Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

Some medium stakes game. Say, 40-80.

Two wretched players limp in middle position. They are both very very very loose and passive/straightforward postflop, although they "take one off" a little too often.

Both blinds are very tight (the two tightest players at the table), with the SB being a bit tricky/TAG, whereas the BB is maybe a bit weaktight, but a winning player.

You are on the button with the 76 of spades. Your image is a bit Laggy, but tough. The blinds probably pay attention to your image, but the limpers certainly are clueless. First, I'd like to commend you on your seat selection. Secondly, what do you do with your hand? Do you raise to isolate/eliminate the good players? Do you limp because you like multiway action with your hand? Do you fold because you hate money?

Thanks,

Josh

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

limp.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

Pretty easy limp on the button. Change that to one or two off and it's different depending on who's to act behind you.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

What about T9s? I think anything above this is an easy raise, and anything below is an easy limp, amirite?

Edit: Hmm, what VP$IP would you say the fishies are? Giving them top 80% not discounting premiums I think we have a slight edge with 87s 5 way...

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

I didn't see the option for "raise because they are spades" so I pretended your reason to raise was my reason to raise. You play poker?

-DeathDonkey

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

I limp here and raise with T9s+ and may consider raising if the whole table had already come along as opposed to just 2.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

The concept behind having a poll for this question is the problem, and that's because everyone's answer should be "sometimes I raise, sometimes I limp." 76s on the button after 2 bad limpers is the perfect situation to have a "mix it up" policy.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
The concept behind having a poll for this question is the problem, and that's because everyone's answer should be "sometimes I raise, sometimes I limp." 76s on the button after 2 bad limpers is the perfect situation to have a "mix it up" policy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
I limp here and raise with T9s+

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm very slightly in the "raise" camp, but can be persuaded to change. for the record, I limped in this hand, then thought it was a small mistake.

See, I think that a lot of reasons to raise w/ 76s don't apply to T9s. For example, if the SB has something like Q7, you'd obviously want them to fold preflop. However, if the SB has a bigger Ten, they likely won't fold preflop to my raise.

So, getting out "dominating" hands is a viable reason for raising 76s that doesn't apply much to T9s. Also, the "bigger spades" factor....You'd want the BB to fold 82s if you have 76s, in case a flush comes. However, if you have T9s, you'd want 82s in there if spades comes.

My point is NOT that "you should raise 76s". My point is simply that I think if you want to raise T9s here, you should also raise 76s.

I guess I just have such a strong desire to play only against bad players that I like the raise. Maybe my preference for this is keeping me from doing the right thing, though.

Josh

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

I don't like raising with either of these hands on the button like this because I don't want to get isolated by the SB. This assumes that even these bad players would fold to two more bets. Even if they would play for 3 I would prefer to get in cheap as possible to see the flop.

Also, I find when I raise with 76s or the like and the flop really hits me (two pair or better) it looks like I have a big overpair and the surprise factor diminishes in value.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I limp here and raise with T9s+

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm very slightly in the "raise" camp, but can be persuaded to change. for the record, I limped in this hand, then thought it was a small mistake.

See, I think that a lot of reasons to raise w/ 76s don't apply to T9s. For example, if the SB has something like Q7, you'd obviously want them to fold preflop. However, if the SB has a bigger Ten, they likely won't fold preflop to my raise.

So, getting out "dominating" hands is a viable reason for raising 76s that doesn't apply much to T9s. Also, the "bigger spades" factor....You'd want the BB to fold 82s if you have 76s, in case a flush comes. However, if you have T9s, you'd want 82s in there if spades comes.

My point is NOT that "you should raise 76s". My point is simply that I think if you want to raise T9s here, you should also raise 76s.

I guess I just have such a strong desire to play only against bad players that I like the raise. Maybe my preference for this is keeping me from doing the right thing, though.

Josh

[/ QUOTE ]

Villain in question is usually folding all J9-K9(maybe A9) and QT/KT, all nonsuited of course. The tighter SB is, the more likely I am to raise. We are also more likely to be good if we have TP on the flop than if we have 76s. We aren't just raising for freecards. There are legitmate hands we want TAGs to fold.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

"I guess I just have such a strong desire to play only against bad players"

This is not a mistake. If you're going to play, and I agree your hand is strong enough to do so, why share the weak player with two other strong players? As you well know, playing hands against worse players than you is the key to winning at poker. The second best player in the world will lose to me.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I limp here and raise with T9s+

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm very slightly in the "raise" camp, but can be persuaded to change. for the record, I limped in this hand, then thought it was a small mistake.

See, I think that a lot of reasons to raise w/ 76s don't apply to T9s. For example, if the SB has something like Q7, you'd obviously want them to fold preflop. However, if the SB has a bigger Ten, they likely won't fold preflop to my raise.

So, getting out "dominating" hands is a viable reason for raising 76s that doesn't apply much to T9s. Also, the "bigger spades" factor....You'd want the BB to fold 82s if you have 76s, in case a flush comes. However, if you have T9s, you'd want 82s in there if spades comes.

My point is NOT that "you should raise 76s". My point is simply that I think if you want to raise T9s here, you should also raise 76s.

I guess I just have such a strong desire to play only against bad players that I like the raise. Maybe my preference for this is keeping me from doing the right thing, though.

Josh

[/ QUOTE ]

Villain in question is usually folding all J9-K9(maybe A9) and QT/KT,

[/ QUOTE ]

When a LAG raises from the button, it's almost definitely a mistake to fold these hands from the blind.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
limp.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this thread should be moved to Micro Stakes. This is a limp 100% of the time. There is no other reasonable option here. I cant believe this thread exists.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
The concept behind having a poll for this question is the problem, and that's because everyone's answer should be "sometimes I raise, sometimes I limp." 76s on the button after 2 bad limpers is the perfect situation to have a "mix it up" policy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm...No. This is a limp 100% of the time situation. Mixing it up here is retarded IMO.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The concept behind having a poll for this question is the problem, and that's because everyone's answer should be "sometimes I raise, sometimes I limp." 76s on the button after 2 bad limpers is the perfect situation to have a "mix it up" policy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm...No. This is a limp 100% of the time situation. Mixing it up here is retarded IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

reread josh's post and tell me this is the case again please? I understand where you'd want to limp more than raise but everything he brought up has serious merit.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I limp here and raise with T9s+

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm very slightly in the "raise" camp, but can be persuaded to change. for the record, I limped in this hand, then thought it was a small mistake.

See, I think that a lot of reasons to raise w/ 76s don't apply to T9s. For example, if the SB has something like Q7, you'd obviously want them to fold preflop. However, if the SB has a bigger Ten, they likely won't fold preflop to my raise.

So, getting out "dominating" hands is a viable reason for raising 76s that doesn't apply much to T9s. Also, the "bigger spades" factor....You'd want the BB to fold 82s if you have 76s, in case a flush comes. However, if you have T9s, you'd want 82s in there if spades comes.

My point is NOT that "you should raise 76s". My point is simply that I think if you want to raise T9s here, you should also raise 76s.

I guess I just have such a strong desire to play only against bad players that I like the raise. Maybe my preference for this is keeping me from doing the right thing, though.


[/ QUOTE ]

You have made some decent arguments for raising. Now maybe as an exercise you could present your reasons for limping.

Oh, and, you play poker?

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]


You have made some decent arguments for raising. Now maybe as an exercise you could present your reasons for limping.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you heard ILOVEPOKER929 properly. There ARE no decent arguments for raising. Word has been passed down from high: it's 100% a limp!

I should probably delete this thread lest anyone be tricked into raising a suited connector on the button.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The concept behind having a poll for this question is the problem, and that's because everyone's answer should be "sometimes I raise, sometimes I limp." 76s on the button after 2 bad limpers is the perfect situation to have a "mix it up" policy.

[/ QUOTE ]



, and as a deception play that doesnt cost any
Umm...No. This is a limp 100% of the time situation. Mixing it up here is retarded IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

reread josh's post and tell me this is the case again please? I understand where you'd want to limp more than raise but everything he brought up has serious merit.

[/ QUOTE ]


Generally speaking, with a hand like 76s you want to see a flop against as many opponents as possible, as cheaply as possible. You dont mind having other "good" players in the pot cuz youre trying to make a big hand and good/tight players can make 2nd best hands too.

Raising 76s after 5 limpers is a viable line for pure value/possible free turn card/deception play that doesnt cost anything.

Iso-Raising 76s after one limper is also a viable line against many opponents with tight players in the blinds.

Once two limpers enter the pot who are already gonna peel the flop loosely and play the turn loosely, the last thing we want to do is charge ourselves to see a flop with this hand and build a larger pot to make the limpers "loose play" postflop more likely correct.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
The concept behind having a poll for this question is the problem, and that's because everyone's answer should be "sometimes I raise, sometimes I limp." 76s on the button after 2 bad limpers is the perfect situation to have a "mix it up" policy.

[/ QUOTE ]

can you explain why you would want to mix it up? is it just because you don't know whether the ev of raising is higher or lower than limping? are you randomizing here? or are there other factors that affect your decision?

i would thinking that given the information in the OP, the correct thing to do would be either to limp 100% or raise 100%. i don't know which is correct. i would think limping is, but i would sometimes raise because i'm on tilt and i want to win a big pot. but not because i think the EV is higher. i don't see the value in randomizing.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
i don't see the value in randomizing.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are several good reasons to randomize here, Pete. First of all, I think we know the EV difference is very small [I'd say a) it's clear limping is +EV and b) it's clear that the + is not by much at all], and in cases where the difference isn't very large, you want opportunities to consider things like your image, your opponents, the table texture, metagame, etc.

Sometimes you want to be seen showing down 76s after raising. Sometimes you want a more passive/straightforward image so you decline to raise this and other marginal hands. Sometimes you want to build a big pot because the table is tightening up. Sometimes you've been card dead for an hour and the limpers think you have to have AA/KK to be raising here.

Having hard and fast preflop rules, especially for very marginal on-the-border situations/hands where the EV either way isn't too big, is not a recipe for creativity. It'll just make you more predictable in the eyes of your opponents.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

Honestly I haven't read most the replies but with regard to the "randomizing" thing I don't really see the purpose because I am guessing most of us would autoraise T9s here and to a lot of people 76s=T9s in this spot in their eyes so if they see us raise one then they assume we raise the other.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]

Sometimes you want to be seen showing down 76s after raising. Sometimes you want a more passive/straightforward image so you decline to raise this and other marginal hands. Sometimes you want to build a big pot because the table is tightening up. Sometimes you've been card dead for an hour and the limpers think you have to have AA/KK to be raising here.

[/ QUOTE ]

so you're not randomizing at all. that's all i was asking.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

I think I'd raise here because I have the button and raising seems like an extremely easy way to get to the river rather cheaply with a weak draw, or to find good spots to win unimproved, or to win a decent sized pot if I hit something.

Basically I'm on the button and I want to have the initiative for this hand. Make the limpers a little looser postflop than described in the OP and I change my answer to a limp.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

In this situation, as I interpret the description, I probably raise. There are times I call. There are very rare times I fold (usually a look-left tell).

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
In this situation, as I interpret the description, I probably raise. There are times I call. There are very rare times I fold (usually a look-left tell).

[/ QUOTE ]

I still think raising here is terrible no matter how many respectable posters disagree with me. BTW Joe, I recently saw your videos. Keep up the good work. Very nice site.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

I would almost never raise ! suited connectors play best in multiway pots against loose passive opponents right ? so isnt this the perfect oppertunity to do just that ? we wanna see a flop cheaply, hit big and get paid well simple as that realy.

Even if we have a very small edge preflop (which is very questionable) we're gonna have a much bigger one if we hit the flop, the more opponents we have the better our implied odds so wanting to knock players out seems absurd to me.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
wanting to knock players out seems absurd to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

We only want to knock out the blinds who play well. We're not expecting the limpers to fold -- instead, we want to play a pot against them, in position, that has a lot of their chips in it for us to win. And if the blinds do call, fine -- we're still in position in a large multiway pot with a well-disguised hand.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

wanting to knock players out seems absurd to me.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



We only want to knock out the blinds who play well. We're not expecting the limpers to fold -- instead, we want to play a pot against them, in position, that has a lot of their chips in it for us to win. And if the blinds do call, fine -- we're still in position in a large multiway pot with a well-disguised hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I can see your point but IMO I think a preflop raise is gonna hurt our implied odds because we have less opponents and we're tagged as the preflop raiser its likley to dampen the action post-flop, if we just call i think we will find it alot easier to build a large pot on the flop with multiple opponents when he hit a big hand/draw. the fact that the 2 blinds are decent players doesnt bother me much because my hand is gonna be pretty well defined after the flop im likely to either wanna play it hard or not atall fair enough if we eliminate the blinds we win more pots when we hit a scabby pair etc but i dont think that compensates enough for the loss of multiway action.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In this situation, as I interpret the description, I probably raise. There are times I call. There are very rare times I fold (usually a look-left tell).

[/ QUOTE ]

I still think raising here is terrible no matter how many respectable posters disagree with me. BTW Joe, I recently saw your videos. Keep up the good work. Very nice site.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are wrong. If Joe advocates raising, even if only slightly, it's a pretty easy raise.

Position with dead money and initiative against retards is a pretty sweet spot to be.

Certainly better than position against lots of players, including two good ones with no dead money and no initiative with a hand that easy for them to read because it's exactly what we are "supposed to" have.

I really don't know that one needs to go any further than that in order to know what the right play is.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In this situation, as I interpret the description, I probably raise. There are times I call. There are very rare times I fold (usually a look-left tell).

[/ QUOTE ]

I still think raising here is terrible no matter how many respectable posters disagree with me. BTW Joe, I recently saw your videos. Keep up the good work. Very nice site.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are wrong. If Joe advocates raising, even if only slightly, it's a pretty easy raise.

Position with dead money and initiative against retards is a pretty sweet spot to be.

Certainly better than position against lots of players, including two good ones with no dead money and no initiative with a hand that easy for them to read because it's exactly what we are "supposed to" have.

I really don't know that one needs to go any further than that in order to know what the right play is.

[/ QUOTE ]

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I dont see it, and I never will.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
wanting to knock players out seems absurd to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

We only want to knock out the blinds who play well. We're not expecting the limpers to fold -- instead, we want to play a pot against them, in position, that has a lot of their chips in it for us to win. And if the blinds do call, fine -- we're still in position in a large multiway pot with a well-disguised hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that the blinds play well is meaningless. We have 76s. Were not drawing to top pair, we're drawing to a big hand. Each player who enters this pot adds more value to our hand, even those who play well becuz thats more people who have the golden opportunity of making a 2nd best hand against our monster.

If we had a hand like ATo,A8s,K9s,QTs, then your logic makes sense and these hands should be raised accordingly becuz now we have a hand that will make top pair a reasonable amount of time and having good players out of our pot is a great thing since now we can make a possible 2nd place hand. These hands should also be raised for pure value but getting the good players out is certainly a real benefit with these holdings.

And why the [censored] do we care about disguising our hand? We have two bad players at the table, we dont need to purchase deception here. Just make the boring optimal play and we'll get the money in the long run.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]

Yeah I can see your point but IMO I think a preflop raise is gonna hurt our implied odds

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely. Raising here is basically shooting ourselves in the foot. We have a very profitable limp here against that lineup. By raising instead of calling and charging ourselves more money to see a flop we are ensuring that we dont make money in this situation. Our return in the raise preflop scenario is the same as calling but our initial cost has doubled making it difficult if not impossible to turn a profit with this highly speculative hand. Turning a profitable situation into an unprofitable one is not my idea of good poker.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

I don't want to put words in peoples mouths, but it surely looks to me like this question is divided amongst lines that have nothing to do with this hand. Those who think about poker, playing the players, and not just playing the cards, advocate raising. Those who think that only the cards matter advocate limping.

In this hand, a very solid 2+2er was in the SB and I was on the button. I limped, and afterwards I asked him about it. He thought limping was correct, and I still thinking raising is...but we both say it's close.

ILOVEPOKER929...I really hoping that you are using a lousy form of hyperbole when you say that
[ QUOTE ]

Turning a profitable situation into an unprofitable one is not my idea of good poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you think that putting in 2 (or 3 or 4 or 182) bets preflop with an average hand (this hand is probably about the avg. limping hand that the two limpers would have), on the button, against two HORRIBLE postflop players is unprofitable, you are way wrong. In fact, if it's not profitable for your postflop abilities, you are definitely better off just mucking it preflop. Seriously and sincerely.

The way that I figure it is....if it's simply showdown poker (i.e. no postflop play), and it's me and the two limpers, I'll win about 30-35% of the time. If it's me, the two limpers, and the two blinds, I'll win about 20-25% of the time. These are simple, rough guesstimates.

Given that the limpers are both uberpassive, I won't be bluffed, and I'll have every opportunity to make my hand. Moreover, since I have position, I have a ton of postflop stealing/bluffing equity. Yes, they are very loose, but they are 40-80 players. They won't call with J9 on an A83 flop (though they will take one off with 44).

Meh, it's becoming more and more clear to me. If you have any postflop ability at all, this is a raise. If you just sit and wait until you make your hand, even on the button, you should probably muck, or maybe limp.

Josh

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

Josh,

I just like dead money and position on retards in raised pots.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
Josh,

I just like dead money and position on retards in raised pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too. Note that this means our cards don't matter!

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In this situation, as I interpret the description, I probably raise. There are times I call. There are very rare times I fold (usually a look-left tell).

[/ QUOTE ]

I still think raising here is terrible no matter how many respectable posters disagree with me.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not terrible. It's not bad. It's higher variance, true that. But it is certainly something you need to consider. Look at the spot we are in, it couldn't be more perfect. As you can see here, it's not the first time this has been brought up.

[ QUOTE ]
BTW Joe, I recently saw your videos. Keep up the good work. Very nice site.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you very much, we work hard to put out a quality product. I appreciate the feedback!

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


I still think raising here is terrible no matter how many respectable posters disagree with me...

[/ QUOTE ]

Position with dead money and initiative against retards is a pretty sweet spot to be.

Certainly better than position against lots of players, including two good ones with no dead money and no initiative with a hand that easy for them to read because it's exactly what we are "supposed to" have.

I really don't know that one needs to go any further than that in order to know what the right play is.

[/ QUOTE ]

In that case, the right play would be to usually call in that situation but occasionally raise to keep the opponents guessing...I don't think you have to do it too often.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In this situation, as I interpret the description, I probably raise. There are times I call. There are very rare times I fold (usually a look-left tell).

[/ QUOTE ]

I still think raising here is terrible no matter how many respectable posters disagree with me.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not terrible. It's not bad. It's higher variance, true that. But it is certainly something you need to consider. Look at the spot we are in, it couldn't be more perfect. As you can see here, it's not the first time this has been brought up.

[ QUOTE ]
BTW Joe, I recently saw your videos. Keep up the good work. Very nice site.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you very much, we work hard to put out a quality product. I appreciate the feedback!

[/ QUOTE ]

The link you gave Joe is a really a totally different situation. I think raising 76s in that situation is just fine.

Re: Quasi-Awesome Preflop Question
 

I hate a raise here given your image. Hate it.