EP Limping Question

What do you think of opening hands like AQs, AJs, and ATs for a limp from EP - at 10nl 6max?

Rationale
1. Typical villains play passively, so at least half the open limps don't get raised.
2. AT+ plays pretty well in limped pots, rarely dominated and often dominating.
3. Limp/call disguises typical line with small pp's and makes them easier to play against overcards.

Downside
* You end up out of position with an easily dominated hand in raised pots, and just have to fold in reraised ones.

I know that #3 is weak since they don't pay attention down here, but when I've played 25nl, there's enough 3betting to make limping small pp's attractive in EP. Actually, #2 is the strongest argument given the awful postflop play in limped pots at 10nl. But overall its a tactic that has to win a lot of small ball to make up for the medium/big hands you can lose.

I was afraid to post this. It's non-standard and probably a terrible idea at higher stakes. But over 5k hands at 10nl, I'm fairly pleased with it. If I play extremely careful in raised pots, it seems to work out. It allows to me to open a few extra hands in EP where I'm generally only playing something 11/8.

You're missing some key points as downsides:
1- You're not building a pot for when you hit. (this one is very important imo)
2- People still call raises with all kinds of dominating hands.
3- With initiative and less people in the pot, you can take away lots of missed flops.

Also your 2nd point as a rationale I disagree with and actually works as a downside. AT+ plays pretty poor in limped, often multiway, pots (imo) and often makes you put in too much money against better hands.

Fwiw I'd open all of those for a raise and am very comfortable with it. Especially at loose-passive stakes, because high cards are great there, even OOP. Just make sure you valuebet them to death when you hit and don't spew when you miss.


Btw, don't be afraid to post thoughts like this. It's important to understand why certain things are advised. Following a playbook won't make you a much better player, knowing how to make your own decision, and what factors to weigh, will do that.

First, thanks for the thoughtful reply. I've just been thinking and trying to learn the game better, like you said. It's hard to do in a vacuum.

Originally Posted by minSim

Also your 2nd point as a rationale I disagree with and actually works as a downside. AT+ plays pretty poor in limped, often multiway, pots (imo) and often makes you put in too much money against better hands.

This has been different than my experience, like I said. But I certainly see your point. It worries me that I am playing hands to win small pots and lose big ones.

I'll keep working on it. Thanks.

how can playing stronger hands weaker be +EV on a passive table? Passive= no raising=no money in pots= no point in debating on whether there needs to be deceptive play in order to win pots.

If the table is going to let you run them over, then run them over. start raising ATs utg and your pp's. for me personally, i don't look at AT/J as a showdown hand if i'm raising them in EP on a passive table. I'm looking at stealing the blinds, and hoping people notice i'm opening a large range in EP, so they will start calling behind with a larger range (instead of 3 betting lighter). so you are getting more action. the only worry you should have is how your opponents play Ax on an A high flop. if you're called by a guy that doesn't reraise his high kickers, you should be less willing to fire at him OOP. If it's a guy that loves playing any ace, fire away since you know a T+ kicker will have him dominated most of the time.

only read the title, dont limp in EP ever. totally unnecessary at low stakes

i open limp once every other blue moon and my hand is almost always 55 or 44 and i am UTG.

It's better to fold then limp and that might even be better then raising.

I'm running an experiment now to the tune of 15-25 ptbb/100 (16k hands in two weeks) on Party beginner's tables ($0.02/$0.04) as I created an account there to clear a bonus. Those are ridiculously soft and it's probably true to say that you could play any winning strategy, but I've tried to come up with a strategy to crush games that are that soft and it ended up involving quite a lot of open limping. (My focus in the experiment is on postflop betting decisions.)

Thing is, at those stakes there's often a donkey who'll stack off with top or even middle pair, which greatly increases my implied odds if I get to see a flop with any two suited or connected/gappers cheaply enough.

Prior to deciding to actively include open limping in my strategy (for these tables) I read Harrington on Cash vol 1 pg 133-135 Limping, Raising and the Deception Principle (aka Ode to Open Limping). Let me just quote one of his four reasons here:

Originally Posted by DanHarrington

Open limping lets you see more flops cheaply: One of your goals is to see a lot of flops at a low price. A limp is cheaper than a raise, and at many tables a limp will begin a cascade of limpers, building a large pot for a minimum investment.

It's plain that limping (open or otherwise) is a waste of money if it's generally always raised and you then have to fold, but if the table is such that it allows open limping I think it can be profitable. That said, I don't think I'd ever include open limping in my strategy if I hadn't already identified the table as a ridiculously soft and allowing open limpers. (Super soft micro stakes, and allegedly some small stakes live games)

Thus, for now I'm going to assume that you are at a table where open limping can be profitable and ask the question - which hands would be candidates for open limping? In my mind those candidates would mainly be suited connectors - those that need to improve a lot to be profitable. Those hands that have equity preflop should generally be raised while they have equity. When you consider EP you may end up favouring medium/high suited connectors, and may decide to include low pocket pairs and some trouble hands.

Limping is something I think can be profitable when crushing super soft games with terribad players. Depending on site I would expect to find some games like this at the lowest limits, maybe up to 10nl. I would expect 25nl generally not to be soft enough to consider this.

If you're playing for implied odds, how do you do that when you don't know who's going to call you behind you?

I think it's more +EV to limp in position then out of it, which is closer to the OP's question (not just open limping in general). Another reason not to do it much is habit, if you're doing it now you'll be more willing to do it when you move up in stakes, where it isn't likely to be allowed as much. Something to think about anyways.

1. If we take a quick mathematical look using 10 hands......
10 x .1= 1.00 spent
if half the time we're folding to a raise -> 10 x 0.1= 0.5
so we're -0.5 so far
using PT stats to generalize, let's say we go to showdown 30% of the time, and wine 50% of those showdowns.
we lose 0.2 (the time we're seeing a flop but don't go to showdown)
so that leaves 3 times we've limped preflop in which we would have to make back that pre-flop dollar. of course, this is simplified, so it doesn't take into account betting amounts invested on later streets. But the quickest way to get that money is to bet the flop, but how often are you going to bet the flop oop with a weak hand in a multi-way pot? i'm not sure, but you might be able to get an answer with pokerEV.
to see your performance of open limping utg with PT, do the following in the filter:
under VPIP, select put money in
under pre-flop raise, select no raise
since it's 6 max, select EXACTLY and 3 for positions off the button
(the only downside is this works only for sites that differentiate between 6-max and full ring. it won't work for sites that lump them all together.....someone will have to work on that and post maybe? )