Some Pre-Flop Dynamics (or why we don't open-limp in the CO)

[davelin]

Hey all,

I was hoping someone today posted a hand where he open-limped in MP3 with a hand like 88 and I could create this topic about some pre-flop dynamics and why this is a no-no. But since no one did, I'll make this post anyway [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Newer players eventually are told not to open-limp in late position, usually something like MP2 and later in a full 10-handed game. I've heard some posters explain why but I hope this post makes it a little more clear plus open up some things about pre-flop dynamics.

(Quick terminology check: open-limping just means to limp in a pot when no else has limped in before you). In pre-flop there is pretty much three things you can do - fold, limp or raise. There's also cold-call but I consider that a subcategory of limping in most cases. Let's take each of these in consideration.

Folding is easy, your hand sucks, blows, etc. etc. pitch it without a care in the world. Now let's go to raise. Why do we raise pre-flop? Seems pretty straight-forward, we raise to isolate bad players, reduce our risk by knocking out marginal hands and most importantly we raise for value when we have a hand we believe has the best of it. This last one is probably the most important, you still easily raise your premium hands even if you knew everyone would call i.e. marginal hands would still call.

Seems pretty easy. So why do we limp pre-flop? We limp with hands that have an equity disadvantage pre-flop. Huh, I thought limit was the exploitation of pot equity, why would we ever play a hand where we have a disadvantage? To think about this consider if you had 22 on the Button. After 3 limpers to you with passive blinds after you, this is a straightforward limp, no question about it. But if you think about it, we only flop a set 1-in-8 times but we're getting only 1-in-5 in our initial call (assuming blinds coming in). So we're paying a slight premium to play this hand. Why? Because a hand like this thrives on implied odds.

Would you pay $1 upfront to play a game where I give you $4 when you flip heads and you give me $1 when you flip tails? Absolutely! And that is what happens when we limp in with hands like 22, 33, 56s or T8s after a suitable number of limpers. We're paying a slight premium upfront in order to enter a game where we can exploit an equity advantage later. Some people think playing tight only means playing the best hands that are better than others. Not true, sometimes we enter the game with slightly sub-standard hands because of the payoffs we believe will happen post-flop.

What does this have to do with open-limping? Because when you're in a short game, your implied odds diminish with lack of each limper. So when you enter the game now with these hands, you're paying for a premium upfront to enter a game where the payoff isn't worth the upfront entry fee so to speak. Because then the limping consideration is gone, we only enter pots when we have an pre-flop equity advantage, that is hands that we want to raise.

[dseiler116]

This is a important dynamic to consider. Because most people, including myself for a time, consider pre-flop play the easiest (specific hand selection via playing only monsters, etc) it's crucial to determine odds every step of the way. I've started to see how easy some of the marginals calls are.

Gave tight a new meaning too. Thanks davelin.

[bozlax]

NH. The only thing I'd add is that at a table where it's folded to you in MP2/MP3, frequently, you should be looking to steal from those positions, not just open-raise for value. This means not only raising a hand like 55, where you'd be calling if there were 2 limpers in front of you, but also a hand like A6o, where you'd "normally" be turbo-mucking.

[theJoblessWobbly]

What hand range falls into the category of "play with limpers from CO, but don't open limp from CO"?

[bozlax]

[ QUOTE ]
What hand range falls into the category of "play with limpers from CO, but don't open limp from CO"?

[/ QUOTE ]

Any hand that you would limp behind 2-3 limpers should be open-raised in the CO.

Oh, wait, you mean what hands that you would play behind a bunch of limpers should you muck if it's folded to you in the CO, right? Small suited connectors, e.g. 43s. Middle-suited two-gaps, e.g. 96s.

[Aaron W.]

This is a nice post, but I'd like to add a few words.

[ QUOTE ]
What does this have to do with open-limping? Because when you're in a short game, your implied odds diminish with lack of each limper. So when you enter the game now with these hands, you're paying for a premium upfront to enter a game where the payoff isn't worth the upfront entry fee so to speak. Because then the limping consideration is gone, we only enter pots when we have an pre-flop equity advantage, that is hands that we want to raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

You also want to raise hands to create an equity advantage. For example, if you have some weak-loose players behind you, raising with a hand like KJo may get them to fold A5 or 44, hands which they would happily see a flop a for just one bet. Similarly, raising a hand like 55 with a couple left to act behind you often folds out 3 or 4 overcards to your small pocket pair (depending as always on how loose villains are, especially those guys in the blinds), thus creating a positive equity situation (every overcard to your pocket pair has roughly a 15% chance of appearing on the flop at which point you're drawing to a mere 2 outs). If you play well postflop, this is a huge advantage for you.

To reiterate, raising will create situations where you have the best hand (or an equity advantage) from situations where you don't have it.

[davelin]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a nice post, but I'd like to add a few words.

[ QUOTE ]
What does this have to do with open-limping? Because when you're in a short game, your implied odds diminish with lack of each limper. So when you enter the game now with these hands, you're paying for a premium upfront to enter a game where the payoff isn't worth the upfront entry fee so to speak. Because then the limping consideration is gone, we only enter pots when we have an pre-flop equity advantage, that is hands that we want to raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

You also want to raise hands to create an equity advantage. For example, if you have some weak-loose players behind you, raising with a hand like KJo may get them to fold A5 or 44, hands which they would happily see a flop a for just one bet. Similarly, raising a hand like 55 with a couple left to act behind you often folds out 3 or 4 overcards to your small pocket pair (depending as always on how loose villains are, especially those guys in the blinds), thus creating a positive equity situation (every overcard to your pocket pair has roughly a 15% chance of appearing on the flop at which point you're drawing to a mere 2 outs). If you play well postflop, this is a huge advantage for you.

To reiterate, raising will create situations where you have the best hand (or an equity advantage) from situations where you don't have it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well said.

[mbarr350]

Isn't this the same concept as cold calling pre-flop?

i.e. If your hand isn't good enough to raise then fold.

[theJoblessWobbly]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What hand range falls into the category of "play with limpers from CO, but don't open limp from CO"?

[/ QUOTE ]

Any hand that you would limp behind 2-3 limpers should be open-raised in the CO.

Oh, wait, you mean what hands that you would play behind a bunch of limpers should you muck if it's folded to you in the CO, right? Small suited connectors, e.g. 43s. Middle-suited two-gaps, e.g. 96s.

[/ QUOTE ]
Is something like 78s an open-raise, or a muck? Also, 88 was given in the OP as an example. That would be an open-raise?

[davelin]

[ QUOTE ]
Isn't this the same concept as cold calling pre-flop?

i.e. If your hand isn't good enough to raise then fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are certainly opportunities to cold-call, my post even lays out some dynamics under when this would be okay.