FTR Classic Rethread, Week 4

[Robb]

How should we play small/med pp's? Check out this thread, with posts from FTR icons including fnord, renton, lukie and miffed.

Playing pp at Medium Stakes

Pros and cons of the limp/call from EP are discussed. First half of thread is awesome and goes into set odds, postflop playability when we miss the set, etc. After Lukie's quadruple post, scroll to near the bottom for Jeffrey's discussion of flop odds and playability for suited connectors. This thread just has awesome content all the way through it, with some contrast in viewpoints so you can see all sides of the issues discussed.

Questions for Thought:

1. Should we limp/call small pp's from EP? from MP? Why or why not? What is your current "standard opening" for small pp's?

2. What should our "set odds" line be? 10x? 15x? 20x? more?

3. How deep do the stacks have to be to play sc's for an LP call based on implied odds?

[Fnord]

3. How deep do the stacks have to be to play sc's for an LP call based on implied odds?

For what it's worth, you're best off making this call when you are able to use position to sometimes take the pot away from the pre-flop raiser. Calling just to hit is at best marginal.

[kb coolman]

Another quality trudge, Robb. This is an area of my game I plan to spend a lot of study time on in the next couple of weeks, so this is the perfect thread to get me started.

1) I've found that limp-calling 22-55 from EP is not profitable for set mining. The loss of position here puts you at a tremendous disadvantage from the BTN TAG who raises 4Bb+1BB per limper, putting you at a decision to call a 7-8BB raise. It's just a waste of money. At loose tables, I'll open 4xBB, normally getting 2-4 callers, and can take down the pot with a 2/3 c-bet on the flop, or make a small fortune when my set hits with value bets. On tighter tables, I'll likely fold. I play them similarly from MP. EP, I call behind up to 6xBB, depending on villain tendencies and stack sizes.

2) I really like my set odds line to be 20+ or better, but I need to think about why. Right now, it just 'feels' right, if you know what I mean.

3) I have to think on this a while.

Sorry for the weak answers on 2 and 3, but I'm not done with this thread yet.

[kb coolman]

3. How deep do the stacks have to be to play sc's for an LP call based on implied odds?

For what it's worth, you're best off making this call when you are able to use position to sometimes take the pot away from the pre-flop raiser. Calling just to hit is at best marginal.

I'm really glad to see you posting in the BC again.

[Airles™]

At 6Max NL I'll open every PP for a standard 3-4xBB raise regardless of position. At FR, I'll open PP 77+ from EP. All others I either limp or fold. But I hate open limping from EP because it screams small PP.

With low PP 22-66 (and sometimes 77-QQ) the villain must have around 15-20x the amount to call the bet left in his stack. Same goes for SCs since the odds of flopping a set and a flush/OESD are about the same. And of course we'd rather have position on the raiser.

Therefore, to go "set-hunting", we would prefer to have as many full stacks as possible at our table, us included. I always get a kick out of these guys that buy in for 20-30BB and proceed to go 4/2 over a 100 hands looking to catch that set or shove AI with AA/KK.

I also get a huge laugh when I see players at LHE playing PP's as if it were NLHE, not realizing the implied odds aren't there. Well, that and buying in for less than 12BB, but that's for an entirely different topic.

[Robb]

3. How deep do the stacks have to be to play sc's for an LP call based on implied odds?

For what it's worth, you're best off making this call when you are able to use position to sometimes take the pot away from the pre-flop raiser. Calling just to hit is at best marginal.

Fnord pwns the thread. I was hoping folks would read the other thread and come that conclusion. I personally think sc's get way overvalued by the regs (thank God!). They're semi-bluff hands, typically, with an emphasis on the bluff.

[Robb]

1) I've found that limp-calling 22-55 from EP is not profitable for set mining. The loss of position here puts you at a tremendous disadvantage from the BTN TAG who raises 4Bb+1BB per limper, putting you at a decision to call a 7-8BB raise. It's just a waste of money. At loose tables, I'll open 4xBB, normally getting 2-4 callers, and can take down the pot with a 2/3 c-bet on the flop, or make a small fortune when my set hits with value bets.

With a preflop EP raise, you can cbet the Axx flop and take down some pots. Like Airles says, no one's gonna believe you have an ace of if you limp/called pre.

I think of the preflop raise as a slightly bigger investment in the hand. We'll still get paid off 20 to 1 (or more) if we hit the set, and we have other options for the hand. It's just hard to get both stacks all-in after a limped pot pre. Implied odds only refer to the amount of chips left to win (i.e. likely to end up in the middle). Often, I think we have better implied odds with 100bb stacks after a raised pot than after a limped one, just because villain is so much more likely to have some value in his hand he thinks is worth betting.

[Airles™]

3. How deep do the stacks have to be to play sc's for an LP call based on implied odds?

For what it's worth, you're best off making this call when you are able to use position to sometimes take the pot away from the pre-flop raiser. Calling just to hit is at best marginal.

So 3bet PF from the CO/BTN with SCs more often? Best for playing against weak-tights no?

3. How deep do the stacks have to be to play sc's for an LP call based on implied odds?

For what it's worth, you're best off making this call when you are able to use position to sometimes take the pot away from the pre-flop raiser. Calling just to hit is at best marginal.

So 3bet PF from the CO/BTN with SCs more often? Best for playing against weak-tights no?

It depends
if the weaktight has a tight enough raising range he only raises with the hands that he'll call a 3b with

or he could be very tight to 3b and fold a lot
so you really need fold to 3b stats
ATS helps when facing with an LP raise because if someone has an ATS of like 11% they're raising a tight range in LP

[Fnord]

3. How deep do the stacks have to be to play sc's for an LP call based on implied odds?

For what it's worth, you're best off making this call when you are able to use position to sometimes take the pot away from the pre-flop raiser. Calling just to hit is at best marginal.

So 3bet PF from the CO/BTN with SCs more often? Best for playing against weak-tights no?

3-bet works too. I like to mix it up.

[kfaess]

I play 6-max so these responses only apply to 6-max:

1. I think the reason that limp-calling from EP with low pp isn't believable is because our range for doing this is basically only low pp's. This assumes that our opponents are actually thinking a little bit about the hand and not half playing poker half watching sportscenter and eating doritos. So I guess that means that limp calling is worse at higher stakes where our opponents will be able to immidiately put us on a low pp, while at the micros many of our opponents won't be able to come to this conclusion.

We should also think about what hands our opponents are most likely to stack off when we hit a set (at micro stakes). I think the hands most likely to do this are high pp's (AA, KK, maybe QQ) and TPTK type hands (AK). Most of our opponents would raise these hands preflop when facing limpers, so why not just make the raise ourselves and not give the thinking players a chance to put us on a small pp? I think playing them in this way keeps our ranges balanced and, like others have said, gives us more of a chance to get value post flop when we hit.

Right now I open raise all pp from all positions.

2. Our set odds definately depend on our opponents. Against an aggressive opponent and/or tight opponent who is more likely to put lots of money in the pot, I think our odds can be around 15x.

Against a somewhat passive opponent I think we need closer to 20x.

10x times seems too low, even at the micro stakes. In the other thread some posters didn't think we'd be able to stack an opponent almost every time we hit a set, and you would have to do this getting only 10x.

3. From what I understand, SC's don't flop a hand we are willing to felt as often as pp's do. Thus, I think its safe to assume we need to have at least 25-30x the raise remaining in the effective stacks. If there is a raise, and several callers, then we can have less implied odds becuase the immidiate pot odds make up for it.

Another question about SC's: does anyone ever limp SC's in late position when there are 2-3 limps in front of us?

[Fnord]

Another question about SC's: does anyone ever limp SC's in late position when there are 2-3 limps in front of us?

In the $5/$10 live game I'm playing a very wide range for a limp on the button or cut-off.

I'm also capible of value betting really thin when I have position.

[kevster]

1. Should we limp/call small pp's from EP? from MP? Why or why not? What is your current "standard opening" for small pp's?

I open 66 from all positions and my default play is to dump 22-55 until the HJ. Nitty perhaps, but a limp is often going to end up as spew almost regardless of table image @ 25NL (where I play).

A limp gives us near to zero initiative pf so we're presumably doing so for set value. However, if we limp/call for set value there are a lot of variables. We need to be sure of some callers, preferably no raise/re-raise, and enough money in the stacks that to make calling worthwhile.

A lot of variables means I'll often be dumping the small PP's in EP instead of limping.

Calling is slightly different but with so much action behind us we're still putting ourselves in a vulnerable spot. There might be enough in place to make calling for set value worthwhile. If not, I think the initial raiser would have to be a maniac and the rest of the table nitty to make a call +EV.