Limping With Aa Utg From Now On!

[delphi12 0]

Its a strategy I usually mix up but I've now felt that limping in 1st or second position with AA is the proper move and has the most chance of losing small and winning big. Here's the reason, I feel: as 1 or two more people call your initial raise of 4-5x BB the rest of the players including the BB (who feels he has to protect his blind!) calls for "pot odds" (as they like to call it). After a flop that looks uncoordinated, if you raised pre-flop you are now gonna throw in a half-full pot bet (at least I do). Well, it just seems like the amount of money I am throwing in there is too much with AA and often I can't get away with it and get beat by 2 pair or as last night happened trips (when he called with bottom pair, but since 2 people ahead of him called my half-pot flop bet he was, in fact, getting decent odds to get all our money - which he did!). If instead I limp and someone else raises, then I can go in for a huge re-raise and usually isolate or win right there. I learned my lesson last night and honestly feel this is the best strategy - anyone else with thoughts?

[Garn 0]

limping with AA is bad. You want the least amount of players possible to go against hands like AA, KK, AK.It will just cause you to be pissed when you liimp and someone with 78 beats you. Raise and you will be happier

[NocturnalRob 0]

Its a strategy I usually mix up but I've now felt that limping in 1st or second position with AA is the proper move

Okay...this is kind of a sneaky way to approach this hand. And I haven't really had much luck with this hand lately, but these are my thoughts. This is completely dependent on your read of the table. If you've got a lot of aggressive players to your left who like to raise it up in middle and late position, then by all means, give it a shot. But you're not going to like it when it gets limped around and you enter a pot with 4 or 5 other people. Again, just go with your read.

[delphi12 0]

Okay...this is kind of a sneaky way to approach this hand. And I haven't really had much luck with this hand lately, but these are my thoughts. This is completely dependent on your read of the table. If you've got a lot of aggressive players to your left who like to raise it up in middle and late position, then by all means, give it a shot. But you're not going to like it when it gets limped around and you enter a pot with 4 or 5 other people. Again, just go with your read.

The times that I have limped, I seem to lose less money though.. At the $5/$10 NL tables that I usually play *someone* will raise - usually one of the blinds if it is limped around to them - very rarely does a flop get seen without a raise, thats why I think at this level it is imperative to limp/raise or limp/play weak postflop. And, UTG, I think a raise of 7-10x BB for KK at this level is the right play as well, it makes completing the big blind too expensive I think. This is my biggest weakness and costs me the most.

limping with AA is bad. You want the least amount of players possible to go against hands like AA, KK, AK.It will just cause you to be pissed when you liimp and someone with 78 beats you. Raise and you will be happier

Im more pissed when the pot has 4 people and someone with 45 catches trips and I cant release the aces!

[NocturnalRob 0]

And, UTG, I think a raise of 7-10x BB for KK at this level is the right play as well, it makes completing the big blind too expensive I think. This is my biggest weakness and costs me the most.

I think obviously it's a bad idea to play the two best starting hands in the game like you're scared. Raising 7-10x the big blind is absurd from under the gun with kk. But then again, i don't play 5/10 NL, so I don't know what to tell you. I will say that if you play scared, then you're not going to make any money. But I'll go back to my original point that it depends on the table. If you've got some guy who will absolutely not give up his blinds, then pop it up 5-6x the bb from utg. See what happens. If he folds, next time pop it up 4-5x. Keep notes. I don't know what site you're playing on, but if you're playing 5/10, i'd imagine you're seeing mostly the same people every day. Hope that helps.

[Actuary 3]

table reads matter

I agree.also, why do some players think getting felted in NL Cash games is horrible?It happens. Play against a bunch of rocks if your don't want action

[delphi12 0]

I think obviously it's a bad idea to play the two best starting hands in the game like you're scared. Raising 7-10x the big blind is absurd from under the gun with kk. But then again, i don't play 5/10 NL, so I don't know what to tell you. I will say that if you play scared, then you're not going to make any money. But I'll go back to my original point that it depends on the table. If you've got some guy who will absolutely not give up his blinds, then pop it up 5-6x the bb from utg. See what happens. If he folds, next time pop it up 4-5x. Keep notes. I don't know what site you're playing on, but if you're playing 5/10, i'd imagine you're seeing mostly the same people every day. Hope that helps.

Its live - Hustler and Hollywood Park casino.And let me get this straight - I don't (at least think I) play scared. Its just that much harder to get away from a hand when the pot is large - I've laid down strong hands in the past, often times to weaker hands, but they were small pots and I don't mind losing those. It's when you forcifully build a large pot - The pros that I talk to (including Druff, though he is a limit specialist) are trying to get me to play more of a trap game and I think I need to work on that - you can get away from hands and will get paid off much more on the hands that you make. Just something I need to work on. I like the discussion, however.

[MasterLJ 0]

Doyle Brunson advocates limping with aces and kings UTG.It only works at the most aggressive of tables where you can expect some sort of raise from those left to act.I dunno... I've shot myself in the foot trying this a few times, but man... every time AK, JJ, QQ and sometimes AJ, AQ bet out pf, and you push all in, they call the limp-re-raise.It's a useful tool under the correct conditions.

[BIG_L_RIP 0]

definitely table dependent. Really came into vogue with some of the wild higher-stakes LA action, where people can raise 5-10x the BB from early position and still get 5 callers. It's less conspicuous live because a lot of pots do get limped.

[Abbaddabba 0]

Uhh, here's a question - why are you only betting half of the pot on the flop?

[Stallion714 0]

I think it would be a good idea to limp in ep SOMETIMES with bullets if you have the intention of reraising big time preflop. Even with 5 players in you should win about a third of the time, and even more so with fewer opponents. So a standard raise preflop is always gonna do you right at any limit. Limping with aces will be something (even unsophisticated players will notice this)people remember . So mixing can be a handy tool.

[BeaverStyle 1]

I think the main idea being expressed is that it depends on table image, and that in my opinion is paramount.I think you need to play each hand with the mindset of: Nothing in poker is constant. Each hand is different, but similar, in the fact that each hand contains information used in future hands.This is pretty straight-forward, and if you say that limping UTG w/ AA,KK is NEVER a good idea, then you are ignoring this philosophy.

[Stallion714 0]

I think the main idea being expressed is that it depends on table image, and that in my opinion is paramount.I think you need to play each hand with the mindset of: Nothing in poker is constant. Each hand is different, but similar, in the fact that each hand contains information used in future hands.This is pretty straight-forward, and if you say that limping UTG w/ AA,KK is NEVER a good idea, then you are ignoring this philosophy.

Wow! this reminds me of the Billy Madison "Little Lost Puppy" story.

[grocery_mony 8]

only limp with aa utg if you are disciplined enough to be able layy it down if you get a few limpers and someone shows alot of strength when u probe after the flop

[76clubs 0]

Ill do it occasionally, but i would rather open up with a raise at an aggressive table, get a caller, and then have a donk come over the top of both of us.i dont like to limp with kings either by the way.i hate to see A2 beat me because i got tricky about it

[BeaverStyle 1]

Ill do it occasionally, but i would rather open up with a raise at an aggressive table, get a caller, and then have a donk come over the top of both of us.i dont like to limp with kings either by the way.i hate to see A2 beat me because i got tricky about it

Yeah, i lost quite a big pot in a cash game by limpin w/ KK,yeah...ya live and you learn

[Arkanoid 0]

Yeah, i lost quite a big pot in a cash game by limpin w/ KK,yeah...ya live and you learn

It's important to know if you are playing full table or shorthand. Shorthand I'd limp AA 1 time in maybe 25. Full table maybe 1 time in 8, but it depends on how much action the table is giving.If you limp reraise with other hands like suited connectors, or even any two cards, you can set up the AA hand if you happen to catch a monster with 67s and show it down. It's all a matter of perception.

[rog 0]

The times that I have limped, I seem to lose less money though..

You'll lose even less if you fold them preflop. Better yet, cash out, quit poker, and put your money in guaranteed bonds. You'll lose less with AA that way. AA is the best starting hand in hold 'em. If you play loss-limit strategies when you are 100% certain you are ahead, you're playing scared. You probably got your aces cracked a few times too many. Raise your aces most of the time.

[NocturnalRob 0]

Ill do it occasionally, but i would rather open up with a raise at an aggressive table, get a caller, and then have a donk come over the top of both of us.i dont like to limp with kings either by the way.i hate to see A2 beat me because i got tricky about it

Especially when the flop comes 2-2-5

[MasterLJ 0]

It's important to know if you are playing full table or shorthand. Shorthand I'd limp AA 1 time in maybe 25. Full table maybe 1 time in 8, but it depends on how much action the table is giving.If you limp reraise with other hands like suited connectors, or even any two cards, you can set up the AA hand if you happen to catch a monster with 67s and show it down. It's all a matter of perception.

Just throwing this out there...For aggressive short-handed players there's no reason to ever slowplay aces, unless you don't like money.

[shamhawks 0]

this response is based on my pokertracker numbers.I have only lost with AA 4 times in 106 chances and have never limped in. I only use the numbers to show that aggression with AA is the only play to eliminate the tight players that might limp in with small-mid PP but will not call the raises with them, and to definetly get rid of the blinds.now this being said, I will sometimes just call a raise in front of me to disguise my hand in hopes of a big pot with the pre-flop aggrssor overplaying his hand, but this will only depend on what the blinds are, how many people called him already, my position, or if I don't think i can put him all-in pre-flop.

[Zach6668 513]

this response is based on my pokertracker numbers.I have only lost with AA 4 times in 106 chances and have never limped in. I only use the numbers to show that aggression with AA is the only play to eliminate the tight players that might limp in with small-mid PP but will not call the raises with them, and to definetly get rid of the blinds.now this being said, I will sometimes just call a raise in front of me to disguise my hand in hopes of a big pot with the pre-flop aggrssor overplaying his hand, but this will only depend on what the blinds are, how many people called him already, my position, or if I don't think i can put him all-in pre-flop.

Ok, I don't play NL, but from a limit standpoint, eliminating players isn't a huge key. The idea is to win more money. For example, I win about 73% of the time, but it is my second most profitable hand, in terms of BB/hand (second only to KK). (Btw, my sample is smallish, 45k hands).I'm just wondering, from an NL point of view, are you still winning more per hands with AA by thinning the field as much? If you see what I'm getting at here. Do we win more with AA against one player, winning more often, than we could against say 3 players winning slightly less often?Just curious.- Zach

[MasterLJ 0]

Ok, I don't play NL, but from a limit standpoint, eliminating players isn't a huge key. The idea is to win more money. For example, I win about 73% of the time, but it is my second most profitable hand, in terms of BB/hand (second only to KK). (Btw, my sample is smallish, 45k hands).I'm just wondering, from an NL point of view, are you still winning more per hands with AA by thinning the field as much? If you see what I'm getting at here. Do we win more with AA against one player, winning more often, than we could against say 3 players winning slightly less often?Just curious.- Zach

In NL you ideally want to get all your money in pre-flop with AA. That is objective #1. Assuming that did not happen, your next goal is to protect by betting very large on a non-scary flop. The longer you drag on with your aces, the more likely you are going to lose.

[shamhawks 0]

In NL you ideally want to get all your money in pre-flop with AA. That is objective #1. Assuming that did not happen, your next goal is to protect by betting very large on a non-scary flop. The longer you drag on with your aces, the more likely you are going to lose.

I agree. I normally will raise big, but will just call a raise sometimes depending on the situation like I said in earlier post. Depending on the player and how many people call his raise before me. If it's just the original raiser who is aggressive I will just call him pre-flop if I don't think I can get him all-in for his chips pre-flop. This really has worked for me in the right situations as it disguises my hand, and I can usually get a big pot out of it post-flop by the aggressor overplaying his hand. have to be real carefull though, and has been some occassions where i did let AA go post flop.If I do get a raise before me and a few callers, I push hard for sure probably going all-in as there is a good pot already.

[Stallion714 0]

Ok, I don't play NL, but from a limit standpoint, eliminating players isn't a huge key. The idea is to win more money. For example, I win about 73% of the time, but it is my second most profitable hand, in terms of BB/hand (second only to KK). (Btw, my sample is smallish, 45k hands).I'm just wondering, from an NL point of view, are you still winning more per hands with AA by thinning the field as much? If you see what I'm getting at here. Do we win more with AA against one player, winning more often, than we could against say 3 players winning slightly less often?Just curious.- Zach

Good God no way. You cant lose a whole lot of equity by adding a player, or two. You're not talking family pot, but not 5 or 6 people either. You can get a bigger payday out of 2 people than you can 1 obviously. That is IF you can get both to call, or raise with a worse hand, or do something ideal with a worse hand post flop. Wich is why it is totally fine to limp with it SOMETIMES.In all reality AA has got a 33% stake going into a flop 5 handed. So it's gonna make money regardless. That's 5 handed! Think of all the jack a couple of people will put in there with top or mid pair depending on the level.Bottom line is, and this is easy, it's real tough to misplay bullets PREFLOP. Flops can move the world if you give it a big enough lever.