Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > PL/NL Texas Hold'em > Small Stakes
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 07-20-2007, 10:23 AM
tufat23 tufat23 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: wafflecrushing your sister
Posts: 7,933
Default Re: No limping in 6 max?

theres so much to explain, but basically i doubt u have anywhere close to an optimal limp reriasing range and frequency. just raise every hand u wanna play or fold
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-20-2007, 10:41 AM
sokiraJ sokiraJ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Finland
Posts: 180
Default Re: No limping in 6 max?

[ QUOTE ]

I appreciate not limping hands that arn't strong enough to raise with, but can you never feign weakness in 6 max with limping against highly agressive players?

[/ QUOTE ]

Limp-reraising isnt really trapping because your limp-rr range is so much smaller than your standard opening range. Consider three scenarios:

You raise with AA, laggy player calls with weaker hand and picks a pair or a draw on the flop and you win more monies.

You raise with AA, laggy player re-raises. You can 4-bet or slowplay if you have the position and win more monies.

You limp with AA, laggy player raises, you re-raise and he makes an easy fold.

I hope this made some sense and isnt complete bs.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-20-2007, 10:51 AM
fees fees is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Whats my motivation? LOLOLOLOLOLOL
Posts: 4,162
Default Re: No limping in 6 max?

only limp RR when you have AA and they have KK
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-20-2007, 10:53 AM
poker12 poker12 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 318
Default Re: No limping in 6 max?

i like to limp the button
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-20-2007, 11:03 AM
Kermit Kermit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: WIPE ME DOWN!!
Posts: 1,512
Default Re: No limping in 6 max?

[ QUOTE ]
theres so much to explain, but basically i doubt u have anywhere close to an optimal limp reriasing range and frequency. just raise every hand u wanna play or fold

[/ QUOTE ]

you certainly COULD implement a strategy that involves limp rr'ing in SH games. however, as tufat suggested, there is much more to it than just limp rring AA and KK with some flim flam mixed in.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-20-2007, 11:12 AM
Hattifnatt Hattifnatt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: FT
Posts: 8,202
Default Re: No limping in 6 max?

I seldom open limp but it happens from time to time, limp behind a limper or some limpers I do pretty often
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-20-2007, 11:13 AM
FGators FGators is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,339
Default Re: No limping in 6 max?

If you ain't limping with AA you shouldn't be limping with 22, there's a thing called transparency.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-20-2007, 11:26 AM
Montezuma21 Montezuma21 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: london
Posts: 1,088
Default Re: No limping in 6 max?

GRUNCH

[ QUOTE ]
Just wanted to get a majority consensus on limping UTG in 6max with small pairs (55-). I assume most would say you should never limp first in in 6max.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whilst i would almost always raise PPs from all positions, there are certainly some rare circumstances where open-limping with them might be acceptable.

[ QUOTE ]
I am curious as to whether, when people are raising with these pairs UTG in 6max they are calling a pot size 3bet or instafolding everytime? Is it entirely/partially opponent specific for you?

[/ QUOTE ]
it's mostly dependent on stack sizes (5-10 rule) and partially dependent on villain.

[ QUOTE ]
Would anyone consider 4betting?

[/ QUOTE ]

certainly, this is very opponent specific.

[ QUOTE ]
If you are folding to the 3bet do you feel you lose value by not getting opportunity for a set? Is the best play an 80/20 raise/fold type scenario?

[/ QUOTE ]

1.no
2. lol no.

Please add in any other variables/ideas I may have missed. Cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-20-2007, 08:45 PM
Choparno Choparno is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The land of do-as-you-please
Posts: 366
Default Re: No limping in 6 max?

[ QUOTE ]
Folded to you in MP with 22. CO and button are both 60/5's.

I limp here and you should too.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? Even if I know they are both guaranteed to call, I still like raising to build the pot in case I hit. Obviously, it is much easier to stack people in a raised pot, and if I know they are going to call down with middle pair / TPNK, I get that much more value by inflating the pot PF. If I miss, I have no problem check/folding, knowing they are going to call c-bets. Is this wrong? Does limping really show greater EV than raising against this specific opponent type?
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-20-2007, 08:49 PM
Gelford Gelford is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Not mentioning the war
Posts: 6,392
Default Re: No limping in 6 max?

[ QUOTE ]
For me it depends on the table aggression. If there are 26/23 players left to act behind me, I'll sometimes (~25%)limp with 44 intending to call their raise. Also, the Ed Miller example of limping hands like J9s on the button against weak opponents in the blinds.

I think it also depends on table image and your ability to take control of the hand. I haven't limp re-raised in eons, but I can't say that it is always a bad play. Weak opponents only do this with two hands, if you can broaden your raise and you know that villain will not calla LRR lightly, then there is some merit in it.

[/ QUOTE ]


You limpcall 44 oop shorthanded [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.