Stop limping, start raising limpers. Against a limper or two, I isolate REALLY wide, because, well, they just can't have much.... cuz they limped.
Do you not think that by constantly raising limpers,
you unbalance your stratagy,
make it far easier for opponents to define the range of your hand,
offer large implied odds to premium hands,
limit your own ability to play and conseal speculative hands ?
you unbalance your stratagy,
make it far easier for opponents to define the range of your hand,
offer large implied odds to premium hands,
limit your own ability to play and conseal speculative hands ?
Right, but it means there's a 95% chance they don't have a good hand . Or at least they think its not good enough to raise, which says a lot.Just because somebody limps into a pot, does not mean they don't have a hand.
Obviosly I am not C9 who is much better player than I am but in response to your questions Widening your range actually would have the opposite effect to your concerns above.
Unbalance - no because adusting to limpers should already be something you are prepared for as it is something you come across a lot.
Easier to define range - No because you range has widened it will make it much harder
Implied odds - Raising reduces implied odds and really only becomes a factor if they call and presumably you will be making adjustments if that ocurrs and can out play them post flop
Conceal speculative hands - again no becuase by widening your range with raises with speculative hands you will be disguising your hands better.
Just my thoughts I play the monkey stakes so it might not have the depth of a response you were looking for.
I cant see how widening your raising range will help here.
Imagine two equaly statted players, i.e. play top 20% hands and raise top 10%
first player limpls, so his hand is somewhere within top 10 - 20% (but occasionally it will be a trap and his hand is much stronger preflop)
so to put a figure on it we say his hand is within top 15%
Now what advantage does widening our raising range gain us?
The times that he is playing a hand in 15-20 % he will fold, but the times he is playing a hand 10-15% he will probably call.
By raising we can be certain that his hand is good, but as he has put money in already, we will not get him to fold with all but his raising range.
Therefore the cost of seeing the flop increases, but the decisions are not made that much easier post flop, so its not like you are paying to make your own decisiuons easier.
I can see that you would want to tighten up a little, pre flop palying yourself only top 15%, and that things like suited connectors become more playable against multiple limpers, but right now, I cannot see the advantage of widening the raising range.
1) I'm not sure I know what unbalancing my strategy means. It shouldn't ever be a strategy to "limp every so often". If anything, it helps my strategy, because my strategy is to raise a lot.
2) No, I raise ~27% of my hands preflop, and more in late position. My range is WIDE. If I limp, it would be far easier for them to define my range, because then a ton of good hands that I usually raise with aren't in that range.
3) By raising, you reduce your reverse implied odds. If I limped with aces, I'm offering more implied odds to them than if I 4-bet right?
4) Speculative hands are often limped, and by raising them, they're concealed. The only problem is that you lose some implied odds against your opponents by raising them. However, you gain the ability to c-bet/get them to check to you on the flop, which is worth plenty more than some loss in implied odds.
Go to hold'em manager & run the filter "Heads up on the flop, no PFR". Then run "Heads up on the flop". You should be massively more profitable when you're heads up on the flop as the preflop raiser.
Right, but it means there's a 95% chance they don't have a good hand . Or at least they think its not good enough to raise, which says a lot.
But see now you are introducing a very specific situation into what was originally a very vague question
By raising - you do not always reduce implied odds. If someone holds AA at table with players bias towards raising, they can limp raise because they can virtually guarantee that someone will raise. Therefore, preflop agains hands that want to get the money inprefop this is a tendency which could be exploited.
Stop limping, start raising limpers. Against a limper or two, I isolate REALLY wide, because, well, they just can't have much.... cuz they limped.
^^^
maybe I am using the wrong term when I say implied odds in this situation.
What I am getting at is by having a large bias towards raising limpers you are making it easier for them to check raise you, because they are more confident that you will raise with a less than premium hand. Thus they are able to get more of your money in preflop.
I would have classed that as implied odds as if the check raise with an enormous raise, it should end the hand at that point.
By limping more, you force them to initaially raise a premium hand as they are less likely to take the limp raise risk of waiting for someone else to raise.
Do you not think that by constantly raising limpers,
you unbalance your stratagy,
make it far easier for opponents to define the range of your hand,
offer large implied odds to premium hands,
limit your own ability to play and conseal speculative hands ?
No, if he limps, his hand will be towards the bottom end of his range (with occasionally some monsters mixed in, but that's pretty rare). If his VPIP is 20%, and his PFR is 10%, he's probably playing the bottom 50% of his range.first player limpls, so his hand is somewhere within top 10 - 20% (but occasionally it will be a trap and his hand is much stronger preflop)
It doesn't gain us equity, it gains initiative. Which is worth far more than the 0.0001bb we lose by raising our top 30% of hands against the bottom half of his range. Additionally, we know he's probably not limping hands like AK, JJ, and we know he's more likely to limp stuff like 22, 45s. So we can now play well against his range.Now what advantage does widening our raising range gain us?
No, fish suck, and call all the time with their whole range. And even if they fold, we make money.The times that he is playing a hand in 15-20 % he will fold, but the times he is playing a hand 10-15% he will probably call.
Yes they are. Most limping hands play fit/fold on the flop. So we c-bet, they fold 75% of the time, and we profit. And when they pitch a fit, they've hit a set/combodraw/two pair/trips and we'll play very well against them, folding when we have air, and drawing with implied odds when we have a draw to a better hand.Therefore the cost of seeing the flop increases, but the decisions are not made that much easier post flop, so its not like you are paying to make your own decisiuons easier.
Not raising for fear of being limp/raised is retarded. I think I've been limp/3-bet like 4 times total. And often, its against some terrible player who has no idea what they're doing and I stack them with 99+/AK+. Limp/3-betting is a decent move in theory, but the problem is that most hands you want to actually 3-bet play TERRIBLY in limped pots. And you give up a ton of value by not just raising them in the first place. Even though I raise a lot, I only raise 27% of the time. The other 73%, I'll usually pass, and they'll often have to play a limped pot. Course, I play 6-max, so there's more incentive to raise as the blinds are easier to steal, but I'm sure the concept is pretty similar playing full ring.By limping more, you force them to initaially raise a premium hand as they are less likely to take the limp raise risk of waiting for someone else to raise.
but I'm sure the concept is pretty similar playing full ring.