why NOT to limp preflop - 6max NL

[KRANTZ]

I almost never start big strategy threads, but I thought I’d make one on this since lately there seem to be a bunch of posts that start out with a preflop limp. OP’s explanation is usually something to the effect of "sometimes I raise, but this time I decided to limp." So I think for the benefit of newer posters/regulars who are looking to move up, there needs to be some discussion on why, in almost all scenarios, raising or folding is generally better than limping.

The limped pot conundrum: You limp a hand like a pocket pair or suited connector. It's limped to the flop. You're immediately facing two significant problems:

1- How do I win a big pot?

You're almost never going to win a sizable pot unless your opponent hits the flop very hard, but you hit it harder. When you raise preflop, you're introducing another layer to the game: c-betting with air, double barrel-ing, the overvalueing of hands by your opponent, bluffing from your opponent, etc. That's NOT happening in a limped pot, or rarely. A raised pot is also better suited for stacking someone; the bet sizes are able to more easily facilitate an all-in.

2- I can lose a big pot.

You limp a hand like Q3d and flop a flush. The BB had K4d and would have folded to a preflop raise. Stacked.

The idea of raising vs limping directly correlates to the idea of switching gears, or changing tempo during your session. The more often you're raising preflop, the more likely it is that your opponent will take a stand against your frequent preflop raises in the wrong spot or spew chips off by making a heroic calldown. As you notice people making plays at you, or calling you lightly, react by either a. firing more barrels at them or b. folding the suited cards from EP preflop. The great thing about a raised pot is that you don’t need to get to showdown to win. And if you do hit, your hand strength is disguised. People will often be calling your frequent raises thinking that they have implied odds to crack you if they hit; of course, that’s not true, because you can easily pitch your hand postflop – the money is only going in with the best of it, or with a great read that they’ll have to fold a better hand. Limping bleeds money. Why limp 44 UTG and then call a raise from BTN, only to c/f a J high flop that you could easily have won by raising preflop and then c-betting?

A hand occurred a few days ago where I had been liberally raising, floating and 3-betting an otherwise solid LAG 2+2 regular. I picked up QQ on the BTN, he raised, and I 3-bet. He called, and c/red a T high flop all-in with 88. Stack to me. That would not have occurred had I been playing weak/tight/passive and limping. He would have checked and folded the flop.

By raising preflop, you’re creating +EV situations where none existed before. Couple this with solid postflop play and you will already be improving. Limping is just asking for good players to pick on you. The key is precise control of your play postflop. Experiment from the CO/BTN first, and then start adding in the other positions. It's alright to fold 22 UTG if you're not comfortable raising it.

The only time I would advocate limping is when there’s some kind of giant fish at the table who’ll pay off like a slot machine when you hit. Otherwise, RAISE.

[yvesaint]

honestly this can be summed up with: people go broke with more hands in raised pots

good post nonetheless, its nice to see solid reasoning behind these concepts.

[amoeba]

its all about balance. raising marginal hands also produce a lot of situations where you lose a big pot that would not have happened had you limped especially since many on this board do not "let go of a hand easily" postflop. We can bring up your 77 hand against TWP for example had you not hit the 7 on the river or if TWP decided to bet/3bet the turn.

or if we use your example with QQ, had villain had AA/KK/Set, you would have been stacked whereas if you had a tighter image, perhaps it wouldn't have happened.

The important thing is balance. increased aggression with a wider array of hands widen our own range as well as the range of our opponent if they are able to adjust. at the end of the day, you still have to win more than you lose. you might win 10 pots out of 15 whereas a tighter player wins 6 small pots out of 8.

[KRANTZ]

[ QUOTE ]
its all about balance. raising marginal hands also produce a lot of situations where you lose a big pot that would not have happened had you limped especially since many on this board do not "let go of a hand easily" postflop. We can bring up your 77 hand against TWP for example had you not hit the 7 on the river or if TWP decided to bet/3bet the turn.

or if we use your example with QQ, had villain had AA/KK/Set, you would have been stacked whereas if you had a tighter image, perhaps it wouldn't have happened.

The important thing is balance. increased aggression with a wider array of hands widen our own range as well as the range of our opponent if they are able to adjust. at the end of the day, you still have to win more than you lose. you might win 10 pots out of 15 whereas a tighter player wins 6 small pots out of 8.

[/ QUOTE ]

very valid points, and i didn't mean to steer this into a TAG vs LAG discussion - only to shed light on why raising, whether youre tight or loose, is much more preferrable to limping.

[iceman5]

"You limp a hand like Q3d and flop a flush. The BB had K4d and would have folded to a preflop raise. Stacked"

You limp a hand liks A4s, flop a flush and stack the BB who had K5s. He wouldve folded K5s to a raise. It goes both ways.

[amoeba]

I think raising a wide range is a way to magnify our own advantage in hand reading ability over villain's (whether perceived or real).

[KRANTZ]

[ QUOTE ]
"You limp a hand like Q3d and flop a flush. The BB had K4d and would have folded to a preflop raise. Stacked"

You limp a hand liks A4s, flop a flush and stack the BB who had K5s. He wouldve folded K5s to a raise. It goes both ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

You limp a hand like A4s, flop A24, and stack off to 35o. It works that way, too.

[amoeba]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"You limp a hand like Q3d and flop a flush. The BB had K4d and would have folded to a preflop raise. Stacked"

You limp a hand liks A4s, flop a flush and stack the BB who had K5s. He wouldve folded K5s to a raise. It goes both ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

You limp a hand like A4s, flop A24, and stack off to 35o. It works that way, too.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think we can come up with examples ad nauseum. I don't think 1 way is better than the other.

[iceman5]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"You limp a hand like Q3d and flop a flush. The BB had K4d and would have folded to a preflop raise. Stacked"

You limp a hand liks A4s, flop a flush and stack the BB who had K5s. He wouldve folded K5s to a raise. It goes both ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

You limp a hand like A4s, flop A24, and stack off to 35o. It works that way, too.

[/ QUOTE ]

I realize that, Im just saying your flopped flush example wasnt a very good one.

You could limp 44 and stack 96 on a 964 flop where he wouldve fold to a raise.. We could do this all day.

[JKratzer]

raising>limping