Help me to understand PNLH (p199)

[Matt Flynn]

[ QUOTE ]
Why doesn't hero bet the turn for 5-7 BB? If we're playing at a loose/passive table, that villain very rarely leads river. This means it's heros job to get chips in the middle.

[/ QUOTE ]


yes i agree with you. does my post above yours answer that question sufficiently? if not let me know.


[ QUOTE ]
Also, I think you need to point out to beginners that if you limp KQ UTG, you must fold it to a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

not necessarily! if your opponent will positionally raise with weaker hands you might call (or even reraise, but limp-reraising is such a huge can of worms on these forums and KQ is usually the wrong hand to do it with).

[EMc]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
matt, sunny,

Im first off happy that you all feel free to post here and dont ahve to worry about being flamed for disagreeing with conventional 2p2 wisdom. I havent gotten to SPR yet, but from what posts ive read I have a vague understanding of what it is.

That said, according to that idea, this seems like its ok. HOwever, in my (currently drunken) heart, I feel as if this is wrong. I will try to elaborate tomorrow when im a little more coherent, but to me the idea of limping that hand UTG is gonna really place us in an unprofitable situation post flop.

[/ QUOTE ]


sure EMc, happy to discuss all you want.

let's start with this premise: before you act preflop you should think about how you're going to make the most money with the hand and play it accordingly.

if that premise is accepted, then we're discussing under what circumstances you make more money limping with KQ than raising or folding.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with the first part of the premise. The first circumstance that comes to my mind that limping will be moreprofitable is if you have a read your oppenent will call down with TPNK and will limp in with hnads like K6, Q9, etc, but fold to a raise. There is an important caveat there, that is we have a read

[Xanta]

Limping hands that have limited potential to make monsters but strong potential to make good hands OOP is an interesting thought, but you should be real careful in making sure that your opponents behind you are unlikely to raise preflop. Playing top pair - good kicker hands OOP is really difficult, mostly because you can't effectively control the pot size (the whole reason we limped in the first place!)

Interesting thought though.

[mvdgaag]

Limping also allows you to get away cheap if it's raised (on a tight/passive table), but be quite sure you are good when it's limped around (who of your opponents doesn't raise AK/AQ? after a limper).

The only problem is that exactly these tight/passive tables where you can often see a flop for one BB are also the tables where a raise or a raise and a cbet would win you a lot of small pots.

[Grunch]

I have open-limped with a TP type hand a few times since reading PNL. It worked pretty well, I got what I wanted, and I didn't turn in to a girl.

[Splossy]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi guys,

First off, lemme say that I'm pleasantly shocked that OP presented an isolated and unsupported example that very much goes against 2p2 convention, and instead of a thread full of "OMG FLAME FLAME FLAMES",

[/ QUOTE ]

That's because it's a quote from a book written by you guys. if it were a hand post from someone with less than 1000 posts the reaction would be "Fold PF. U suck at poker". Forum reactions differ wildly depending who posts...