Limping preflop - is it ever ok?

As I get more and more hands under my belt I am constantly adjusting my play.

Looking at poker tracker, I've noticed the number of hands I limp in preflop has gone down significantly.

I was trying to figure out if there's ever a correct position to limp. I'm thinking it's table dependent.

For example, you're in the CO with 44 and there's 4 limpers behind you. Do you limp? I'd rather raise and have those 4 limpers call for a bigger pot so I get paid if I hit my set.

But what if you're in the SB with T7s and there's 4 limpers behind you. Wouldn't it be correct to limp here?

Comments/suggestions appreciated.

EDIT: I'm referring to FR cash games.

bump it or dump it FTW!!!

kinda like in real life with women you know...

I limp very very rarely, but there are certain situations where I'll limp. Mainly, if a shortstack(s) has limped and I feel he's too stationy to fold often to an isolation and I have a small pocket pair 22-77. I limp to play a pot multiway for better set odds and to hopefully draw in other limpers (they're common at 20NL) My hand is shit vs him and his short stack in a raised pot.

Sure there are other examples too people could give when it's alright once in a while.

This is a fairly huge topic to explore fully so I'll be brief. Yes its ok if you have a reason/plan that makes it ok. Often for me it depends on how easy it is to build a pot postflop v's that particular table.

When weak players limp into the pot, I love to follow them with position.

Raising light to isolate can be suicide in loose games. Also, if you do it too much, they will adapt. So if I want to play lots of hands against someone I mix up my cold-calls, over-limps and (re)-raises.

The defacto isn't "limping is bad" it's "open limping is bad".

DUCY?

First of all, EVERYTHING in poker is dependent on your opponents.

If there is 4 limpers behind me in the cutoff and the button isn't very agg I'll limp 'potential hands'. Open limping is what you should probably avoid - at least never in 6-max, and only if the game is fishy full ring. Personally I will rarely open limp, unless the game is very, very loose/passive. Limping behind is fine though with potential hands like small pairs and suited connectors. It's probably okay to raise once and awhile as well, but it can't be wrong to take some cheap flops here and there. When you're raising to isolate you generally want to do it with only 1-2 opponets who lean on the weakish/tight side postflop. If they're absolute calling stations just limp the marginal stuff and play hit-to-win.

You also need to think about implied odds. In the SB you're out of position and will need to factor in how easily you can manipulate your opponents and if it is likely you will win some stacks when you hit your big hand that you're looking for.

Please tell me you're going to read Renton's Full Ring Guide soon because he talks through alot of the topics you've been asking questions about.

I find it funny that people will play all sorts of crap out of the SB for half a bet that they won't limp on the button.

You can raise or limp behind with 44 in CO after four limpers, both plays are fine. Completing T7s from SB after 4 limpers is pretty marginal.

as fnord and p4s say

I would NEVER open limp, but limping behind with small pockets or suited connectors isn't horrible. This may be because I mostly play 6max, but I'll take a lot of those type hands I'd limp behind with when I'm on the button and raise it up instead, attempting to either take the pot down right there, or isolate a single player with position.

Originally Posted by pocketfours

You can raise or limp behind with 44 in CO after four limpers

At micros I"m always calling 22-66/77 with 4 in front. People love to limp/call, LOVE. It's just too hard for a noob to play a small pocket in a bloated pot correctly. Where as if there was one limper, or the pot wasn't opened they'll be more selective facing a raise.

Originally Posted by Fnord

I find it funny that people will play all sorts of crap out of the SB for half a bet that they won't limp on the button.

Yep. I will also mention something that I mentioned once before and got no bites. What do you all think about the different blind structures in no limit poker? In other words, here are 4 common structures:

$2 / $3
$1 / $2
$0.10 / $0.25
$1 / $3

It seems to me that your small blind strategy needs to be different depending on the ratio of Cost to Complete / BB. Specifically, the lower the ratio, the more likely you might be to be willing to limp in or raise, the higher the ratio (i.e., the closer you are to needing to put in a full bet), the tighter you should be playing from the SB.

I never see poker books mention this in discussing their pre-flop ranges from the small blind.

Are we talking about online or live?

2/3 - Probably throw the buck in. It doesn't matter enough.
1/2 - I fold more often than most. Like what it does for my table image. More inclined to complete if it's going to be only 3 or 4 way because I can bluff lead into a lot of flops.
1/3 - I'm folding a lot

That's exactly the answer I was looking for, Fnord. I doubt very many players play the small blind differently based on the blind structure, but you should indeed be much tighter when putting 2/3 of a BB in than 1/3.

My online SB results got a lot better when I stopped completing to hit a flop and instead focused on making a lot of small bluffs into these limp pots on boards that hit the sorts of hands I'm expected to have. Then I started also playing with leading into boards that aren't supposed to hit me and had good results with that too...

UTG with AA at an over aggressive full table.

Originally Posted by CBAT

UTG with AA at an over aggressive full table.

Anyone interested in learning ignore this please.

Originally Posted by swiggidy

Originally Posted by CBAT

UTG with AA at an over aggressive full table.

Anyone interested in learning ignore this please.

QFT

mwahaha - you tight-holes.

It's worked before, and I'm sure it will work again! I usually only save that fancy move for tournaments though.