almost never " Limp in" is what I hear many Pros and books say

[Jetto]

Why?? Is it really that bad//i think limping in is good for trapping and whatnot.

And if your in position with K,7+ s go for teh limp./

Although I do it about 1 outta 10-13-15 hands I do do it.



I also hear players always saying to never limp..is it really that bad ( I know not to limp in late tourneys rounds)

[holyfield5]

because you telegraph that you have a weaker hand and lose the power of the cbet and ability to isolate others and dont fold out the weaker hands behind you.

[AKSuited]

I think it depends on position, how many are in the hand, table tightness etc. Also, cash games are different to tourneys. I limp a lot in cash games purely to disguise what I have. In fact the last hand I played tonight I limped in with Ad Qd . The flop came down Qc-7d-3d. I got action all the way to the river by someone with Q-3. An ace hit the turn with a dud on the river and I took a large amount of his cash. The guy had no idea I had AQ. Had I raised pre-flop, I'm sure he would have folded.

Don't get me wrong though, I only limped because it was a tight table and I was utg. 95% of the time I would raise with that hand. And I admit I got lucky because the guy hit 2 pairs on the flop. I've also seen some top pros on High Stakes Poker limp in with AK, whereas Daniel Negreanu would probably raise with it 100%.

At the end of the day, it's all down to personal preference and what you are comfortable with.

[holyfield5]

think this is for 6max also btw

[RickA]

I do not agree with this advice at all. It comes down to the equity in your hand. You should be trying to get as much $ in the pot as possible when you have the most equity.

AQ is much stronger played against fewer players. Against 4 callers with random hands (which means they are calling with any 2 cards) you will only win 38% of the time.

If you raise and get 1 caller who is playing only his top 20% of hands you will win 59% of the time.

Try to get the $ in when you have the best hand will be far more profitable in the long run than trying to "trick" opponents who don't know what is going on anyway.

[AKSuited]

Like I said though, I raise with it 95% of the time. I don't advocate limpimg every time. Sometimes I like to throw a little something different into the mix. But that's just my style.

[bet124]

[ QUOTE ]
I played tonight I limped in with Ad Qd . The flop came down Qc-7d-3d. I got action all the way to the river by someone with Q-3.

[/ QUOTE ]
And this is exactly why I not limp in hands with strong holecards.
If you wouldn´t hit your outs, you had lost, Q-3 is in front of you and you put all the way money in the pot.
You had won this hand at this time, but if you will always play this way (I know you don´t, but maybee others) you will loose your strong hands much more then you will win if you had raised it preflop.

[AKSuited]

I totally agree bet124. In my post you'll see I admit I got lucky

[SuitedKingAce]

I think they mean limping in when you are first to put money in the pot. I can't see why limping should be bad when players before you already put money in the pot. For example, limping in with 55 when one or more player is already in the pot, is no mistake, imho. However, when there is no player in the pot, you should raise your 55.

thoughts?

[Ralph Wiggum]

Never limping is a better strategy in very aggressive short handed holdem games. In many other situations, limping is fine. Anytime any advice is "never do this" or "always do this", it should often be phrased "in this type of situation, usually do this".