NLTRN: Why play raise or fold from button?

[teteatot]

I've seen most of you advocate playing raise or fold from the button, and a lot of you are probably better than me, so I'm likely in the wrong, but I don't see why this way of playing is optimal. Against someone who is passive preflop but reasonably good, ok, I can understand playing raise or fold there. But against an agressive opponent who will raise limps frequently, it seems like a better strategy is to mix raising and limping your medium and strong hands, since then, you'll often have your opponent making his preflop raise and be out of position as well as have an inferior hand.

I'd appreciate to hear what you think is wrong with this reasoning.

[jay_shark]

The strategy you choose very much depends on the opponent you play against . Against some , you should raise or fold . Against others , it may be ok to limp with some weaker hands only if they won't come over the top often .

We need more posts on deciding what strategy to use for various player types . This is what makes someone a great player . I'm getting a little off topic here , but if you've ever watched tennis and specifically Roger Federer play tennis , you will see that he doesn't have a fix game plan . He doesn't have game but he has games . He has this uncanny ability to choose the right strategy for different players which is what makes him so tough to beat . If he's playing against a passive player he will serve and volley but the bottom line is that he doesn't have one game plan .

[Dromar]

Are you sure this advice wasn't in reference to LHE? Because I'm pretty sure that's the case in limit, but I don't see how it can be right in NL, for the reasons you mentioned. You still want to be aggressive on the button in NL, since you've got position, but raising every hand should really only be a consideration against someone who folds too much.

[APXG]

[ QUOTE ]
The strategy you choose very much depends on the opponent you play against . Against some , you should raise or fold . Against others , it may be ok to limp with some weaker hands only if they won't come over the top often .

We need more posts on deciding what strategy to use for various player types . This is what makes someone a great player . I'm getting a little off topic here , but if you've ever watched tennis and specifically Roger Federer play tennis , you will see that he doesn't have a fix game plan . He doesn't have game but he has games . He has this uncanny ability to choose the right strategy for different players which is what makes him so tough to beat . If he's playing against a passive player he will serve and volley but the bottom line is that he doesn't have one game plan .

[/ QUOTE ]

One time I completely agree with you Jay, and Federer is a perfect example. The amazing thing with Fed is if you watch a match from start to finish, you can clearly see the first few games / set are an "exploratory" stage, where he is just gaging reactions / weaknesses / exploitabilities. Then, after this is done, the match is essentially over even though less than half has been played, b.c. all the targets are flawlessly zeroed in on, and he could play with his eyes closed / brain turned off. Commentators always call this "cruise control".

In poker and HU SNGs, people tend to find some style that is "right"(usually the one that is most widely "accepted") and play it vs. everyone. This is a reason one can never be a great player based solely on Harrington.

I would say raising 80-85%(and folding the rest) from the button is close to Nash, but definitely not always optimal. In other words, 80-85 is a DEFENSIVE position, even though you're technically being very "aggressive". Another major factor aside from opponent are the blinds / effective stack ratio, and of course your opponent's reaction to this relationship. Going into matches with a specific gameplan is very much the sign of a good but never great and always exploitable player.

[Vinetou]

I can't see why would it be wrong to limp on the button and to do it with mostly all of hands. Some players, for example, will fight for big pots and you will be able to steal those limped pots from them. And a lot of limped pots mean a lot of chips.

Sometimes, against a certain opponent, who likes to reraise, you want to keep the pot small, for example if you have a hand like A2, but you certainly want to see the flop with it.

In HU play, you usually don't have so much fold equity than in full ring or shorthanded games so it is not so necesarry to pump it or dump it. I actually believe it is very wrong when people advocate raise or fold strategy because you are building a pot when you don't like to and you don't have fold equity. With a hand like suited connectors, you want to see the flop, but you want to see it as cheaply as possible.

You also have position on the button throughout the entire hand so this is not the time to fold a lot of hands. And we all know position is everything in HU play. So if neither raising or folding is right, why not limp then?

I think sometimes when people say never open limp - raise or fold - it is just a prejudice that limping is a weak play. Quite the opposite - if done right, it can be a powerful play.

All right, I am talking a lot of ******* here. The most important thing is - why limp.

1. you are keeping the pot small
2. you are slowplaying.

There might be a lot of other reasons, but if you have a reason to limp, limp in. You are there to win money, not to play by prejudices.

[MychCumstien]

I've been playing a lot of NL HU recently, and must agree with the above posts, that is, your strategy definitely depends on your opponent's style. I don't personally employ a raise/fold button strat.

I rarely fold my button, unless I am up against a complete LAG who won't allow me to limp. If I'm folding too many of my limps to an aggressive player's raises, then yes, I'll switch to a raise/fold strategy.

I personally like to start out with about 50%-75% raises, and the rest limp/checks. That may sound thin to some, but I don't want to telegraph what I'm doing, and risk making my opponent overly aggressive. It becomes obvious if you try to steal every set of blinds, and it only becomes a matter of time before your opponents then change their strategy and play back at you. I would advocate not "overdoing" the preflop aggression.

I personally much prefer getting into some cheap flops and stealing from my opponents post flop. Your opponents will frequently yield on the flop as most flops miss most hands, and they typically give you too much credit for a hand post flop vs preflop. At least, this is what I've seen.

Against an average opponent, I'll almost never fold my button. Even with the worst cards, by limping on the button, you keep position, and enable yourself to steal against a passive player. Again, I'll only fold my button if I'm up against a LAG, who will not allow limps.

I personally agree with the philosophy of keeping the pots small, especially out of position. Then try to outplay my opponents post flop.

Also, as another poster stated, mixing up your strategy is the key, as to keep your opponents guessing at what you're doing.

Lastly, for my endgame strategy, i.e. when you have your opponent on the ropes, that is when you have a 4-1 chip lead or more, I personally like to slow down my preflop aggression, to almost exclusively limping, as I know raises will frequently be met with "all-in" moves. At this point in the HU tournament, I would prefer to limp into every pot, hit a hand and bust them. Bear in mind your opponent will be getting desperate at this point, so top pair will usually almost always be good (unless you have a terrible kicker), and even 2nd pair will be good much of the time. Again, this isn't a catch all strat by any means, but it is important to note that you don't want to risk "wasting" chips on futile bluffing attempts late in a HU tourny when your opponent is going to be looking to "shove". Also, by limping at this point, you can trap them with a strong hand, so that if they shove into your limp, you can easily bust them [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I guess to sum it up, I'm saying to use finesse during the end game; that is, don't foolishly double up your opponent and let them back into the game [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I'm no expert, but those are the types of strategies I employ, and it's been working for me thus far [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]