Re: Profession NL HE example
 

As an aside,

I know you all think limping is evil, but try reading the book with an open mind. Sure you all are pretty good, make good money, but being open to new ideas can help you in the long run,

Re: Profession NL HE example
 

[ QUOTE ]
As an aside,

I know you all think limping is evil, but try reading the book with an open mind. Sure you all are pretty good, make good money, but being open to new ideas can help you in the long run,

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't mean to derail this thread, but I'll say something short about limping. For example. limping or raising 33 UTG has very little difference in EV IMO, but the reason we raise is because there are some hands that are ++EV to raise (big pairs, AK) so that its better to sacrifice maybe a bit of EV by raising close decisions so that we can play more so in a non-exploitable fashion.

Re: Profession NL HE example
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As an aside,

I know you all think limping is evil, but try reading the book with an open mind. Sure you all are pretty good, make good money, but being open to new ideas can help you in the long run,

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't mean to derail this thread, but I'll say something short about limping. For example. limping or raising 33 UTG has very little difference in EV IMO, but the reason we raise is because there are some hands that are ++EV to raise (big pairs, AK) so that its better to sacrifice maybe a bit of EV by raising close decisions so that we can play more so in a non-exploitable fashion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is basically the same reason why people adhere to 4+x like super glue. By doing the same thing every time no matter what the hand or position or table status, nobody can estimate your range based on your PFR size.

Of course it would be nice if we had the freedom to limp or raise the perfect amount for every situation to accomplish whatever our goals are. That would be the most +EV scenario. It may even be true that 4+x isn't ideal for the majority of situations, and if that is so then we may be giving up too much for the same of not being exploitable. Seems to me that the logical solution to this is to randomize your play somewhat, rather than giving up your freedom to select the perfect line.

Then again, if you limp you must have small genitals. Limping is weak.

Re: Profession NL HE example
 

Hey I know that guy! Grunch, glad to see you are posting again.

Re: Profession NL HE example
 

My impression is that given current conditions in online 6max SSNL (at least at pokerstars and full tilt) never limping preflop is probably optimal. People assume this means that never limping preflop under any circumstances is optimal. But there are plenty of full-ring games, especially full-ring live games, where limping a lot is definitely hugely profitable. Playing live 1/2 or 2/5 NL at Foxwoods or the Borgata, for example, it's definitely +EV at many tables to play around 70/15. The 15 is your "normal" 15, but you just limp almost everything else. I know because I've done it. So though I don't have the book yet, seems to make sense to approach it with an open mind.

Re: Profession NL HE example
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hey I know that guy! Grunch, glad to see you are posting again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thx, I've been posting in other forums actually.

Re: Profession NL HE example
 

sorry for the novice question, but whats 4+x?

Re: Profession NL HE example
 

[ QUOTE ]
sorry for the novice question, but whats 4+x?

[/ QUOTE ]

4 big blinds + 1 for each limper

Re: Profession NL HE example
 

[ QUOTE ]
sorry for the novice question, but whats 4+x?

[/ QUOTE ]

Refers to the size of a PFR. 4 BB + 1 more BB for every limper. So if you are first to enter, pfr 4 BB. If there are 2 limpers then you, PFR 6 BB.