HUSNG Assertion: You should never limp.

[ThePhenom919]

nicho, raising against people like dippy described will cause a bet on all streets to be almost a double up while limping might make a 500 chip pot

indy, I meant it was for 10/20 15/30 and to an extent 25/50

[daveT]

I think it depends on your over-all strategy.

I have been testing tighter tendencies, and raising only with premium or playable hands make my opponents decisions easier, so yeah, limping sounds good if you mix it up.

What about the player that will not play anything but premiums to a raise? I started limping to them, only to see them fold on the flop. Why would I want to waste my time, and tourney time, limping when I am going to get the same points anyways? And I won't have to worry about what random hand they have?

[Kidling]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Against an opponent who calls a lot, can't the same argument as above be made? By making it 3x instead of minraising, you let them make bigger mistakes by letting them play big pots OOP?

.

[/ QUOTE ]

Against certain loose passive opponents Im sure its positive ev to raise larger then 2x. Although I lose a little profit by still min raising these opponents I do it for a few reasons. First of all by keeping the pot smaller I decrease my fluctuation and put them in a position to make bigger mistakes post flop. Hu Sngs start out short anyway with only a 75bb effective stack and I prefer the extra room accorded from a min raise.


That being said the main reason why I stick to a standard pre flop min raise strategy is that i am usually multi tabling and I am most comfortable with it. I have stream lined my game to the point where every bet or raise is always the same except in rare cases. I min raise pre flop and bet or raise 3/4 the pot on all streets. This has really simplified my decisions while also giving away as little information as possible. This is probably a point for another discussion but it is taking my game to the next level. When the decision is between betting or checking as opposed to how much to bet or checking the decisions become so much clearer. By simplifing the game I am also becoming much more keen at picking up my opponents tendencies which I think more then makes up for any ev I am losing in making bigger or smaller bets. Instead of maximizing each bet or each match I am devolping a strategy that is as non exploitable as possible.

[dboy23]

kidling that is really interesting stuff. I've never heard of someone using that type of strategy here, but I've certainly played against that strategy.

I'm really curious what kind of roi at what levels you have been getting with it.

[Kidling]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm really curious what kind of roi at what levels you have been getting with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have been tinkering with this for about the last 1000 hu matches. Playing the 100s and 200s its 11 percent for the last 1000. Its about the same as the 3000 before that but I can multi table easier and play longer sessions. The more I use it the more comfortable I am with it. Using the bet pot script I use a 1 .75 .75 .75 line. The preflop bet pot is for my bb reraises while I just use the min raise for the sb. I am down to using only three buttons in most matches although I do go all in at times.

[Collin Moshman]

With moderate/deep stacks in NL, I play entirely limp/raise otb (i.e., fold 0% in position).

You are getting 3:1 immediate odds with position throughout the hand, so not folding is clearly correct IN A VACUUM.

Would anyone disagree with that statement? So the problem becomes metaconcerns. You're limping your weaker hands, and Villain begins raising widely OOP. My solution is to simply readjust. I'll increase my limp/raise ratio, and force Villain to play a guessing game if he wants to build a big pot OOP. The downside is you'll lose value, on average, with your stronger hands. But the value you get from being able to play 100% of hands otb more than compensates for this, IMO.

-- Collin

[xSCWx]

[ QUOTE ]
With moderate/deep stacks in NL, I play entirely limp/raise otb (i.e., fold 0% in position).

You are getting 3:1 immediate odds with position throughout the hand, so not folding is clearly correct IN A VACUUM.

Would anyone disagree with that statement? So the problem becomes metaconcerns. You're limping your weaker hands, and Villain begins raising widely OOP. My solution is to simply readjust. I'll increase my limp/raise ratio, and force Villain to play a guessing game if he wants to build a big pot OOP. The downside is you'll lose value, on average, with your stronger hands. But the value you get from being able to play 100% of hands otb more than compensates for this, IMO.

-- Collin

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with never folding from the button regardless of your stacks. Even if an argument could be made for limping 72o from the button as being less -EV than folding it (which I find to be quite a stretch), I believe it would be extremely difficult to put forth an argument that it is positive in terms of $/hr.

Beyond calling a sub-min-raise all in, I don't really see value in voluntarily playing hands such as 72 82 83 92 etc. regardless of stack sizes or position.

[shyturtle27]

I also disagree with ALWAYS limping. It is the basic Harrington strategy and I've used it with mixed success. I then started a raise/fold method OTB with much better, but probably not optimal success. I'm interested in changing gears mid match. Assume a loose/passive, but straight forward opponent. If I start out playing raise/fold then how large does the effective stack have to be before I start limping some hands? <15BB? 20?

[Collin Moshman]

[ QUOTE ]
I also disagree with ALWAYS limping.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to clarify, I'm not saying to always limp and not raise. I'm only arguing against button open-folding.

-- Collin

[dboy23]

I don't think never folding the button is optimal either. especially at like 5 - 10BBs.

You either have to give up your EV from raising because you have to trap so much, or you make it easy for your opponent to raise you off.

If you are playing a thinking opponent it isn't worth all that trouble just so you can see the flop with 72o.