Range trouble in pre-flop bingo type sessions

Hi everyone,

$1/2 NL live action games often seem to play out like pre-flop pot building (multiple limp/call) bingo. I'm finding it hard to put folks on ranges pre-flop when I run into these games.


In a recent session at Harrah's Vegas (and also separately a session in Riverwind in OK) I consistently saw 4-6 way multi-player limped pots on MOST hands. When the limpers were faced with anything between $6 - $12 open raise they ALL typically called; that is, rarely would limpers fold and even more rare 3-bet after an open raise pre-flop. This pattern left me quite confused about the cards opponents could be holding and therefore scrambling on the flop to put the opponents on a range. Though I tried to put the opponent on a range, most of the time I was surprised by the showdown (most pots got to showdown with 2 players).


What are ideas about how to narrow each opponents range pre-flop in these limp/call multi-pot scenarios?


Thank you in advance for your thoughts!


scubed

Any two is a range. It happens to be a wide range but sometimes it is your opponents pre-flop range. Further action in the hand may help to narrow the range. For instance any two might be good enough pre-flop but they may only continue if they hit something.

Update: I am learning to beat the bingo folks pre-flop by determining what their threshold of pre-flop raise pain is!

In $1/$2 at Mandolay Bay & MGM in Vegas I recently experimented with increasing my pre-flop 2bet raise size to fold out the marginal hands that previously were calling a $6/$7 open. In some games $12 would fold out a few, whilst other games were $16. I played in one game where a $22 raise was required from early position to ensure the pot was only contested by 1-2 players.

This pain threshold approach was a little nerve racking & pulse racing because it made the pots really big, really quick, but at least I had a better place to start with trying to identify and then narrow the ranges of my opponents.

I was going to say "raise bigger pre" but I noticed you have already started to figure that out. find the sweet spot raise size where you are going 3w max to flops (including yourself).


As for ranges, here is an easy clue.... if you get raised by some passive 1/2 player, it's going to be 2p+ nearly always. Always pay attention to the action when you aren't involved, and note the players (mentally obv) who will raise draws, or some players raise top pair also to "see where they're at."

The range is ATC, the deck. if they become aggressive, like C/R, they have 2p+ man, until proven otherwise. EZ game. It doesn't matter that the flop is Q-6-2r, they will have Q-6, 2-6, etc, or a set. Most live players have an element of fear in their game, and they will raise super dry boards frequently because they don't want people sucking out. People don't bluff very often, seriously. If it feels "icky" you are behind most likely. You can adjust to players who raise less than 2p+, but only after you see proof they are capable of raising with less than 2p+. I mean actually seeing the hand go to showdown, not just strong suspicions they are out of line or they are bluffing.


I hope this helps.

Buy in for a low amount. Like 40 BB.

I don’t necessarily agree with changing your raise amount pre.
They’ll adapt to your raising strategy as you adapted to them calling every hand, whilst not improving your EV and essentially playing inconsistently - now with the added bonus of having more money stranded in the middle of the table.
Whether it’s immediately apparent or not, you’re forcing them to make worse decisions by playing with a standard opening value but maybe diversifying your opening range to make you harder to read. That seems like a better strategy to me.
Good luck!

People don't adjust that often at live poker tables. I've played thousands upon thousands of hours at 1/2, and some at 1/3 as well. The opponents are mostly people who don't study the game at all, and they have no idea how to play.


The raise size is too small because H would get multiple callers here most likely. AK doesn't play well multi way OOP.


I understand the theory of what you're saying, but it just isn't applicable in the live arena.

I hear you; I’ve been playing live for over 10 years so I take your point, it depends on the table.
Some of the regs I play against study theory too so I guess it just depends on the environment.

theres no chance of narrowing their ranges, play stronger hands, when you make a strong hand bet it hard

I realize the sample size is small, but in 4 different live 8+ hour sessions at $1/$2 I experimented with your recommendation of waiting for and only playing stronger hands. The problem I found with the strategy is opponents - even players who don't pay attention -notice when someone is playing so tightly. One guy even said "come in, the water is fine." The effect was the only time any opponent got involved in a hand with me was when they also had a hand. When I "bet it hard" - they folded so I wasn't able to maximize my value.

The days I experimented with this super tight approach I won mostly small pots, barely enough to make up for the blinds/small pots (when I had to fold) I was losing. I ended each of those days with really small wins - just under $5 USD an hour.

I am grateful for the winning sessions - but at the end of those long days I absolutely know that different strategies to be involved in more pots are more profitable (and, of course, risky).

I would just spend an hour watching, playing only strong hands, then adjust. Once people see you as a rock, increase your bluffing right?

also disagree with buying in small, rake will hammer you, you need to maximize the moment you get a A high flush and someone has trips or king high, and they lose their whole stack.

small ball sounds like it would work excellent at these tables. as would semi bluffing with draws, etc.

I was unclear about how the original poster thought that buying in for a low amount would help solve the problem of opponents limping pre-flop ending up in 4-5 way pots most of the time.

Perhaps the thought was that with a small stack opponents would fold fearing an all in of $40??


Thank you for weighing in on the idea to buy-in small. I also don't see the point of this for the same reason - maximizing profit when the opportunities present themselves!

In addition - I can't imagine that a small stack would cause opponents to fold to a "normal" raise ($6-12) in a $1/$2 live game. Unless possibly the small stack wouldn't give them implied odds so they'd fold...