When Is Limping Not Okay?

[SuperJon 175]

Let's say the blinds are 600/1200 w 125 ante, and you have 85,000 with an M of 44.You're in MP2. UTG folds, UTG+1 limps, MP1 limps.You look down and see a hand such as a decent suited connector (78s, 910s, 10Js) or a small to mid pocket pair (22-99).Is it ever okay to limp behind, or are the blinds and antes too valuable at this point to do so?This of course assumes that the players left to act aren't avid raisers and none of them are in shove/fold mode.

[copernicus 0]

Limping here is much better than raising for a few reasons. You dont want to reopen the betting for the limpers behind you in case one was trapping. A raise costs a lot of money after a couple of limpers and kills your implied odds. If someone wakes up with a big hand behind you then you cant stand a reraise.As long as you mix your plays up, there is nothing wrong with limping as part of an overall small ball strategy.

[Aces Rule 0]

Limping here is much better than raising for a few reasons. You dont want to reopen the betting for the limpers behind you in case one was trapping. A raise costs a lot of money after a couple of limpers and kills your implied odds. If someone wakes up with a big hand behind you then you cant stand a reraise.As long as you mix your plays up, there is nothing wrong with limping as part of an overall small ball strategy.

Agree with all above.. The times I would raise are when I feel fairly confident I can (1st) steal the Button and then (2nd) steal the pot on the flop if it misses my hand but also the limpers or has a scare card they can't call like an ace or big face. Also I try not to be first limper into a pot (raise or fold) but will come along with 1 or even better 2 limpers ahead of me.

[REvans84 0]

I think limping here is fine as long as the orginal limpers have healthy M's of over 20 aswel otherwise you wont get the payoff you need.

[Mercury69 3]

Let's say the blinds are 600/1200 w 125 ante, and you have 85,000 with an M of 44.You're in MP2. UTG folds, UTG+1 limps, MP1 limps.You look down and see a hand such as a decent suited connector (78s, 910s, 10Js) or a small to mid pocket pair (22-99).Is it ever okay to limp behind, or are the blinds and antes too valuable at this point to do so?This of course assumes that the players left to act aren't avid raisers and none of them are in shove/fold mode.

I think it's OK to limp to go set mining or hoping to hit a monster flop with sooted connectors. With a stack like that and a couple of limps in front of you, however, stacks that are 7-10M or even a bit larger will be inclined to shove relatively light (or raise 5-6xBB if they have a larger stack and a penchant for aggression) to pick up all the dead money piling up. It's possible someone is limping a big PP, hoping for a raise they can jump all over, but that's invitational of trouble, imo.With a stack of 40+ M, I'd feel comfortable raising suited connectors/small to mid PP's in position and, occasionally, popping in a big raise over a couple of limpers with the same. In part, it'll have to do with the stack sizes of the limpers and overall table aggression, which has not been identified in your post.

[Sheiky 0]

Limping here is much better than raising for a few reasons. You dont want to reopen the betting for the limpers behind you in case one was trapping. A raise costs a lot of money after a couple of limpers and kills your implied odds. If someone wakes up with a big hand behind you then you cant stand a reraise.As long as you mix your plays up, there is nothing wrong with limping as part of an overall small ball strategy.

Matters 0% Changing your actions in reaction to table conditions/stack sizes is obviously correct, but 'mixing' up your PF actions in a tournament for the sake of bein less exploitable is going to be pointless in 99% of cases. If you were a high stakes MTT reg that plays a tonne, then possibly, but even then I doubt it would be the best idea. At any other tournament there's absolutely no point in sacrificing EV for the sake of randomizing your play because you'll never play enough hands with anyone to recoup your losses, assuming it would add metegame value anyway which I doubt it would.

[copernicus 0]

Matters 0% Changing your actions in reaction to table conditions/stack sizes is obviously correct, but 'mixing' up your PF actions in a tournament for the sake of bein less exploitable is going to be pointless in 99% of cases. If you were a high stakes MTT reg that plays a tonne, then possibly, but even then I doubt it would be the best idea. At any other tournament there's absolutely no point in sacrificing EV for the sake of randomizing your play because you'll never play enough hands with anyone to recoup your losses, assuming it would add metegame value anyway which I doubt it would.

Disagree, especially early in a tourney. There is plenty of opportunity to mix up different size raises since youre usually at the same table for as much as two hours. It only takes one showdown to alter someones impression of your play and disguise your actions.

[Merby 3]

While running a marathon.(Obligatory non-serious reply to the question in the thread title)

[TravisG 0]

Disagree, especially early in a tourney. There is plenty of opportunity to mix up different size raises since youre usually at the same table for as much as two hours. It only takes one showdown to alter someones impression of your play and disguise your actions.

Yeah, but that's not what he was saying. There's a difference between effectively just randomizing your play (Which is only good if you're at a table where a good portion knows you really really really well, because random actions counter higher-level thinking) and specifically reacting to the table as your image changes.

[copernicus 0]

Yeah, but that's not what he was saying. There's a difference between effectively just randomizing your play (Which is only good if you're at a table where a good portion knows you really really really well, because random actions counter higher-level thinking) and specifically reacting to the table as your image changes.

If the issue is "randomization" per se, I agree it is less likely to have an impact versus "deciding". However, it can't hurt, and it can overcome the human tendency to be influenced by quality of cards.

[bigcoled 1]

With suited connectors, I feel you can lose their value by always limping them. A raise, particularly if you are playing them from early or early/mid position gives you more value for you hand. 1. Effectivly thinning the field increases the chances that you can C-bet and take it down. 2. You effectivly conceal your hand, and are able to play it with the same respect as AA or some other big hand. ( this relates to 1) 3. A reraise preflop allows you to get out of the way of a much bigger hand, and can make an opponent more concretely define their hand preflop. 3b. If a player chooses to smooth call a large pair, we can still get away from our hand on the flop after a C-bet gets raised. This goes along with being able to more accuratley assess hand ranges. If they continue to slow play, our hand will most likely have some sort of draw available to it, if we dont flop big. It we have nothing, we shut down after a call.I guess my deal is with suited connectors is that if we are only limping, what's the point in our cards being suited in a 7 way pot? We will find ourselves in a losing proposition making flushes in these situations, so for that I feel the hands lose value. I also think when played in position our option to limp or even call a raise grows larger, in EP I feel we need to have a raise be our primary option, or I don't feel we are playing our hand for full value.I welcome commentary on my thoughts, I am learning as well....

[copernicus 0]

With suited connectors, I feel you can lose their value by always limping them. A raise, particularly if you are playing them from early or early/mid position gives you more value for you hand. 1. Effectivly thinning the field increases the chances that you can C-bet and take it down. 2. You effectivly conceal your hand, and are able to play it with the same respect as AA or some other big hand. ( this relates to 1) 3. A reraise preflop allows you to get out of the way of a much bigger hand, and can make an opponent more concretely define their hand preflop. 3b. If a player chooses to smooth call a large pair, we can still get away from our hand on the flop after a C-bet gets raised. This goes along with being able to more accuratley assess hand ranges. If they continue to slow play, our hand will most likely have some sort of draw available to it, if we dont flop big. It we have nothing, we shut down after a call.I guess my deal is with suited connectors is that if we are only limping, what's the point in our cards being suited in a 7 way pot? We will find ourselves in a losing proposition making flushes in these situations, so for that I feel the hands lose value. I also think when played in position our option to limp or even call a raise grows larger, in EP I feel we need to have a raise be our primary option, or I don't feel we are playing our hand for full value.I welcome commentary on my thoughts, I am learning as well....

I agree you dont always limp with them or you become too predictable, but I think you have the position considerations backwards. If you open raise with them from late position you have much more FE to increase their value. From EP or EMP you stand too much chance of a reraise that you cant call.I also dont understand why you feel that making a flush 7 handed is a "losing proposition". Flush over Flush is very rare, and 7 handed gives you a much better chance of stacking someone.Specifically discuss my first post in this thread and what other considerations youd add or what you think is wrong in it. That would help me understand where youre coming from.

[MovingIn 0]

Limping is not okay with hands that we're not willing to play against a raise, since the greatest possibility with PF limping is that we will get re-raised behind... or in situations where the chances of a raise behind are at their greatest, i.e. in EP, MP or any position where players likely to raise limpers are behind us.Typically, the best situations to limp are at an extremely tight table that frequently allows the entire table to limp... and/or with position, usually on the button, where the chances of a raise behind decrease substantially.

[bigcoled 1]

Limping here is much better than raising for a few reasons. You dont want to reopen the betting for the limpers behind you in case one was trapping. A raise costs a lot of money after a couple of limpers and kills your implied odds. If someone wakes up with a big hand behind you then you cant stand a reraise.As long as you mix your plays up, there is nothing wrong with limping as part of an overall small ball strategy.

This is all very dependant on your table, everything is. If I have a limpy table, I start making raises, I charge them more to see the flops. If the players are calling raises, I up my raise, if they're still calling raises, I tighten up my hand requirements, but make the same raises. In this situation, these people are playing weak if they're doing alot of limping, I would make my raise 2.5x plus and extra "x" for each limper. Our raises are then considerable. I definatley see the benefit of a limp to let other players put in a raise to reveal the stength of their hand in later position than us raising from early position and letting them trap us when they're in lp. I would say at a tighter table limping is good, at a limpy table a raise is better, imo.

[copernicus 0]

This is all very dependant on your table, everything is. If I have a limpy table, I start making raises, I charge them more to see the flops. If the players are calling raises, I up my raise, if they're still calling raises, I tighten up my hand requirements, but make the same raises. In this situation, these people are playing weak if they're doing alot of limping, I would make my raise 2.5x plus and extra "x" for each limper. Our raises are then considerable. I definatley see the benefit of a limp to let other players put in a raise to reveal the stength of their hand in later position than us raising from early position and letting them trap us when they're in lp. I would say at a tighter table limping is good, at a limpy table a raise is better, imo.

The OP asked specifically about drawing hands...SC's and middle pair. the above is fine with big hands, but a mistake with drawing hands in mp.

[bigcoled 1]

The OP asked specifically about drawing hands...SC's and middle pair. the above is fine with big hands, but a mistake with drawing hands in mp.

i disagree... I feel it is uninspired to play to just play a drawing hand like a drawing hand... it seems heartless, and lacks any creativity in your game, thus losing value. You aren't keeping your opponent guessing, and your giving yourself only one way to win the hand (making the best hand).I'm sure this varies in cash games and tournaments, but I feel in any situation you need to take control of your table, and how you play these hands is a big indicator on a person's potential as a player.EDIT: My point is fewer players to beat(isolation)= A greater liklihood you can win the hand without making a hand (without showdown). For me in a tournament this is my goal, keep the pots controlled and take down the hand with as little resistence as possible. Also fewer players= fewer hands to the flop= less liklihood our opponents will make hand worth continuing past the flop.

[copernicus 0]

i disagree... I feel it is uninspired to play to just play a drawing hand like a drawing hand... it seems heartless, and lacks any creativity in your game, thus losing value. You aren't keeping your opponent guessing, and your giving yourself only one way to win the hand (making the best hand).I'm sure this varies in cash games and tournaments, but I feel in any situation you need to take control of your table, and how you play these hands is a big indicator on a person's potential as a player.EDIT: My point is fewer players to beat(isolation)= A greater liklihood you can win the hand without making a hand (without showdown). For me in a tournament this is my goal, keep the pots controlled and take down the hand with as little resistence as possible. Also fewer players= fewer hands to the flop= less liklihood our opponents will make hand worth continuing past the flop.

you can try and be as creative as you want but you cant change the facts of the math. When you raise with a drawing hand you kill the implied odds in two ways...you raise the cost to play, and you limit the number of hands that can pay you off. An occasional off play like raising with SCs for deception may increase your payoff potential and therefore your implied odds but you make the play when the number of potential callers is already limited, not when youve already been given a gift of a couple of limpers.Your edit points out the folly of FPS. You dont WANT to win this hand without a showdown. The cost of a raise that has any fold equity is prohibitive with a minimum raise to 8000. The pot is something like 5000, so you are laying 8:5 to have even a minimal chance of taking the pot down now. If youre called the pot is a minimum of 21000 and a stack to pot ratio of 4 doesnt give you the implied odds needed to justify a one way draw...ie flop perfectly or just wasted 8000 chips. On the other hand, if you limp behind it only costs 1200, you have a SPR of 10:1 which is playable for a drawing hand. You may get bet out by a big bet early on the flop, buts its only cost you 1200 instead of 8000.Your potential as a player is limited by your bankroll more than it is by "lack of creativity". You can give up small edges to make a play to pick up blinds and limps, but you cant turn a playable hand into a mathematically impossible hand and expect to survive very long.DNs PokerVT section on FPS says something to the effect of "professionals dont make a living with fancy plays. Be creative only sporadically"

[Aces Rule 0]

i disagree... I feel it is uninspired to play to just play a drawing hand like a drawing hand... it seems heartless, and lacks any creativity in your game, thus losing value. You aren't keeping your opponent guessing, and your giving yourself only one way to win the hand (making the best hand).I'm sure this varies in cash games and tournaments, but I feel in any situation you need to take control of your table, and how you play these hands is a big indicator on a person's potential as a player.EDIT: My point is fewer players to beat(isolation)= A greater liklihood you can win the hand without making a hand (without showdown). For me in a tournament this is my goal, keep the pots controlled and take down the hand with as little resistence as possible. Also fewer players= fewer hands to the flop= less liklihood our opponents will make hand worth continuing past the flop.

This (the bold above) is a steal strategy not a speculative strategy. You want to steal pf or on the flop for a small pot while with spec hands you want to flop a big hand (or draw) for a big pot. Any time you're playing a spec/drawing hand you should be welcoming multi-way action to help build a big pot to pay for all the times you're going to miss.. A robust discussion took place here where players on a steal only made a move with hands that had some speculative value whereas I took the position that cards do not matter in a steal but that postion and your read on the targets were the paramount factors. Your point speaks to making a steal with a hand of some value rather than a hand of some value looking to see a cheap flop and becoming a hand of great value.

[bigcoled 1]

DNs PokerVT section on FPS says something to the effect of "professionals dont make a living with fancy plays. Be creative only sporadically"

It's not a fancy play, it's controlling the pot... I can see the value of limping spec hands in position, but this player is clearly out of position.... or does position not matter in this situation? I was taught position always has an effect on how you play your hand... If you limp you are pretty much throwing the money away at this point... If you raise you increase the odds of that money coming back to you... I believe what is being discussed is the difference between an aggressive player (me) and a passive player (whoever)... I like parenthesis to make sure what I'm saying is clear... even though I just used "whoever" which isn't clear at all... I don't believe either play has to be wrong neccesarily, but each simply fits in a different style of play...

[bigcoled 1]

I think the player should open for about 5500... Folding to a reraise.... with, say, 2 callers lead out for about 8750.... invest 14250, leaving him with roughly 70,000... with the 14,250 invested his 8750 Cbet stands to win a ~20K pot.....the more I try to think this through the more i think about my own play, and what I'm thinking at different points. I actually like limping mid and low pocket pairs, because you are going to get in less trouble when you miss, whereas with suited connectors there's a much greater liklihood you are going to have some piece of the flop, so your Cbet will be more of a semibluff than an all out bluff, making me more willing to invest more into the pot, this fact is why i play my suited connectors more aggressivly and I feel over the long run I get more value out of them than someone who just limps them and trys to flop big while being a passive caller in the hand. Once again with low and mid pocket pairs I'm looking to commit as little as possible... I don't feel it's appropriate to have these 2 hand ranges lumped together because they are very different....