Is Limping In Really so Bad?

[mange1234]

Limping

I have found that limping in cost more in the long run. You limp in, then limp after the flop, and then limp on 4th street, then decision what to do for the flop, after you have let everyone get their cards.

It is best to just raise if you have the hand, and reraise if hand calls for it or fold if not.

Good players can detect that you are limping and scared. So, they will take advantage of it, by throwing out a feeler bet or just raise you. Knowing full well, that most likely you will fold.

Other day, I had pocket QQs and decided to limp. Kept on calling small bet until I was outdrawn. Then realize, I would have saved money by just three bet my hand and possible would have won the pot by folding some players.

Don,t limp unless you are laying to snag one of those "allin" types. lol

good luck, on and off the felts,

mike

 

[Jblocher1]

Generally a bad idea. If its good enough to limp it's good enough to open

 

[Ubercroz]

Why you shouldn't limp:

I think limping is pretty much always bad, it doesn't accomplish anything is a good way to lose money over the long run.

For the most part people who want to play poker well should be playing a tight range. Depending on the table size you are selecting this range can vary, and if you are playing in a tournament this will be more variable. However, we should mostly be playing a tight range. Strong hands and position are the tools that we have at our disposal, so lets use them.

If we are playing a tight range then we need to get value from the hands that we decide to play. The best way to get value from your strong hands is to put money into the pot. The best way to get money into the pot is to bet. The more you bet the more money is in the pot. Not only that but it makes people fold, if people fold we win without a contest - but maybe I will get into that a little bit more later.

I saw someone write that they will limp with AA because they want to build a pot by letting other people limp in. Reconsider your thinking on this. Lets say you are UTG and you have AA, you don't know how many people are going to enter the pot with a limp. Based on your strategy you are hopeful that 4-5 people will call you. so lets say its $1 blinds, just for simplicity sake. This means that you will be playing a $6.50 pot against 5 opponents. Your equity in winning that pot is ~60%, or $3.90, another way to look at it is that you will win all of that $6.50 60% of the time, either way is fine, but lets just call it $3.90. That's profitable, though if we were to expand that analysis you are likely to put more money into the pot and if more money goes in then the odds of winning a big pot change.... but for now we will stop at the flop.

So if you bet, lets say you want to raise it to 3bb, or $3. You get 1 caller for $3 plus the bb and the sb. You now have a pot of $7.50 against 1 opponent, our equity there is around 89% or ~$6.68.

So by betting 1 time with 1 caller we not only have a bigger pot, but we also have more equity because we are against fewer players with a stronger hand. The difference in equity there is a difference of 2.8bb's. That means when you limp to "get a big pot" you are actually giving up on almost 3bb's worth of value. So limping there lost us money. So playing a tight game we should be more profitable betting than we are limping. So while limping there is not "bad" as it will still make us some money it is WORSE than betting.

Another reason that limping is bad is when you take that same idea and use a hand with worse value- or one that should lose most of the time. If you limp with a low equity hand you are going to more often lose than win. I wouldn't be surprised to see someone losing a little less than .5bb's with weak holdings when they limp. Part of the problem is it takes a great deal of skill and experience to be able to play in a multi-way pot, especially if you are out of position. You have to have a very good understanding of that your opponents holdings could be (which is hard if everyone limps) and you have to know you are holding a monster if the stacks move into the pot.

The other reason to bet is that if others are limping and we are in position then we should bet to take their bb's. If we have a strong holding and are in position we should expect that not everyone will call your raise, which is instantly profitable when everyone folds. If you reduce to 1 opponent then you have built a big pot with stronger holdings in position. This is just pure equity. I love to play against people who limp call. Even if they play back at me on the flop I still make money off them because my hands are better than theirs most of the time.

So there are a number of reasons not to limp, part of it being that limping is worse than raising even if it is not strictly a losing play.

 

[IPlay]

By watching people and how they play, if the stronger players folded and I know the ones left in tend to fold on raise preflop then I would call. I do understand your point though about letting others flop a good hand.

More of an online tactic as you don't usually get as many weak players in live games.



Sent from my C6903 using Tapatalk

Ahh you play live, thats a whole other monster that I have never attempted

 

[Lotok]

Live is loads more fun, I play in the nuts poker league. Held in pubs across the UK.

Sent from my C6903 using Tapatalk

 

[LeanAndMean]

I noticed this year while watching pros play on TV, they are doing a lot of limping. I know it used to be frowned on by experts, but now e1 is limping and calling it small pot poker. I have always been a limper, guess I was ahead of my time.

 

[JusSumguy]

One of the most important things a poker player should always be trying to do is be the master of the table.

I agree

if the stronger players folded

What is a "stronger" player? The person who raises a lot? The guy with the 22" biceps? The quiet guy who rarely plays a pot?

Just what is a stronger player?

-

 

[Lotok]

I agree



What is a "stronger" player? The person who raises a lot? The guy with the 22" biceps? The quiet guy who rarely plays a pot?

Just what is a stronger player?

-

TAG's and Aggressives usually. Hard to explain but you get a feel for people at the table, while watching their play style you get an idea. Maybe my midichlorians are off the scale

 

[SpookMBluffwell]

I don't like limping in with certain hands because it'll lead to an unbalanced range. I don't know how the play is like at the site you're on, but that's bad if they can catch on.

Even if they don't, your letting them see the flop for free with worse hands. If you raise whenever you're more likely to have an advantage, you'll increase the likelihood of winning more than what the blinds take.

Sometimes after I foolishly limp into a hand the flop hits and then I think to myself"look what you got yourself into now" lol...

 

[fletchdad]

I wont read this whole thing, so sorry if this has been addressed already.....

There are very few absolutes in poker. When you are first to act, you have 3 choices. Fold, call or raise. If someone has already just called you have the same three choices.

So, what do you do? Well, it comes down to that famous poker saying...... "It depends".

Limping certainly has its merits in the right situation. If you are fairly certain that you can get away with calling and not be raised, there are a number of situations where you should do this. I wont list them here, cause the things that factor in as to if this is a good play or not are so situation based, and there is no "right" way to limp that is universally going to be used.

To say "limping is always wrong" is silly. To limp a lot is bleeding money.

Look for articles on ABC poker, and use that as your foundation until you start to understand how to recognize, and adapt to, the table dynamics and player traits.

 

[horizon12]

Not bad, in early when blinds low you can limp suited connectors and low pair, but this only right when play micro limits, because in pot always 2-3 player play, but in high limit need always open raise,,,

 

[blueskies]

You limp when you have a speculative hand that can vastly increase in strength after the flop if you hit. With such a hand you want more ppl in the pot with out because it increases the chances of someone making a good, but inferior hand, that he will pay you off with.

This means: small pocket pairs and suited connectors.

Some people will tell you never limp. Once you hear the word "never" you can safely tune him out. Poker is so situation-dependent that "never" does not apply.

I laugh when I see people go crazy with stuff like 33 and get mad at the "donks" who clean them out.

 

[Ubercroz]

Some people will tell you never limp. Once you hear the word "never" you can safely tune him out. Poker is so situation-dependent that "never" does not apply.

Maybe not never... but most always don't. Normally limping is not beneficial. Raising can get people to fold, and will often get more money in the pot than a limp will.

I would strongly discourage MOST players to limp.

If you don't really understand why you shouldn't limp then, in fact, you probably should NEVER limp until you understand it. You will be doing a disservice to yourself by limping because you likely don't play the flop well either.

I said never, but don't tune me out - because its good advice and you will be better at poker if you stick to that rule.

 

[hobonc]

Here is my case for limping.

You should at times limp. It can be situational like the previously mentioned trap play which was AA or KK in early position at a table with aggressive players; or it could be like holding 8 10 os in late position with like 7.5:1 odds for 1/30th of your stack. A limp here could pay off if the flop hits you hard. Like has also been said, these type of limps can end up going south on you so be forewarned.

I also play knowing that lots of players are observant, and many play with poker trackers. If they are able to polarize you it can be detrimental. Adding a small amount of limping in your game can make it a little erratic and help avoid this.

I can't really tell you when and where to limp in order to make it more advantageous. It is situational. It will come with experience. The exact same hand you might play differently given the situation.

As another poster stated: one key advantage to raising is projecting a strong hand which may lead to more successful post flop play. So you should indeed raise a good portion of the time. Also, too much limping can definitely cause you to lose value on monster hands when you do raise with them. In other words, it can polarize you the opposite way.

Just my thoughts on the matter.

 

[SloPowers]

The best advice I got when I started was 'fold more'... that reduced my range considerably. It's not so much what you do pre flop with you hand, but what you will do with it post flop! If you are only going to fold to a post-flop bet or raise, you probably shouldn't be in the hand in the first place!
Having said that, limping can be a strategic move for some players but you need to know who you are up against to determine just how to play it.

 

[Ubercroz]

Here is my case for limping.

You should at times limp. It can be situational like the previously mentioned trap play which was AA or KK in early position at a table with aggressive players;

As I explained once, this in an incorrect thought.

If you are in early position and limp then you will be playing (more likely) in a multi-way pot. AA has less equity in a multi-way pot.

Lets say you get 5 limpers each for $1. You have a $6.50 and your equity is around 48%. that earns you around $3.12. Good but not great.

Lets say you bet $3bb and get 1 caller (not the blind). You have $7.50 in the pot and 84% equity. that earns you around $6.30.

Simple math explains very clearly why you are wrong to limp.

Limping is bad. Don't fool yourself into thinking that there are some really strong benefits to limping. Good players will just demolish you in the long run.

Maybe I will say it like this- I would love to play at a table where everyone else limps and either calls or folds. I can abuse your weak and predictable play by betting a strong range of hands. I get bigger pots in position with strong hands.

If I was interested in winning more money I would just advise you to limp more. more limpers means I make more money. However I want you to get better.

Please, for the love of God and all things holy, don't limp.

 

[KingDave13]

Limping in

It is a must in my opinioin. To add another level of being unpredictable before the flop may get weaker hands to raise and get big headed by not seeing a raise in front. Especially if you only raise with certain hole cards in a certain range an opponent may catch on and start taking advantage of knowing what flops miss your range.

However Limping may also bite you in the rear so be sure to keep mixing it up and maintain an adamant mind of what your opponent has done in the past.

 

[hobonc]

As I explained once, this in an incorrect thought.

If you are in early position and limp then you will be playing (more likely) in a multi-way pot. AA has less equity in a multi-way pot.

Not necessarily. If it is raised it gives you the chance to re-raise. It works because I have used the trap too many times to count. It has the potential to do just as you said but that is what I meant went I said it could go south. Once you get more experience you'll find this play can be profitable. If it turns out like you have described then just play the hand like any other pocket pair hand.

 

[MasterOfDisaster]

Depends but in general raising is often way better as limping.

 

[IntenseHeat]

I wish I would have read this thread sooner. As it is, it's been pretty well worked over. I would just like to say that I come down on the side of raise or fold. And to to those who think that limping in to allow more players in builds bigger pots, I'd like to point out that this is an illusion. One player calling a 3x raise is conrtibuting as many chips to the pot as three players limping in. At the same time playing a hand against one opponent greatly increases your chances of winning the hand compared to playing against three opponents.

And to those who think they save chips by limping into pots, once again, I find this to be an illusion. These players tend to limp into more pots with a much lighter range of hands. It is not uncommon for me to see players limping into pots at more than a 6:1 ratio compared to me, and frequently higher than that. At that rate I would have to double my normal raise size to be putting as many chips into the pot as these limp-a-lot players. Since these limpers are often seeing flops against as much as half, or more, of the players at the table, they are going to have a much lower chance of winning those pots. So, not only are they likely to be contributing more chips to pots than me, they are very likely to be getting a much lower return on investment.

That's all assuming that players are limping in light and seeing a lot of flops. We know, of course, that this isn't always the case. Some players, as stated in the above posts, think it's clever limp in with big pocket pairs and try to trap a lesser hand. The problem with this is that, while you may or may not get paid off by someone flopping top pair on a light board, you are almost certain to pay off the bingo player that flops two small pair on you. But how is that different from any other hand? After all, we are all reluctant to fold a big pair when we see a weak board. The difference is that with a pre-flop raise, you're likely to get the majority of those suited garbage, small connector, one gapper, and weak ace players out of the hand.

Anyway, as I always say, play the way you play. Do what works for you. To those limping in with monster hands that end up getting cracked, don't cuss out the guy who just hit bingo on you. It's your own damn fault. You're a victim of your own play. You should have raised his ass out of the pot. And to those who limp in light and hit bingo, well, better lucky than good. Right?

 

[kidnaping]

yes

of course if u think u hand i better than the others i called to never limp

 

[blueskies]

I agree with you limping is bad in most situations. Against competent players you certainly should not open limp.

However, let's say you had 33 in MP on a micro level table of fishes who rarely fold to raises. You raise, everyone behind you calls. 5 to the flop. You miss. You have to fold to any aggression.

Or, you get 3bet and you either have to fold or you call and have to play OOP and just fold to post-flop aggression unless you're willing to put more chips in there with those same 33.

Maybe not never... but most always don't. Normally limping is not beneficial. Raising can get people to fold, and will often get more money in the pot than a limp will.

I would strongly discourage MOST players to limp.

If you don't really understand why you shouldn't limp then, in fact, you probably should NEVER limp until you understand it. You will be doing a disservice to yourself by limping because you likely don't play the flop well either.

I said never, but don't tune me out - because its good advice and you will be better at poker if you stick to that rule.

 

[hobonc]

I wish I would have read this thread sooner. As it is, it's been pretty well worked over. I would just like to say that I come down on the side of raise or fold. And to to those who think that limping in to allow more players in builds bigger pots, I'd like to point out that this is an illusion. One player calling a 3x raise is conrtibuting as many chips to the pot as three players limping in. At the same time playing a hand against one opponent greatly increases your chances of winning the hand compared to playing against three opponents.

And to those who think they save chips by limping into pots, once again, I find this to be an illusion. These players tend to limp into more pots with a much lighter range of hands. It is not uncommon for me to see players limping into pots at more than a 6:1 ratio compared to me, and frequently higher than that. At that rate I would have to double my normal raise size to be putting as many chips into the pot as these limp-a-lot players. Since these limpers are often seeing flops against as much as half, or more, of the players at the table, they are going to have a much lower chance of winning those pots. So, not only are they likely to be contributing more chips to pots than me, they are very likely to be getting a much lower return on investment.

That's all assuming that players are limping in light and seeing a lot of flops. We know, of course, that this isn't always the case. Some players, as stated in the above posts, think it's clever limp in with big pocket pairs and try to trap a lesser hand. The problem with this is that, while you may or may not get paid off by someone flopping top pair on a light board, you are almost certain to pay off the bingo player that flops two small pair on you. But how is that different from any other hand? After all, we are all reluctant to fold a big pair when we see a weak board. The difference is that with a pre-flop raise, you're likely to get the majority of those suited garbage, small connector, one gapper, and weak ace players out of the hand.

Anyway, as I always say, play the way you play. Do what works for you. To those limping in with monster hands that end up getting cracked, don't cuss out the guy who just hit bingo on you. It's your own damn fault. You're a victim of your own play. You should have raised his ass out of the pot. And to those who limp in light and hit bingo, well, better lucky than good. Right?

This is solid advise. Especially with a tight aggressive strategy. A lot of players do well with this game.

When confronted by this type play, I note the increased raising. If I put them on a certain range, I look for situations I can use that knowledge to my advantage. This is why I'm not a big advocate of the never-ever-limp style.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying limp ATC every hand. I mean finding situations where limps have the potential to be profitable.....excellent pot odds with meager holdings, implied odds, villain's playing style.....and add some in to your game to try and keep villain from getting a bead on you.

I would say try to be good but at the same time take small risks and allow luck to help you also. It doesn't always work out but that's poker.

 

[Az4zel]

Like the others said, I learned early on and it was good advice then and good advice now. "If a hand is good enough to call its good enough to raise" Barely ever limp. raising gives you the control. limping = weak. Tons of good advice above me so thats all i have to say. good luck
-A

 

[Ubercroz]

I agree with you limping is bad in most situations. Against competent players you certainly should not open limp.

However, let's say you had 33 in MP on a micro level table of fishes who rarely fold to raises. You raise, everyone behind you calls. 5 to the flop. You miss. You have to fold to any aggression.

Or, you get 3bet and you either have to fold or you call and have to play OOP and just fold to post-flop aggression unless you're willing to put more chips in there with those same 33.

1: If your playing a tight range you should not be raising with 33 in mp in a full ring game. 6max its fine.

2: If you get multiple callers and you are out of position then you should not Cbet most flops. You can still value bet flops you hit though.

3: Lets say that you do bet 33 in mp and get 5 callers behind you. Thats amazing. You canr be happy with that result because you will probably make money doing this even if you fold when you miss. with 5 callers you instantly have 5:1 proft, thats nice, but your odds of hitting a set are about 16:1. So if you can get a call from 1 player on 2 streets after that flop when you do get your set then you will show immediate profit. There is a good portion of the time you will actually get more than 1 caller (if 5 people called pre-flop). By betting you ensure a larger pot which allows you to get MORE value when you do hit the set.

4: If you are going to play 33 in mp it is STILL better to raise than to limp, because you are more likely to get the implied odds you need to enter the pot at all.

5: playing 33 OOP is relatively easy against multiple opponents. Its harder against just one.

6: I have not yet read a credible argument for limping. Even the guys saying limp raise with AA are wrong. You are more likely to fold out the raiser by limp-raising than you are if you simply just bet, you also run the risk of people simply limping behind you. Against a TAG opponent limping is still worse because limp-raising reveals more about your range than simply raising.

7: don't limp, you hurt yourself by doing it. you disguise nothing. you lose value from the hands that should be getting more value.

8: you should fold to 3bets more often than not. actually folding to a 3bet should be your standard move when OOP, unless you want to shove pre or on the flop. I think not raising with a hand because you don't want to get 3bet is poor decision making. its okay to fold. if the guy is constantly 3betting you, then you can adjust. otherwise fold with a smile and move on. A pocket pair should never call a 3bet just to set mine, it is a -EV move - even if you capture the guys entire stack when you do it. You have to be around 150bb deep before you can profitably call a 3bet with a small pocket pair purely to set mine.