Theory - EP in Full Ring

[derosnec]

[ QUOTE ]
I started when I came from 6 max with about 15/8/3 for about 4BB/100.
Now its more like 15/3/2.3 for ~8BB/100.

[/ QUOTE ]

a/s/l?

[Johan L]

I dont understand, what is your question?

[Fallen Hero]

[ QUOTE ]
As to the not being convinced to open limp, he talks about the specifics of it somewhere... but I can't find it at the moment. However, I'm positive they wouldn't write about it without doing some research on it, David just doesn't pull these things out of his ass.


[/ QUOTE ]

he's not a god either, he makes mistakes like the rest of us. I'm sure open limping on the button is better than folding for most hands but it's never, ever better than raising.


[ QUOTE ]
It really is a terrific book, it has gotten me thinking about all sorts of things during a hand now, especially the section on multi-level thinking and hand reading. I recommend it for anyone who likes "The Theory of Poker". It definately isn't a recipe book for success though, so people who are looking for that will be dissapointed.

[/ QUOTE ]

if it's Theory of Poker oriented for nl (like many say it is) than I'm sure it's a great book.

[NewUser2006]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure open limping on the button is better than folding for most hands but it's never, ever better than raising.


[/ QUOTE ]

You must be one of those macho types [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Fallen Hero]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure open limping on the button is better than folding for most hands but it's never, ever better than raising.


[/ QUOTE ]

You must be one of those macho types [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I am [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[NewUser2006]

I thought I remembered a discussion of this topic somewhere.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...part=1&vc=1

[Fallen Hero]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought I remembered a discussion of this topic somewhere.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...part=1&vc=1

[/ QUOTE ]

Jamougha:
"Ed,

All of the points you make in favour of limping are valid. The question is, do they outweigh the benefits of open raising? You have no real way of making this comparison. We have only 2 data points;

1) No high-level player advocates open limping on the button, basically ever.
2) People have hard statistical data over many hands showing that they were not making money limping 'implied odds' hands in the situations you describe.

This puts the burden of proof on you. A few appeals to intuition don't cut it for me here. "


Smart man.

[Fly]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying you can't play profitably by open limping.

I'm saying that I love playing against 2p2ers who give away their hands with their preflop play. I have a much harder time with opponents who aren't afraid of position and know how to disguise a hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

YOU love playing against open limpers. They expose their hands to YOU. Do you see what I'm getting at??? It doesn't matter if it is profitable to open limp against you specifically. YOU are not the typical opponent. Don't you understand that even if a play loses money vs certain players but gains vs others it can still be hugely +EV?? When I (and I assume others) give advice about play in Full Ring game we generalize to the average opponent. This is a THEORY post, not a post about PRACTICE vs specific opponents.

[jmillerdls]

I raise jacks, limp 2's and fold everything else.

[RUSE]

[ QUOTE ]
Newuser said:
As long as you're not likely to face a big raise, limping early often encourages a windfall effect and encourage other limpers, which helps your hand out.

[/ QUOTE ]

The above in reference to open limping a drawing hand (such as T8) up front. This phenomenon doesnt help your hand out at all. You've got a drawing hand and therefore want position and most of all initiative. Unless you're just there waiting to flop your share of 'good hands' and be done with poker.

Sure, when everyone limps behind you, you get sweet sweet (limitpokerlike) odds to continue with the hand when you flop a draw and someone behind you bets (smallish) and a couple of yokels come with. But that's not what you want to play NL for is it? The thing about NL is maximizing all the possible potential the game has to offer to make the other guy screw up. I can recognize precious little of that attitude in this strategem.

I don't know, maybe i've playing 6max too long and is this endemic to one of those hybrid pokerforms you get when you put too many people together in one game. I don't mean to say there is anything wrong with that. I'm sorry for sounding like that if i did.