shouldn't I play *much* looser?

My poker tracker stats show I win money from all positions on the table. But I win more in SB and BB than I do in UTG, UTG+1 and UTG+2

Does that seem to suggest that I would be better off if I limped a lot of hands? Especially in MP and LP. The only thing is multitabling: I wouldn't be able to play as many tables.

But wouldn't it be prudent to play a lot more if I was playing only 1 or 2 tables for any reason, or some of my tables were slow (i.e. If i play 3 tables and they all trash, why not pick the best hand/position of what's available and limp/raise it?)

I'm not sure how easy it is to do in PT, but isn't the the important factor to discover how profitable your "non-standard" hands are from the blinds?

I mean, if the greater profit is due to a few KA and JJ hands, then your logic wouldn't hold, right?
Oh, and how much profit comes from Blind v Blind play?
And, definitely, how much comes from all folding to your BB? (That can't really happen UTG)

dunno if this helps, but also when limping UTG you have no idea if you will subsequently be raised out of the pot compared to just completing or checking the blind, and raising UTG a lot obviously isn't very good since you will be OOP

and blinds are harder to put on a hand in a limped pot compared to someone who's tight and limps UTG (usuually a PP, or a/k with good kicker, maybe a suited connector).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by benny999

dunno if this helps, but also when limping UTG you have no idea if you will subsequently be raised out of the pot compared to just completing or checking the blind, and raising UTG a lot obviously isn't very good since you will be OOP

---

You have no idea if anyone will raise your blind either. It's just that you have to post it to play the hand. So, in that sense, limping any hand UTG would be no different. In fact you have position on the blinds, so slightly better.

Quote:

---

and blinds are harder to put on a hand in a limped pot compared to someone who's tight and limps UTG (usuually a PP, or a/k with good kicker, maybe a suited connector).

---

So you get more respect than the blinds do. Which may be a good thing or bad, depending on what you plan on doing, I suppose.

It seems to me that if blinds are profitable then it means that the table is playing too passively pre-flop and letting you see too many flops cheaply.

I am finding my blinds profitable, because of the weakness of the tables I play. But I'm trying not to let that sucker me into limping every pot. Which seems like trait that will just get me into hot water at higher levels.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anosmic

You have no idea if anyone will raise your blind either. It's just that you have to post it to play the hand. So, in that sense, limping any hand UTG would be no different. In fact you have position on the blinds, so slightly better.

---

No, he is right (from my experience). Assuming that people will generally raise their premium hands, if there was no raise when it gets to your blinds, your crappy hand has an increased succesrate here. Atleast you'll be able to see a bunch of cards cheaply. If however you do the same UTG, some AK/QQ/whatever guy might be raising behind you.

And yeah "tight is better". It's the stigma here right? So don't question your game, just stick to the rules! And now seriously, for me personally, tight is good.. the first 20 hands at a table, until I see how it plays. Then I go with the flow. Yesterday I played an hour and a half of poker, raised all sorts of crap, called raises with all sorts of crap, limped with all sorts of crap.. now, saying how I did would ofcourse be "bragging", "meaning I still don't get it" and "just be short term, while I lose out on the long term". And salsa, I think you are pretty damn good at poker, so if you think something could improve your game, I wouldn't hesitate but instead trust your own judgment over the "rules" and just try it out asap..

Quote:

---

You have no idea if anyone will raise your blind either.

---

pre flop, the blinds are last position compared to UTG who is first position. and yea, the only times this would work is in real loose/passive tables to give you the pot/implied odds to draw OOP.

Quote:

---

trust your own judgment over the "rules" and just try it out asap

---

i def. agree in not accepting rules and testing, but not asap...from what i can reason, this is a clear example where testing without thinking or getting other opinions would become a big leak in MOST cases.

i used to limp a bunch of "crap" hands at penny tables in EP because the implied odds were huge when ppl play ultra loose/passive and have 200+ bb stacks. obviously, a key is learning when to switch the tight/loose and aggressive/passive gears, although sticking to tag at low stakes is a sure fire way to win and thus heavily promoted here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackvance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anosmic

You have no idea if anyone will raise your blind either. It's just that you have to post it to play the hand. So, in that sense, limping any hand UTG would be no different. In fact you have position on the blinds, so slightly better.

---

No, he is right (from my experience). Assuming that people will generally raise their premium hands, if there was no raise when it gets to your blinds, your crappy hand has an increased succesrate here. Atleast you'll be able to see a bunch of cards cheaply. If however you do the same UTG, some AK/QQ/whatever guy might be raising behind you.

---

The blind is a bet. The BB is not the last to act, he's the second to act.

If you called the BB ever time UTG you'd be no worse off than the BB, technically a little better because you'd have up to two people to act before you on subsequent rounds.

This is not entirely true because your bet would be information-providing (you didn't raise) and or limiting, which the BB's bet isn't (because it's active and so he has the right to raise his own bet).

The point is limping early puts you in a slightly better position than the BB, imho, but since BB is a sucky position that's not saying much.

Again the "limp anything" strategy may work at this level, but it leaves one exposed to decent pre-flop play.

My guess is that a loose passive style pre-flop is not a winning style.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackvance

Yesterday I played an hour and a half of poker, raised all sorts of crap, called raises with all sorts of crap, limped with all sorts of crap.. now, saying how I did would ofcourse be "bragging", "meaning I still don't get it" and "just be short term, while I lose out on the long term".

---

This kind of martyr crap doesn't help your cause, dude.