Seems like he just has a question...


[/ QUOTE ]

Brett,

You're absolutely right. In this case, my response was not to the OP. That doesn't justify it, but I did clarify further upon being asked.

[lerxst337]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You need to read SSHE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whether this is a response to my UTG question or the OP, I can't imagine this illuminates the discussion at all.

For the record, unless the game is VERY loose (6-8 to the flop), SSHE advocates PLAYING ATs from EP, but not raising--likely assuming the game while not overly loose, is not aggressive. (pg 80) Shant and many others here seem to deviate from this somewhat. Most of the games discussed here (at least of the online variety) don't seem to meet the loose requirements where SSHE would recommend a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's a reply (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Board=smallholdem&Number=42 98385&Searchpage=2&Main=4296410&Words=Harv72b&topi c=&Search=true#Post4298385) by Harv72b from just last week.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you! I read this and thought it made sense, and more directly equates with the kind of situations I find myself in, rather than the multi-handed situations in SSHE. Playing in Harv's situation would likely be heads-up, and then depend on your read of the opponent as to whether to show down the hand. I read his post as ATs is playable in those situations as a semi-steal (since no one is calling without a premium hand) and then marginally playable afterwards. All that makes sense to me (and what I alluded to in my original response indicating that I would raise at a very tight table). Shant indicated that he FREQUENTLY raised with this hand, unlike Harv (unless most of the tables he plays at resemble the super tight ones he was discussing). Are the table conditions like those in SSHE, or more average, say 3 or 4 to the flop? That's what I was more curious about.

[kurto]

Thanks for your replies. I actually read SSHE years ago but haven't played limit for a while so its not fresh in my mind.

Not having played limit for awhile, I forget the larger variety of hands you can play.

Due to the large bet nature of NL.... A10, suited or not, is relatively junk, particularly from EP. I'm always asking myself, "how am I going to play this hand post-flop from this position". and "If I raise and get reraised... what am I going to do?" obviously these questions are answered differently in the two games.

Its interesting to look back at limit now. It seems clear to me that to go from NL to limit... I would probably be too tight. While those switching from Limit to NL would probably be too loose. And it appears pocket pairs play out a little differently.

Anyhow... thanks for the responses.

[shant]

My regular game is 10/20, where lots of pots are heads up or 3-handed, so I raise lots of hands. I raise as low as A8s depending on how the table is running. I'm admittedly awful at explaining the reasoning for these plays, but Harv touched on some good points. Also, in these games I'm often being coldcalled by bad players who are not dominating my hand.