Unbalanced limping range in early position

[mporter123]

First few levels of a tournament, no antes, lets say buy in is<$20 online or <£150 live.

Thoughts on having a limping range from UTG, UTG+1 that looks like this:-

8,9 suited, 10,J suited, Q,10 suited.
22 through 66

Opening 77"s and above, KQsuited and above. Folding A10off and below.

Intention is to be completely unbalanced i.e. not limping strength at all.

As a generic strategy before we assess table - good/bad?

[dwh103]

Awful, when the alternative is clicking (should you even wish to play those hands), retaining the initiative, creating an image and better defining opponent ranges.

[KarmaDope]

Dislike. Would much rather raise or fold. Infact, I like raising more than folding early on to play against spewbots.

[deanp27]

Prefer to open (say 2.5x early but even min-raising>limping) and have the betting lead when deep but limping behind is ok.
Not folding ATo either

I"d need a really good reason to start open limping

[AAroddersAA]

Good Post imo

I don"t mind being unbalanced as there is really no need to be balanced most of the time.

Open limping is not generally not what I do but it"s a great discussion topic, what is the plan? Limp/Call and hit big or get out? If there is a raise/3-bet we fold right?

I actually don"t think it is awful, but not sure it is optimal at all, I would just raise 2.5x or 3x is fine at this point, sometimes I would just fold. The structure is important as well, in a shallow stacked turbo would be pretty bad I think as your chip stack is so important. In an apat type event it has potential to be +EV maybe?

How are we planning to proceed within the hand? Say we limp and call a raise, what do/should we do when we hit say:-

a) Set
2) Flush Draw or str8 draw
3) A massive draw like a str8 flush draw
4) Marginal hand like second pair
5) Nothing

[PHIL_TC]

Rarely post on these boards.. but when it comes to strategies isn"t how you play totally dependant on how your opponents play?

If you read Elky"s book Raiser"s edge (excellent read from a year or so btw) he says something like this :

1. Don"t raise a lot, don"t call a lot ... is beaten by.... 2. raise a lot, don"t call a lot
2. Raise a lot, don"t call a lot ... is beaten by... 3. raise a lot, call a lot
3. Raise a lot, call a lot... is beaten by... 4. don"t raise a lot, call a lot
4. Don"t raise a lot, call a lot... is beaten by and back to.. 1. don"t raise a lot, don"t call a lot

Simple view I know. But the simplest view is often the best x

[AAroddersAA]

Rarely post on these boards.. but when it comes to strategies isn"t how you play totally dependant on how your opponents play?

If you read Elky"s book Raiser"s edge (excellent read from a year or so btw) he says something like this :

1. Don"t raise a lot, don"t call a lot ... is beaten by.... 2. raise a lot, don"t call a lot
2. Raise a lot, don"t call a lot ... is beaten by... 3. raise a lot, call a lot
3. Raise a lot, call a lot... is beaten by... 4. don"t raise a lot, call a lot
4. Don"t raise a lot, call a lot... is beaten by and back to.. 1. don"t raise a lot, don"t call a lot

Simple view I know. But the simplest view is often the best x

Please post more in this thread, this is a good point. My opinion on it is:-

Totally dependent on your opponents - no, there are definitely other factors as well but Mark did say at the start of this thread that we were discussing the options before we have a read on the table.

Also there are good solid strategy"s that will work against the vast majority of the way players play today (I think this is called population tendencies). Think how you would play a hand at the start of the game against a table of unknowns. You are not guess guessing your play you are basing your decisions on other factors and the way you know today"s players usually play.

[TheSnapper]

First few levels of a tournament, no antes, lets say buy in is<$20 online or <£150 live.

Thoughts on having a limping range from UTG, UTG+1 that looks like this:-

8,9 suited, 10,J suited, Q,10 suited.
22 through 66

Opening 77"s and above, KQsuited and above. Folding A10off and below.

Intention is to be completely unbalanced i.e. not limping strength at all.

As a generic strategy before we assess table - good/bad?

I totally agree with Phil, only if table dynamic allows us to add these hands to our range.

That is so seldom going to be the case though, first few levels we still have all the droolers, they have ample chips relative to the blinds and for the most part they are not inclined to fold.

You are offered a much more favourable opportunity with these hands when over-calling, 3 betting or squeezing from late position. How profitable this is will rely on your post flop skills, are they sufficient to minimise losses in the inevitable tough spots you now create?

[pokerpops]

Rarely post on these boards.. but when it comes to strategies isn"t how you play totally dependant on how your opponents play?

If you read Elky"s book Raiser"s edge (excellent read from a year or so btw) he says something like this :

1. Don"t raise a lot, don"t call a lot ... is beaten by.... 2. raise a lot, don"t call a lot
2. Raise a lot, don"t call a lot ... is beaten by... 3. raise a lot, call a lot
3. Raise a lot, call a lot... is beaten by... 4. don"t raise a lot, call a lot
4. Don"t raise a lot, call a lot... is beaten by and back to.. 1. don"t raise a lot, don"t call a lot

Simple view I know. But the simplest view is often the best x

Given the population tendencies of local casino games <£150 is very solidly in the #4 camp then Elky"s pointing us to the "Don"t raise a lot, don"t call a lot" strategy.

OP are we limp-calling these hands or planning to vary between limp-fold and 3betting?
In the early stages we want to see flops with baby pairs and if the table will let us do that for the minimum then HELL YES, limp deuces and make them pay for their limp with AQ from cut off on an AQ2 flop. The alternative is to fold or to inflate the pot OOP with a marginal hand vs a population that is not easily taken off a hand in the early stages.
Limp calling to set-mine is fine if stacks are deep enough and we can escape set over set situations, but limp-calling to hit a flop hard with a disguised hand only works for everyone else or with the hands we folded...

[mporter123]

Awful, when the alternative is clicking (should you even wish to play those hands), retaining the initiative, creating an image and better defining opponent ranges.

Dave - I don"t think this can ever be awful. There is a strong likelihood when we click open that we will go multiway. Retaining the initiative is far less important then, I don"t know how many flops we will be C betting when we go 4/5 ways. We will still create our aggro image when we open chunks from mid position onwards. I am also not sure we really define our opponents range much if at all with a raise as opposed to a limp. There are some hands that villains will fold to a raise that they would call a limp but in these tournaments they are far more concerned with there "pretty hand" rather than how strong your raise looks. When we open,cutoff calls, button calls and the blinds come along - ranges are still going to be really wide.

Open limping is not generally not what I do but it"s a great discussion topic, what is the plan? Limp/Call and hit big or get out? If there is a raise/3-bet we fold right?

Limp call would be the plan >90% of the time. We would very rarely be getting the right price not to call. Limp raise basically never - we don"t want to turn these hands into bluffs unnecessarily. We can fold very occasionally, for example, we limp the 89suited UTG at 25/50 and a really good player makes it 275 on the button. Would be folding suited connectors there and calling pocket pairs as we would still be getting the correct price.

I won"t go through individually what we would do with those options you gave. Essentially we would be looking to make bets if we think we can get people to fold better hands or call with worse.

How profitable this is will rely on your post flop skills, are they sufficient to minimise losses in the inevitable tough spots you now create?

This is the crux behind doing this. In the majority of times we reg up for a $5 tournament or a £25 live tournament we consider ourselves to be the best player at the table. I don"t think that"s unreasonable either by the way. My edge is much bigger post flop, I will have played these tough spots over and over and will consistently make better decisions than opponents.

FWIW, I have never adopted a strategy like this. "Always be opening with a raise" is a decent thought process to start with in poker but it shouldn"t blinker us from making plays that might be even more +ev. I am still most definitely undecided on this and am looking for more feedback.

[mporter123]

Rarely post on these boards.. but when it comes to strategies isn"t how you play totally dependant on how your opponents play?

If you read Elky"s book Raiser"s edge (excellent read from a year or so btw) he says something like this :

1. Don"t raise a lot, don"t call a lot ... is beaten by.... 2. raise a lot, don"t call a lot
2. Raise a lot, don"t call a lot ... is beaten by... 3. raise a lot, call a lot
3. Raise a lot, call a lot... is beaten by... 4. don"t raise a lot, call a lot
4. Don"t raise a lot, call a lot... is beaten by and back to.. 1. don"t raise a lot, don"t call a lot

Simple view I know. But the simplest view is often the best x

I have read and re-read this, is it some sort of riddle?

I literally have no idea what it means. :-)

Of course you are right about adjusting to the table but we all have to start with a generic strategy that we can then adjust from. I think we can also make some assumptions that a £25 tournament or generic $11 Sunday storm field will have the same sort of villains that will play relatively similarly.

We need to play an exploitable strategy for as long as we think that we won"t be getting exploited if that makes sense.

[PHIL_TC]

Rarely post on these boards.. but when it comes to strategies isn"t how you play totally dependant on how your opponents play?

If you read Elky"s book Raiser"s edge (excellent read from a year or so btw) he says something like this :

1. Don"t raise a lot, don"t call a lot ... is beaten by.... 2. raise a lot, don"t call a lot
2. Raise a lot, don"t call a lot ... is beaten by... 3. raise a lot, call a lot
3. Raise a lot, call a lot... is beaten by... 4. don"t raise a lot, call a lot
4. Don"t raise a lot, call a lot... is beaten by and back to.. 1. don"t raise a lot, don"t call a lot

Simple view I know. But the simplest view is often the best x

I have read and re-read this, is it some sort of riddle?

I literally have no idea what it means. :-)

which is why I rarely post x

[wizzlet]

Interesting topic.  I"ve experimented in the past in low buyin MTTs on the softer sites with limping these hands that have the potential to stack weaker players in the early stages.  My own findings are that its not profitable in the long run for me, either because my own post flop play isnt strong enough when oop or I just don"t flop enough good hands against stronger preflop ranges to make it chip +ev. The only time these days I"ll limp is when I have a monster in late position and its obvious that a short stack in the blinds is going to shove worse.
In my opinion I think a min raise with the range described by the op is better because you still get the sort of action you intended but you you will get win bigger pots post flop with the top end of your preflop opening range because of your loose op image. You only have to look at the success of players like Selbst to see this in action.

[dwh103]

Awful, when the alternative is clicking (should you even wish to play those hands), retaining the initiative, creating an image and better defining opponent ranges.

Dave - I don"t think this can ever be awful. There is a strong likelihood when we click open that we will go multiway. Retaining the initiative is far less important then, I don"t know how many flops we will be C betting when we go 4/5 ways. We will still create our aggro image when we open chunks from mid position onwards. I am also not sure we really define our opponents range much if at all with a raise as opposed to a limp. There are some hands that villains will fold to a raise that they would call a limp but in these tournaments they are far more concerned with there "pretty hand" rather than how strong your raise looks. When we open,cutoff calls, button calls and the blinds come along - ranges are still going to be really wide.

Open limping is not generally not what I do but it"s a great discussion topic, what is the plan? Limp/Call and hit big or get out? If there is a raise/3-bet we fold right?

Limp call would be the plan >90% of the time. We would very rarely be getting the right price not to call. Limp raise basically never - we don"t want to turn these hands into bluffs unnecessarily. We can fold very occasionally, for example, we limp the 89suited UTG at 25/50 and a really good player makes it 275 on the button. Would be folding suited connectors there and calling pocket pairs as we would still be getting the correct price.

I won"t go through individually what we would do with those options you gave. Essentially we would be looking to make bets if we think we can get people to fold better hands or call with worse.

How profitable this is will rely on your post flop skills, are they sufficient to minimise losses in the inevitable tough spots you now create?

This is the crux behind doing this. In the majority of times we reg up for a $5 tournament or a £25 live tournament we consider ourselves to be the best player at the table. I don"t think that"s unreasonable either by the way. My edge is much bigger post flop, I will have played these tough spots over and over and will consistently make better decisions than opponents.

FWIW, I have never adopted a strategy like this. "Always be opening with a raise" is a decent thought process to start with in poker but it shouldn"t blinker us from making plays that might be even more +ev. I am still most definitely undecided on this and am looking for more feedback.

Awful when compared to other options.

Basically this is concerned with maximising implied odds, and works best against level 1 opponents (little/no consideration of Hero"s hand strength). Whilst these players do exist, they"re naturally biased towards the lower end of the buy-in scale. Did come across one utter retard in the £220 I played last night who fit a level 1 description (if that!), but that"s one player out of 10.

There"s a reason why plenty of poker resources includes the hands you"ve specified in an UTG folding range - that"s because they"re nigh on impossible to play profitably. Yes, it"s a valid strategy you can get away with if you"re playing a freeroll or a low stakes donkament populated by dribblers. You don"t find a great deal of those.

Any good player will only need to see one occasion where you limp/call and not end up playing it like an overpair to get an idea about what you"re doing (what else could you possibly be doing outside limping mediocre holdings?). You also define your UTG opening range as a result.

I"m coming at this from the higher buy-in end of what you"ve specified. You don"t always get multi-way pots, retaining the initiative is really important against the average-good players and you certainly can narrow down ranges. I saw loads of limping from K9o, 52s etc yesterday - but not in raised pots, the mentality of some players is such that even a click will shut down a bunch of trash you can"t possibly read.

I don"t think you"d particularly get into a load of trouble if you"re disciplined, however you"re making it much harder to win the big pots out of position.

But just fold, it"s so much easier.

[TheSnapper]

Adding a limping range here makes your range very transparent to even the moderately attentive player.

You will be open raising 77+, ATs+, KQs, AJo+ for a pfr of ~8% from ep this will become clear after a small enough sample size.

You will also open limp 66-22, QTs+, JTs, T9s, 98s

very quickly it becomes clear that your limp is a hand weaker than an 8% open range, yes it can sometimes be a limped monster but the strategy of limping AA,KK here works sometimes precisely because they never believe you would do that.

I suspect that quite a few players would punish that strategy very quickly.