Verify these positional hand ranges plz

Just wanted some input on these hand ranges for a standard NL small stakes 9 player table. Ranges would obviously change for tight or aggressive games. I know it isn't perfect so feel free to give your opinions.

Raise = To raise when nobody else has raised yet
Reraise = To raise over the top of another raise
Call = To call the raise of another player
Limp = To limp the hand


UTG- Raise: 99+, AJs+, AQ+, KQs+

MP(2-3)- Raise: 99+, AJs+, AJo+, KQo+
Reraise: QQ+, AK
Call: 22-99, TT, JJ, AQs
Limp: 22-88

MP(4-5)- Raise: 99+, ATs+, AJo+, KQo+, KJs+
Reraise: QQ+, AK
Call: 22-99, TT, JJ, AQs
Limp: 22-88

LP (6-7)- Raise: 22+, A2s+, A8o+, K8s+, KTo+, 98s+, J9s+, JTo+
Reraise: QQ+, AK
Call: 22-99, TT, JJ, AQs
Limp: 54s+, 86s+, T7s+, Axs

B - Raise: 22+, A2s+, A8o+, K8s+, KTo+, 98s+, J9s+, JTo+
Reraise: QQ+, AK
Limp: 43s+, 54o+, 64s+, 97o+, 85s+, Axs, Kxs

SB & BB- Raise: A9+, KT+, JQo+, AK, 22+
Reraise: QQ+, AK Call: Suited broadways
Call: 22+
Limp: 43s+, 64s+, 85s+, Axs, Kxs, Broadways, 22+
If late pos. raiser: Reraise: AQo+, AJs+, TT+

go look at rentons guide in the FR forum.

Most of this is from rentons actually, along with other info I've read. Just wanted to see what other ppl thought.

I usually raise any pair UTG as opposed to just 99+. Anyone disagree with this?

I know every poker book has one of these charts in it, but I would make the contrarian suggestion that this is of only limited value.

The most important factors in what hands you play pre-flop is the behavior of the players who are acting before you (and what that behavior tells you about their ranges), the expected behavior of the players who are acting after you, and the stack sizes of each of these players.

And bear in mind, it isn't whether the "table" is "tight" or "loose" in most instances; rather, it is the specific betting patterns of the people betting before you and the people betting after you. A loose player to your right is a lot different animal than a loose player to your left.

When you have made your estimation of what the betting to your right has told you about those players' hands and what you expect to happen to your left if you raise, call, or fold, then look at your cards and determine the best play for that hand. In that last step, of course, preflop hand charts are fine to consult but your decision should be informed by what you have actually seen at the table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LawDude

I know every poker book has one of these charts in it, but I would make the contrarian suggestion that this is of only limited value.

The most important factors in what hands you play pre-flop is the behavior of the players who are acting before you (and what that behavior tells you about their ranges), the expected behavior of the players who are acting after you, and the stack sizes of each of these players.

And bear in mind, it isn't whether the "table" is "tight" or "loose" in most instances; rather, it is the specific betting patterns of the people betting before you and the people betting after you. A loose player to your right is a lot different animal than a loose player to your left.

When you have made your estimation of what the betting to your right has told you about those players' hands and what you expect to happen to your left if you raise, call, or fold, then look at your cards and determine the best play for that hand. In that last step, of course, preflop hand charts are fine to consult but your decision should be informed by what you have actually seen at the table.

---

I endorse this message.

Lawdude I completely agree with you on that. The point of this post wasn't to say these are the only hands that can be played at each position. Rather just a base guide to start a discussion on what people recommend and how they would change their ranges depending on other players at the table.

Guys, he isn't saying he doesn't play the players at his table, he just wants input on his ranges.

As a rule, for me, I do not limp in what you call MP 2-3 without a solid table read. I would either raise all PP or fold 22-66 (situational) and raise the rest.

I'd also be careful defaulting to 3betting UTG raisers with QQ.

The LP limping range is really huge. I'm mostly tighter than this.

Gah, there are so many situational factors for this it's ridic. I'm sure you'll be fine with this as a basis, then adjusting as you get better.

raise 77+ UTG imo

If we're mostly playing 77 for set value/c-bet why not throw in 22-66? I'm curious because I generally raise 22+.

Anyone else throw AJs/o into the muck utg and MP?

I do.

There's been a lot of talk about raising pairs in EP and MP. I think it comes down to shania. If you're playing in a game where you don't open limp anything, you should probably be raising all pairs since they should still be profitable.

I'm thinking that this range is close enough to what each of us considers standard that you should probably start playing like this, get 10k+ hands in a database and go over each type of hand for each position and decide what's profitable and what's not. If you find some of these aren't profitable, either figure out why and fix it or drop the hand out of your range for the positions where it isn't profitable.

Keep in mind that 10k isn't really enough for that kind of analysis, but it should give you a reasonable idea.

I've made alot of changes to my range since finding this site.

I toss AJo/AJs in UTG, UTG+1, MP1 and MP2. I also toss QJo, KQo and ATo in these same spots. This depends on the table of course.

I will also toss AQo to an early position PF raise now unless i have reason to believe the villain is a total fish.

When I say limp i'm not always talking about open limping. Especially with a lot of the late position limp hands these are for multiple limpers infront of you. These are the type of hands you want to play in multiway pots. I'm not a big fan of open limping since it's a very weak play, but I will do it every so often if the table is passive enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micro2Macro

If we're mostly playing 77 for set value/c-bet why not throw in 22-66? I'm curious because I generally raise 22+.

---

we're playing to steal blinds / cbet and hopefully get a fold
and sometimes we're going to be good with a hand like 77 on the river if we check through on the turn/river
not as much with 22

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iopq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micro2Macro

If we're mostly playing 77 for set value/c-bet why not throw in 22-66? I'm curious because I generally raise 22+.

---

we're playing to steal blinds / cbet and hopefully get a fold
and sometimes we're going to be good with a hand like 77 on the river if we check through on the turn/river
not as much with 22

---

If the game is the least bit aggressive I don't see checking down to the river once someone calls your raise very common.

The game isn't always so agro.

The 22-55 thing is an ongoing battle. Some players want to play all pairs from all positions, some throw out 22-55 UTG and UTG+1, some even in MP. Personally I play all of them, but I think it's splitting hairs.

The table dynamics of a given session can also drastically change back and forth between agg/passive and loose/tight. So it's probably just as wrong to *generally always play 22-55 UTG as it is to *generally always fold them. IMO if you feel you're just going to get outplayed postlfop then fold'em, but if that's the case there is certainly a better table out there to choose from. I'm not sure how profitable playing these hands in a higher stakes game would be, but because microstakes tables are usually either weak-tight or loose/passive, you'll either get lots of callers when you raise thus giving you great pot odds, or you'll get 1 or 2 callers who will fold to your c-bet 90% of the time, and won't let go of an overpair when you do happen to make your set.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micro2Macro

The table dynamics of a given session can also drastically change back and forth between agg/passive and loose/tight. So it's probably just as wrong to *generally always play 22-55 UTG as it is to *generally always fold them. IMO if you feel you're just going to get outplayed postlfop then fold'em, but if that's the case there is certainly a better table out there to choose from. I'm not sure how profitable playing these hands in a higher stakes game would be, but because microstakes tables are usually either weak-tight or loose/passive, you'll either get lots of callers when you raise thus giving you great pot odds, or you'll get 1 or 2 callers who will fold to your c-bet 90% of the time, and won't let go of an overpair when you do happen to make your set.

---

I don't think this is a useful thought process...

Of course game dynamics change, of course generalities suck, but it's not useful to think about it that way. Any given situation is unique, etc.

Higher stakes games have some players that are putting you on a fairly accurate range, at least preflop, so adding 22-55 to your UTG raising range makes more sense for value and for balance. That said, at really loose passive games, limping is fine. If you think you can get someone's stack in without raising preflop, then you can probably limp these more profitably than you can raise them. I've always tried to key my game towards moving up, so I've been raising them UTG since I played $5nl.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micro2Macro

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iopq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micro2Macro

If we're mostly playing 77 for set value/c-bet why not throw in 22-66? I'm curious because I generally raise 22+.

---

we're playing to steal blinds / cbet and hopefully get a fold
and sometimes we're going to be good with a hand like 77 on the river if we check through on the turn/river
not as much with 22

---

If the game is the least bit aggressive I don't see checking down to the river once someone calls your raise very common.

---

Happens at least some of the time in NL50, if you play higher maybe it doesn't happen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dev

The game isn't always so agro.

The 22-55 thing is an ongoing battle. Some players want to play all pairs from all positions, some throw out 22-55 UTG and UTG+1, some even in MP. Personally I play all of them, but I think it's splitting hairs.

---

I doubt raising small PP in EP is profitable. MAYBE because it's FR and you are on a nitty table but I doubt it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dev

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micro2Macro

The table dynamics of a given session can also drastically change back and forth between agg/passive and loose/tight. So it's probably just as wrong to *generally always play 22-55 UTG as it is to *generally always fold them. IMO if you feel you're just going to get outplayed postlfop then fold'em, but if that's the case there is certainly a better table out there to choose from. I'm not sure how profitable playing these hands in a higher stakes game would be, but because microstakes tables are usually either weak-tight or loose/passive, you'll either get lots of callers when you raise thus giving you great pot odds, or you'll get 1 or 2 callers who will fold to your c-bet 90% of the time, and won't let go of an overpair when you do happen to make your set.

---

I don't think this is a useful thought process...

Of course game dynamics change, of course generalities suck, but it's not useful to think about it that way. Any given situation is unique, etc.

Higher stakes games have some players that are putting you on a fairly accurate range, at least preflop, so adding 22-55 to your UTG raising range makes more sense for value and for balance. That said, at really loose passive games, limping is fine. If you think you can get someone's stack in without raising preflop, then you can probably limp these more profitably than you can raise them. I've always tried to key my game towards moving up, so I've been raising them UTG since I played $5nl.

---

When your UTG you're first to act and you have limited information regarding what everyone will do behind you (the only info you really have is how they play but other than that you can't be certian what situation you will run into otherwise). Therefore, should you always play 22-55 or should you always fold them?

I don't think there is much room for sometimes playing them and sometimes folding them because we are always first to act here. However, does anyone know of any situations where we would fold hands 22-55 UTG when we normally open with them? Some people here always fold the small pairs UTG and some always play them. (I always open for a raise UTG and may limp if the table is really l/p but lately I've been always raising them because I'm also trying to key my game towards moving up. I'm curious to know what conditions would merit a fold as opposed to opening.

There's no right answer. It's a trap. Please don't beat this to death anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dev

There's no right answer. It's a trap. Please don't beat this to death anymore.

---

lol alright. I just wonder why some people advocate never playing 22-55 UTG while others believe they should always be played. I guess it's just a style thing and how they play postlfop...

If I can beat it to death, you have three possible courses of action with 22-55 in early position. You can raise it, call it, or fold it.

Now, consider 3 tables:

1. 3 betting pre-flop is common, and the two players to your immediate left each re-raise 30 percent of the time when faced with a pre-flop raise. Further, the aggression continues post-flop-- they bet such a wide variety of flops that until the turn or even the river, it is always very difficult to pin them down to a usefully narrow range.

2. The table is passive. You can raise a pot pre-flop and you will tend to get the same number of callers as who would limp if you did not raise. Further, the two players to your immediate left are calling stations who will call your post-flop bets at least until the river with any made hand or even overcards.

3. The table respects raises. Normally, when someone raises pre-flop, that player takes down the pot. In those few instances where a pre-flop raise was called or re-raised, the caller / re-raiser always turned over a monster pre-flop hand such as pocket queens or higher. The pre-flop raise also affects post-flop play-- players are very cautious to even call the continuation bet of a pre-flop raiser. The two players to your left are especially likely to fold to pre-flop aggression either pre-flop or on the flop in response to a c-bet.

Now, obviously, each of these 3 tables are an exaggeration. But ask yourself, should you be doing the same thing with your small pocket pairs in early position on each of these tables? And if your answer is "no", then you shouldn't be relying on an inflexible rule in playing your preflop hands and instead should be starting with what you expect the response will be when you play a hand pre-flop and then figure out how you will play hands pre-flop in the specific situation you are in at that table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iopq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micro2Macro

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iopq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micro2Macro

If we're mostly playing 77 for set value/c-bet why not throw in 22-66? I'm curious because I generally raise 22+.

---

we're playing to steal blinds / cbet and hopefully get a fold
and sometimes we're going to be good with a hand like 77 on the river if we check through on the turn/river
not as much with 22

---

If the game is the least bit aggressive I don't see checking down to the river once someone calls your raise very common.

---

Happens at least some of the time in NL50, if you play higher maybe it doesn't happen

---

Did I not just imply that it happens sometimes by saying it's not very common? Sorry maybe my understanding of english just isn't very good. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I'm pretty sure you just repeated what I said in different words.

So to make that easier for you to read I'll replace the topic with 'x':

I said: 'I don't see 'x' being very common'

You said: ' 'x' Happens at least some of the time'

Of course it does? Lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LawDude

If I can beat it to death, you have three possible courses of action with 22-55 in early position. You can raise it, call it, or fold it.

Now, consider 3 tables:

1. 3 betting pre-flop is common, and the two players to your immediate left each re-raise 30 percent of the time when faced with a pre-flop raise. Further, the aggression continues post-flop-- they bet such a wide variety of flops that until the turn or even the river, it is always very difficult to pin them down to a usefully narrow range.

2. The table is passive. You can raise a pot pre-flop and you will tend to get the same number of callers as who would limp if you did not raise. Further, the two players to your immediate left are calling stations who will call your post-flop bets at least until the river with any made hand or even overcards.

3. The table respects raises. Normally, when someone raises pre-flop, that player takes down the pot. In those few instances where a pre-flop raise was called or re-raised, the caller / re-raiser always turned over a monster pre-flop hand such as pocket queens or higher. The pre-flop raise also affects post-flop play-- players are very cautious to even call the continuation bet of a pre-flop raiser. The two players to your left are especially likely to fold to pre-flop aggression either pre-flop or on the flop in response to a c-bet.

Now, obviously, each of these 3 tables are an exaggeration. But ask yourself, should you be doing the same thing with your small pocket pairs in early position on each of these tables? And if your answer is "no", then you shouldn't be relying on an inflexible rule in playing your preflop hands and instead should be starting with what you expect the response will be when you play a hand pre-flop and then figure out how you will play hands pre-flop in the specific situation you are in at that table.

---

Nice answer. I think Renton's guide talks about how he plays small pairs in EP based on the table but not in this detail. Obviously though there are endless scenerios, but you definately did a good job illustrating the extremes.

No, if it happens at least some of the time, it's another way of saying it's NOT uncommon.

Here is the range of commonness:

|----not common----|-----some of the time----|------common----|

Something that isn't common happens some of the time. If you'd like to argue more feel free to do so just so you can get the last word in.

But honestly, it's as bad as you claiming you never limp UTG when your V$IP and PFR don't match.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LawDude

1. 3 betting pre-flop is common, and the two players to your immediate left each re-raise 30 percent of the time when faced with a pre-flop raise. Further, the aggression continues post-flop-- they bet such a wide variety of flops that until the turn or even the river, it is always very difficult to pin them down to a usefully narrow range.

---

I know this was an exaggeration, but since it seemed to be intended to show when one should open fold low pocket pairs, I disagree:

Code:

---

        equity        win        tie              pots won        pots tied       
Hand 0:        47.551%          47.12%        00.43%            9464707053          85972837.50  { 66-22 }
Hand 1:        52.449%          52.02%        00.43%            10448673192          85972837.50  { 55+, A2s+, K5s+, Q7s+, J8s+, T8s+, 98s, A7o+, A5o, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }

---

With just a little bit of fold equity (and we have way more than a little bit), I'm raise/shoving these hands against 30% 3bettors almost every time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iopq

|----not common----|-----some of the time----|------common----|

---

This seems like a sensible range to me :)

Doan:

You are being a bit reductive. I didn't say HOW a player should play small pocket pairs in early position in each of these situations; only that you obviously need to be aware of what the table is doing rather than simply applying an inflexible hand chart.

But I would also caution you as to what I said about scenario 1. You may in theory have positive equity against these guys in playing your pocket pairs, but I would think a couple of important variables would nonetheless come into play:

1. Stack sizes. Since we know these guys are going to raise a lot, it means that they are essentially increasing the price of playing small pocket pairs out of position. That doesn't necessarily mean we shouldn't play them, but they need to have large enough chip stacks that on the hands we hit (especially when we hit a set or a straight), we have a shot at a significant payoff.

2. Note that in my hypothetical, I indicated that these guys c-bet so much that it made it very difficult to put them on a useful range postflop. And this is one of the problems with playing small pocket pairs out of position. They are fine when you hit your set or straight, but when you don't, you need to be able to figure out how likely you are to be ahead in the hand, because that's where a lot of that equity comes from (you are ahead of everyone who misses the flop). A spewing, c-betting maniac to your left side makes post-flop play much more difficult. Now, if you are just fantastic with reads, maybe you can overcome that disadvantage and extract the equity out of your small pocket pair, but it's a pretty difficult situation. I know-- I've been in it.

If you are playing a small pocket pair out of position against some very aggressive players, the reality is that you probably aren't going to collect on many of the hands where they miss the flop unless you are willing to absorb some pretty big beats on hands where they hit it. It is, at best, pretty high variance poker. While I am not going to say categorically that you are wrong to play these, tightening up in this situation at least keeps you out of the types of hands where you have no idea whether you are ahead or behind and no way to find out other than to pour a ton of chips into the pot.

I think this thread needs to be renamed to 'how to play 22-55 UTG'

You guys are f'ing killing me.

Short of railing every game you play, no one can tell you whether those hands are going to be profitable in whichever situation you happen to be in. The line is so thin between raise and fold that if I have a tough decision on another table I tend to break with my usual raise strategy and just fold them.

Renton's guide did a good job of explaining it, and it's been beaten to death again here. The only way to get a concrete answer for yourself is to play 10k hands folding them, 10k hands raising them, and 10k hands limping them and looking at your results. Even then if it's close it's still a toss up. All of our time could be better used analyzing aspects of the game that can have a greater impact on our earn or working on hand histories.

LawDude.... You totally missed my point. I didn't say to raise/call with 66-22, I said to raise/shove. Punish those wide 3-bettors. If they call our shove with AJs+, AQo+, 88+, that is only 6% of hands, meaning they are folding 80% of the time. When we are called, we still have 35% equity against that range. Raise/shove ftw! :D

Doan, again, let's say that you raise / shove with 33 out of position. And Mr. 30 percent re-raise to your left (remember my hypothetical) calls your shove or re-raises your raise with various higher pocket pairs and higher overcards. You are going to end up in a lot of coin-flip or less than coinflip pots. Further, since you are out of position, you aren't guaranteed to go heads up with him but rather are also going to lose pots to anyone at the table who is playing normal poker, gets a read on what you are doing, and waits until he has, say, pocket 8's to fire his bullets.

Again, I am not saying your approach is wrong. It could be right if you can be sure that the Villain isn't going to properly tailor his range for calling your shoves and you are able to successfully isolate against the Villain without inviting calls from other players with strong hands.

I do think, however, that you seem to be quite resistant to the idea that there can be any circumstances where you might have to fold these cards out of position. I don't think there is one right answer or approach to playing poker. But I do think that flexibility and tailoring an approach to exploit the leaks in those around you at the table are crucial skills. Good play, in my mind, starts not with the desire to play certain hands but in an understanding of what others are likely to do in response to your actions and whether you can take advantage of that situation given the cards that you have. You don't have to agree with my assumption that one might want to fold low pocket pairs out of position on table 1. But I am sure that there is some table texture, somewhere, on which betting a low pocket pair out of position, whether with a limp, a raise, or a shove, is a negative expected value play. The point of my post was to make players aware of the things they ought to be looking for, not to proscribe one approach for playing these different types of tables.

I'm not resistant at all. For a while I was folding 66-22 UTG in 6-max. I was just trying to make the point that in the case you mentioned, there might actually be more money to be made by raise/shoving (against a 30% 3-bettor) than by folding. I mean, if I raise to 4x UTG and he makes it 12x, should I really be expecting much action from the rest of the table?

I would probably open fold these hands in EP most of the time in FR, to tell you the truth. I don't really like limping very much (I mostly play 6-max), and I find that too many people cold-call in the low stakes for me to want to play a bricked 22 out of position.

Getting back to the original post, I would modify my opening range somewhat, tightening up in early position and widening it in late position:

UTG: 99+, AQs+, AKo
UTG+1: 88+, AJs+, KQs, AQo+
MP1: 77+, AJs+, KQs+, AJo+
MP2: 66+, ATs+, KJs+, AJo+, KQo
MP3: 22+, A9s+, KTs+, QTs+, JTs-54s, ATo+, KJo+
CO: 22+, A2s+, K9s+, Q9s+, J8s+, T9s-54s, T8s-53s, A9o+, KTo+, QJo
Button: 22+, A2s+, K2s+, Q8s+, J7s+, T7s+, 96s+, 85s+, 75s+, 64s+, 53s+, A7o+, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o

Or something along those lines. Keep in mind that this is an initial opening range only; I wouldn't necessarily be isolating limpers with all of these hands (except for the limp/call/fit-or-fold type). I base mid-late position raises a lot on how tight the players behind me are, especially the blinds. If the blinds never fold, my CO and Button range look more like my MP3 range. If the BB is like 6/6 and the players behind me are pretty straightforward, I might open my button range from MP3.

Also, I would be 3-betting not just for value against people with a PFR over 20, depending on our positions on the table of course, and I might cold call with a hand like JJ or TT in position and try to play postflop against my opponent's wide range.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micro2Macro

Something that isn't common happens some of the time. If you'd like to argue more feel free to do so just so you can get the last word in.

But honestly, it's as bad as you claiming you never limp UTG when your V$IP and PFR don't match.

---

I don't limp UTG, but the stats I posted were cumulative