how to play aqo with many limpers

[Spademan 94]

Heads up, 5 grand LHE.Let me know.

[Smasharoo 0]

A 5K loss is going to do damage to just about everyone's bankroll that plays the middle limits, I don't buy that someone playing 3/6 wouldn't think so too. Either way, it seems like your backing down from your own challenge, which is fine. If you want to do this, I don't mind either, choice is up to you.No, just demonstarting a point.We can play if you want. I just wanted to make the point. I don't particularly want your money, and I could be great heads up and terrible in ring game.The overarching point is this mindless assumption that I play 3/6 becaise I can't play higher. I play 3/6 because it's easy to beat. 5/10 has recently become very soft, so I play 5/10. If a 30/60 game looks particularly juicy, I play 30/60.I'm not in this for the thrill of victory. I play for money. My kids eat.....

[avsfan 0]

Who's that fella that has been writing about limit poker in Card Player magazine, Roy something or other?...I would like to hear what he has to say. glYD

His name is Roy Cooke and anyone interested in how much of a thinking game limit hold'em can be should read his writings.

[kalahari 0]

I think those of us who advocate raising, are people who have read Small Stakes Hold 'em, where this view is clearly espoused. Those who advocate just calling, I am guessing, have not read this book.The reason I say this, is I was one of those people who used to just call with AQ offsuit here, until I read the book.If you doubt what we are saying, I can certainly understand that. That is the view I used to have, too. But do yourself a favor and pick up the book, and read what they say about Pot Equity Edge. I think it will really clarify what we are all debating here.Neither Jen Harman nor David Sklansky/Ed Miller are wrong. They are both right, but they are talking about different levels of games and opponent.Again, I think those that say raising is wrong, have not read Small Stakes Hold 'em.

[jayboogie 0]

It's fine to disagree with those of us who advocate limping in here, but the way most of you guys come across is that your 100% right in your thinking, but I mean why even bother having a debate about it if your not willing to even listen to the other side's argument. I see your argument, but disagree and if you move up to the bigger games you'll see that raising is counterproductive here.

I haven't seen six people limp preflop, in any size of game, without at least half of them holding crap hands that should have been folded and the others holding playable but weak hands. Given that scenario, raising with AQ is hugely +EV, independent of the size of game. If for some reason you suspect that they all actually have real hands, then feel free to limp, but it's never happened in any game I've played in or watched so I'm reasonably confident in my opinion that raising is correct the vast majority of the time. YMMV.I'm really trying to understand the limp camp, but I haven't actually seen any argument put forward for limping beyond "Jennifer Harman sez so", along with vague worries that somebody might be OK to draw to their gutshot. I'm not that worried about the latter (particularly since that somebody could well be me - most of the straight draws I might flop with AQ are gutshots), and the former isn't really convincing without some kind of concrete argument to back it up.

Does AQ offsuit actually play well multi-way? You should start keeping track of how many hands you win with AQ offsuit in a multi-way pot, trust me it's not many. The advantages of limping are you have a strongly disguised hand if it happens to hit and you can drop it when it bricks the majority of the time. You can also better protect your hand when it hits, because usually somebody will bet and you can then raise and knock out the middle/bottom pair, gutshot draws to give your hand a better chance of holding up. If you had raised pre-flop, everybody checks to you and you obviously bet if you hit your top pair, but everybody then has the odds to call just 1 bet with their weak pairs, gutshots because the pot odds justify it. With that many callers, the chances of your hand holding up are not very good. Like I said, when you get action, it's not a good thing because your almost always beat in a multi-way pot like this. I like to play small pots with AQ offsuit, because the chances of it improving to better than a pair are not good and it'll take more than a pair to scoop a multi-way in most instances.

[Smasharoo 0]

Does AQ offsuit actually play well multi-way? You should start keeping track of how many hands you win with AQ offsuit in a multi-way pot, trust me it's not many.Plays fine multiway in games where people limp in with K7o.That's the whole point.

[jdsabrefan83 0]

bah, i made a long post and i may have read the quote wrong.oh well.

[jayboogie 0]

Does AQ offsuit actually play well multi-way? You should start keeping track of how many hands you win with AQ offsuit in a multi-way pot, trust me it's not many.Plays fine multiway in games where people limp in with K7o.That's the whole point.

I can see your point if your talking about playing against bad players who will play any kind of trash. If this were the case where 6-7 see the flop every hand, then it would be fine to raise here with a pot equity edge and position. I think I mentioned this in another of my posts, but I wasn't referring to this kind of game when I replied earlier. Perhaps it's a misunderstanding.

[Smasharoo 0]

I can see your point if your talking about playing against bad players who will play any kind of trash. If this were the case where 6-7 see the flop every hand, then it would be fine to raise here with a pot equity edge and position. I think I mentioned this in another of my posts, but I wasn't referring to this kind of game when I replied earlier. Perhaps it's a misunderstanding.Yes.Read the whole thread.

[jayboogie 0]

A 5K loss is going to do damage to just about everyone's bankroll that plays the middle limits, I don't buy that someone playing 3/6 wouldn't think so too. Either way, it seems like your backing down from your own challenge, which is fine. If you want to do this, I don't mind either, choice is up to you.No, just demonstarting a point.We can play if you want. I just wanted to make the point. I don't particularly want your money, and I could be great heads up and terrible in ring game.The overarching point is this mindless assumption that I play 3/6 becaise I can't play higher. I play 3/6 because it's easy to beat. 5/10 has recently become very soft, so I play 5/10. If a 30/60 game looks particularly juicy, I play 30/60.I'm not in this for the thrill of victory. I play for money. My kids eat.....

It's been widely stated on here that you made 50 k multi-playing 3/6 for the yr, so I assumed that you only played these limits. If you played other limits to make that 50 k, then that's cool, but I didn't know of that. What I said was based on the assumption that you only played 3/6 and nothing higher, which doesn't make much sense when you can beat similar competition at a higher limit for a bigger profit.As for the match, I don't think anything is gained by doing it for either of us, but if you want to do it, it can be negotiated like I said before.

[Smasharoo 0]

As for the match, I don't think anything is gained by doing it for either of us, but if you want to do it, it can be negotiated like I said before.Nah, we can both find better games, I'm sure.

[AceOfSpaiDs 0]

Raise it. They're limping with marginal hands to see a cheap flop. Don't comply. Make them pay to see the flop. It's a value bet.

I definitely agree with him. You don't want weak hands catching 2 pair against an A on you, and you have position. Raising is definitely what I would do.

[AceOfSpaiDs 0]

Raise it. They're limping with marginal hands to see a cheap flop. Don't comply. Make them pay to see the flop. It's a value bet.

I definitely agree with him. You don't want weak hands catching 2 pair against an A on you, and you have position. Raising is definitely what I would do.

[Dhall901 0]

(I don't have the time to mess with quotes, some I'm going to break this down Smash-style)The part about raising all in in NL was a joke, hence the "I JOKE" at the end,Yeah, I got that. but I do think limit is lame, honestly.Then you, sir, are ignorant.However, I do think that a raise is pointless, who would fold one more bet?Exactly. I'm not trying to get them out. I'm trying to take their money. This is why it's called a value bet. I'm going to make them pay to play their trash hands. I don't play a lot of limit, obviously,Seriously? I'dve never guessed...Or is that just custom play in limit?Some call it custom play. Some call it good play. Some call it optimal play. I suppose it depends on whether or not you know me. I don't think you're in any position to judge anyway, considering you don't play much limit hold'em and have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

You sir, spend to much time on the computer, you are probably old and fat and have no chick and no life. I'm sure you make lots of cash playing limit poker however, so I'm sure you're a great guy. Every time you post you have nothing nice or helpful to say, so eat my nuts and do me a favor and shut the hell up. This a a forum to get opinions and optimally some insight on how to play, I'm sorry you had a terribble life in highschool, but suck in up, be a man, and don't talk sh..it on an internet forum. Honestly, what is the point? Grow up.

[flyingmoose 0]

Every time someone doesn't raise with AQo in limit Hold'Em afetr 6 limpers, god kills a kitten.You don't hate kittens, do you?

[RISEorFall 0]

You sir, spend to much time on the computer, you are probably old and fat and have no chick and no life.

Aw yay, I haven't heard the old "I'm completely wrong and have no way of saving my ego except to tell you you have no sex life and are a loser even though I have never met you and have no idea." speech. that makes me happy.

[Dhall901 0]

You sir, spend to much time on the computer, you are probably old and fat and have no chick and no life.

Aw yay, I haven't heard the old "I'm completely wrong and have no way of saving my ego except to tell you you have no sex life and are a loser even though I have never met you and have no idea." speech. that makes me happy.

My point exactly bro, thanks.If it makes you happier, join me at bodog...the NL tables of course, limit is for females who like to manage their money big bets at a time..lol Bet that gets some panties in a wad haha

[RISEorFall 0]

You sir, spend to much time on the computer, you are probably old and fat and have no chick and no life.

Aw yay, I haven't heard the old "I'm completely wrong and have no way of saving my ego except to tell you you have no sex life and are a loser even though I have never met you and have no idea." speech. that makes me happy.

My point exactly bro, thanks.If it makes you happier, join me at bodog...the NL tables of course, limit is for females who like to manage their money big bets at a time..lol Bet that gets some panties in a wad haha

You completely missed the entire point of my post didnt you. Reading comprehension. Learn it. Use it. You usually need it to pass high school. Oh and if you missed the bit of sarcasm about your speech, keep looking, it's there, I promise.

[Fluffyfrog 0]

I really appreciate all the replies to my question.I buy the argument that in higher limit games, people are better, and you should therefore think twice about raising.Still - what confuses me, is that Jennifer Harman is in my opinion _not_ learning an already good player how to play excellent i late position, she is rather giving general guidelines to a new player.Take a look at the first part of her limit-section. It is not very complex, is it?So, i would say that she is giving guidelines that can be used at lower limits like 2/4, 3/6 etc. And again, i say this based on my view that she is not tutoring the high-stakes player in this part of her limit-section.And yes, because of the simple fact that she is Jennifer Harman, you have got to think there is a point in what she is writing.On the other hand, Ed Miller says "raise!" (I just assume he says that from what i've read in this thread, i guess i'll buy his book soon).Right now i'm not quite sure what to think. I think both "limpers" and "raisers" have good arguments for their views on this situation.

[Dhall901 0]

You sir, spend to much time on the computer, you are probably old and fat and have no chick and no life.

Aw yay, I haven't heard the old "I'm completely wrong and have no way of saving my ego except to tell you you have no sex life and are a loser even though I have never met you and have no idea." speech. that makes me happy.

My point exactly bro, thanks.If it makes you happier, join me at bodog...the NL tables of course, limit is for females who like to manage their money big bets at a time..lol Bet that gets some panties in a wad haha

You completely missed the entire point of my post didnt you. Reading comprehension. Learn it. Use it. You usually need it to pass high school. Oh and if you missed the bit of sarcasm about your speech, keep looking, it's there, I promise.

Missed the sarcasm? No I got it, just telling you to disrespect me with your money on the table, that's how it's done where I am from.

[Canada 0]

. its mathematically correct to raise here. .

prove it.

In a hand against 6 limpers who are donks: Lets put them on a reasonable range of ...JJ-22, AJs-A2s, KQs-K2s, QJs-Q2s, JTs-J2s, T9s-T2s, 98s-92s, 87s-85s, 76s-75s, 65s-64s, 54s, AQo-A2o, KQo-KTo, QJo-QTo, JToYou have about a 3% equity edge over every player, so for every dollar going in you are going to win nearly 3c if you raise your AQo every time.Against 6 limpers thats 18% ROI.It's not huge, but its free money, because you also have position and are a better player than your opponents (you are sitting at tables where you are better than your opponents aren't you....?)That range is broad at both ends, but it narrows at both ends as the quality of players increase ie JJ, KQs etc is raised, so is not being played here as well as hands like 85s are not played early.Even if you have 2-3 early players playing correctly, you still maintain an edge. (they need to be early, because after 3 limpers the correct range of hands to limp with is getting close to the majority of the hands in our initial range.So unless you rate all the early players in this hand as very good - raise.

[TwistedEcho 0]

HPFAP says to just call, winning low limit poker by lee jones says raise. To be honest, i really don't think it matters that much if you raise/call with AQo here. The difference really isn't going to be THAT great. I can also see both arguements, on the limping side, you don't want to give draws the odds to chase, and as we are talking about low limit poker, the limpers won't fold to raise, so all it does is build the pot, and if they get ANY remote semi draw they will call and call and call all the way to the river.However, even if you just limped too, they will call with those same draws even if the pot is small - so all you ensure is that when you win the pot, its a small one, and when you lose it, its also a small one.So basically the amount of times you will win with AQo should be way above the times you lose with it if we take it to showdown(because we're all good players right, and know when to fold it). If we assume the limpers will play the same whether your raising/calling (because lets face it, they like to call), then its surely best to raise because when you win its a bigger pot.I probably limp however if im in the blinds, AQo is the bottom end of the limping cards for me, i just dislike playing it aggressively acting first. AQs/AJs however i do raise.Oh and FWIW i've not been using poker tracker for that long, so only have 9k hands at 25/50c to look at, but i've had AQo 75 times in late position (CO-blinds) and i've been raising it vs limpers and have a 67% winrate with it, for 1.8bb/hand.Would be interesting for those who suggest limping to check their stats for AQo in late pos

[RISEorFall 0]

Missed the sarcasm? No I got it, just telling you to disrespect me with your money on the table, that's how it's done where I am from.

Oh so that's why you like to tell people they are losers and have no sex life on internet forums. Cause you get it done on the table and not through petty words online. Got it. Challenging me to an online poker duel. Yes, you're definately more the man. Got me there, I don't know how I can go on....

[Dhall901 0]

Missed the sarcasm? No I got it, just telling you to disrespect me with your money on the table, that's how it's done where I am from.

Oh so that's why you like to tell people they are losers and have no sex life on internet forums. Cause you get it done on the table and not through petty words online. Got it. Challenging me to an online poker duel. Yes, you're definately more the man. Got me there, I don't know how I can go on....

Did I directlychallenge you? Disrespect you in anyway? Let me check the posts..no i don't think I did. I was just kindly letting you know where I play, if you like to get into a "who's d...ick is bigger" contest, i can send pictures, but if not, relax. The first kid attacked me, so I fired back, let's not turn this into "one of those threads." Leave it to giving the OP comments, if not, pm me and we can see how you feel about it.

[RISEorFall 0]

Did I directlychallenge you? Disrespect you in anyway? Let me check the posts..no i don't think I did. I was just kindly letting you know where I play, if you like to get into a "who's d...ick is bigger" contest, i can send pictures, but if not, relax. The first kid attacked me, so I fired back, let's not turn this into "one of those threads." Leave it to giving the OP comments, if not, pm me and we can see how you feel about it.

No thanks, don't really wanna see your d.ick. Keep it to yourself. I never said you attacked me directly, but you did start trying to tell someone how they never get laid and how big of a loser they are. I just pointed out how great of an arguement that is. Because if you know you're wrong but don't want your ego bruised, you should definately attack someone's social status. Then you want me to come "disrespect you on the tables with my money." Hmm, between that and offering to send me a picture of yourself...I think there's laws against that sort of thing....