So I was having a discussion about this with a friend yesterday and was wondering what your thoughts are on this and what your standard play is? Do you riase their limps or do you just check it back?
So I was having a discussion about this with a friend yesterday and was wondering what your thoughts are on this and what your standard play is? Do you riase their limps or do you just check it back?
I check it back mostly
imho the action is related on the game format (normal, turbo, superturbo, deep), on the history about oppo and on BB left.some typical situations:he limps monster hands? well, I'll check back hoping to crack his monsterhe limps weak? if my pocket is something like 22, 33, 44 I raise x3 or x4 cause I hardly will hit my set and I'll be weak.effective stack about 10 BB? I'll shove :) (unless the previous history make me feel he holds a big pair)
Thanks for the response..I'm more interested in readless with deepish stacks or equal stacks at earlier levels because I know the correct way to play them when shallow. The thing is early is the match and deep I have been raising limps with my small PP's and I've now been told that it's much better to just check it back. My thoughts were that they were a good hand to do it with because we can still take down the pot a lot when we miss and when we hit our set we have a more disquised hand that will sometimes stack our opponent. The person I talked to about it said it's better to check back because we are just building a pot OOP with a weak hand so now I'm just wondering what the optimal way is to play them in a readless situation when we are not shallow.
this:"My thoughts were that they were a good hand to do it with because we can still take down the pot a lot when we miss and when we hit our set we have a more disquised hand that will sometimes stack our opponent."is about my same thinking; raising pre we show some kind of strongness and we could win the hand with overcards on board also just correctly managing the flop/turn.Anyway, I'm not sure wheter this is the optimal strategy...
I always ever check back my small pairs to a limp when deepish, and thats regardless of any possible reads. Arguments for that:1. If im readless or if I think my opponent is able to "traplimp" I obviosly have to fold my hand against a preflop reraise and I hate that.2. If my opponent calls I have a guessing game when I dont hit my set ( which will be 1/8 of the time) and there are two or three overcards on the flop and my cbet is called or checkraised or even when my opponent is donkbetting. Of course an equal situation appears when I only check back pre and than my opponent stabs out or he checks and I take a stab and he calls or raises, but I think its fine when the pot is smaller in such situations.3. If I hit my set, the possibilities to stack my opponent ( or to win at least a countable amount of chips) are not so much lower in a checked pot than in a raised pot in my opinion. Just remember to stack ur opponent u dont only have to make ur set, but he has to make a second best made hand ( or a really strong draw with much equity against anything) which he thinks is good although. Of course the bigger the pot is pre, the easier to get it in over the streets, but there are some negative aspects too: Lets say ur opponent has limped with a marginal holding like J6o and u hold 33, im sure most times u will win more chips on a AJ3 flop when u only had checked back the flop and are not representing the A so hardly when u are agressive postflop.This are only a few thoughts, hope makes sensegreeds barraya
for me this is much villain dependant.when villain is most likely to call my raise - i check back. even when i have not raised before one of his limps oop, i can see if he calls many of my btn raises, if yes, he will most probably also call my raise over his limp rather light.however if villain is week post flop, e.g. not calling cbets w/o hit then i am more inclined to raise, also when he is rather passiv in calling only a few of my btn raises, i assume that the chance that he folds to my raise over his limp is rather high.when in doubt - i check back.i do not really know if this is the best play - might be that a coach comments?
1. no argument for me. as long as i have no reads i have to assume he is not trap limping. if he does - i take notes.2. if villain calls my raise - i just have to figure out his range of doing so and play accordingly. same as check back.3. imo stacking in unraised pot is very much unlikely than in a raised pot. also the A on flop will not harm a lot - he should cbet anyhow with mp, if not i can still check behind and try to get action on the turn.but i think either way, raising small PPs pre or check back is ok. i think we are discussing here a quite marginal spot.but still - i look for some HUSNG coach to see this and give some thoughts!
@kukulcan:to 1. yep, if u have no reads u can assume hes not trap limping, but unfortunaly u have to laydown ur hand against a reraise inspite of that.to 2. yep, u have to figure out his range of doing so and play accordingly, but u should be more comfortable to do this in a smaller pot.to 3. dont get ur point, we are playing out of position, he will not cbet , we will not check behind.And finally: I dont agree that it is a marginal spot. I think deepstacked its a way way better to check behind.
Thanks guys..yeah I would like one of the coaches to give a few thoughts also. It's kinda weird that I am only now asking this question now and I feel kinda dumb lol.
I always check them back deep and agree with your friend :)
Think about the line of reasoning that you're advocating with the low PPs.The main advantage that you're giving for raising the PPs is that you can represent strength and take the pot down most of the time. Your added advantage is a disguised monster every so often.Now, the main advantage, if correct in the situation, can be applied to any two cards really. So, while not always the case, it is likely that if it is correct to raise 22 vs a limp it's correctly to raise 87. But those are cases where you have a lot of fold equity preflop and/or on the flop.For cases where players are loose (and readless I would generally lean towards my opponent not folding that often vs my limps), you'll certainly want to check back many more hands, though their postflop play can change that.I'd start with a similar theory to how I approach my 3betting at low to mid stakes: Players are generally too loose and call too much, therefore I'll be value 3betting by default and can change my approach as I see fit (note: I won't need to have 3bet and seen them fold to 3bet light, other reads such as raising every hand OTB but folding quite a lot OOP, folding often and seemingly quickly to CR, etc. can all indicate you have decent fold equity for 3bets).For limp raises, I'm not going to be as nitty about it as a 3bet, mainly because we're not putting in nearly the amount of chips into the pot as with a 3bet (that logic might be a tad bit weak though) and I think there's some value in gaining the reads we often can by raising stuff like T9 early on when a player limps. You may gain reads by 3betting T9, but it's probably a terrible hand to 3bet vs so many loose players, whereas a limp raise isn't automatically bad by any stretch.So in general, don't go crazy readless, but raise hands that flop well (higher suited connectors, premium hands) and start to build some reads on your opponent, further adjusting your ranges and frequencies from there.