AA= how's my line???

[Royal Flush]

Surely if we're limping pre and then someone raises we've gotta 3bet this as we can never look that strong ?

surely that looks like Aces?

Not necessarily if you limp/3-bet a serial limp bully. That could just be good poker.

lol

[George2Loose]

Surely if we're limping pre and then someone raises we've gotta 3bet this as we can never look that strong ?

surely that looks like Aces?

Not necessarily if you limp/3-bet a serial limp bully. That could just be good poker.

lol

Flushy- I need validation. Do u hate my line cos I limped?

[Royal Flush]

Surely if we're limping pre and then someone raises we've gotta 3bet this as we can never look that strong ?

surely that looks like Aces?

Not necessarily if you limp/3-bet a serial limp bully. That could just be good poker.

lol

Flushy- I need validation. Do u hate my line cos I limped?

Basically yeah, you make it so hard to win a big pot by limping, post flop i kinda like although i think a turn check vs an agg opponent might get more, the flop lead is good, that or a small flop c/r maximises his bluff potential.

[George2Loose]

Surely if we're limping pre and then someone raises we've gotta 3bet this as we can never look that strong ?

surely that looks like Aces?

Not necessarily if you limp/3-bet a serial limp bully. That could just be good poker.

lol

Flushy- I need validation. Do u hate my line cos I limped?

Basically yeah, you make it so hard to win a big pot by limping, post flop i kinda like although i think a turn check vs an agg opponent might get more, the flop lead is good, that or a small flop c/r maximises his bluff potential.

If I'm confident he is gonna punish my limp, am I not letting him make the pot big enough for me? Do you think villian would 3 bet in this spot if he's gonna punish the limp?

[Steve Swift]

Wow ,

I love these, it is great getting your differing POV. Great for a learning player.

[MANTIS01]

Surely if we're limping pre and then someone raises we've gotta 3bet this as we can never look that strong ?

surely that looks like Aces?

Not necessarily if you limp/3-bet a serial limp bully. That could just be good poker.

I really don't he would 4 bet here which is why I flatted. If I 3 bet pretty certain he would just give up

So my point was that if you're pretty certain he gives up after you limp/3-bet you don't necessarily need A-A to limp/3-bet. Let's say you limp for 50 with small suited connectors hoping to generate a multi-limped pot that's gonna suit your hand....but that doesn't happen and villain alone raises. You're now gonna be faced with the prospect of playing a raised HU pot oop....and that doesn't suit your hand so much. If you're pretty certain villain folds to a 3-bet you can now chose to 3-bet rather than limp/call into an unfavourable place. If villain was a rock who never folded to a limp/3-bet then limp/3-betting would look much more like a big hand than using the same strat vs someone who prob folds to this move. Hence against this type of villain because you don't need A-A to perform the move successfully it wont look so obviously like A-A...as obv as it is vs a non-folding rock anyway. If you did use this strat with a small hand, like I said, it would be good poker. As a side note I do appreciate this is going through the levels a bit so may make less insightful players lol a bit.

Anyways that was just addressing the point that it will be obv you have A-A which I don't really agree with. But I do agree with the advice to raise pre at these blinds, cos he's neither punishing you or making a big pot by jacking it up by 150 chips.

[George2Loose]

Surely if we're limping pre and then someone raises we've gotta 3bet this as we can never look that strong ?

surely that looks like Aces?

Not necessarily if you limp/3-bet a serial limp bully. That could just be good poker.

I really don't he would 4 bet here which is why I flatted. If I 3 bet pretty certain he would just give up

So my point was that if you're pretty certain he gives up after you limp/3-bet you don't necessarily need A-A to limp/3-bet. Let's say you limp for 50 with small suited connectors hoping to generate a multi-limped pot that's gonna suit your hand....but that doesn't happen and villain alone raises. You're now gonna be faced with the prospect of playing a raised HU pot oop....and that doesn't suit your hand so much. If you're pretty certain villain folds to a 3-bet you can now chose to 3-bet rather than limp/call into an unfavourable place. If villain was a rock who never folded to a limp/3-bet then limp/3-betting would look much more like a big hand than using the same strat vs someone who prob folds to this move. Hence against this type of villain because you don't need A-A to perform the move successfully it wont look so obviously like A-A...as obv as it is vs a non-folding rock anyway. If you did use this strat with a small hand, like I said, it would be good poker. As a side note I do appreciate this is going through the levels a bit so may make less insightful players lol a bit.

Anyways that was just addressing the point that it will be obv you have A-A which I don't really agree with. But I do agree with the advice to raise pre at these blinds, cos he's neither punishing you or making a big pot by jacking it up by 150 chips.

Disagree.

[MANTIS01]

Surely if we're limping pre and then someone raises we've gotta 3bet this as we can never look that strong ?

surely that looks like Aces?

Not necessarily if you limp/3-bet a serial limp bully. That could just be good poker.

I really don't he would 4 bet here which is why I flatted. If I 3 bet pretty certain he would just give up

So my point was that if you're pretty certain he gives up after you limp/3-bet you don't necessarily need A-A to limp/3-bet. Let's say you limp for 50 with small suited connectors hoping to generate a multi-limped pot that's gonna suit your hand....but that doesn't happen and villain alone raises. You're now gonna be faced with the prospect of playing a raised HU pot oop....and that doesn't suit your hand so much. If you're pretty certain villain folds to a 3-bet you can now chose to 3-bet rather than limp/call into an unfavourable place. If villain was a rock who never folded to a limp/3-bet then limp/3-betting would look much more like a big hand than using the same strat vs someone who prob folds to this move. Hence against this type of villain because you don't need A-A to perform the move successfully it wont look so obviously like A-A...as obv as it is vs a non-folding rock anyway. If you did use this strat with a small hand, like I said, it would be good poker. As a side note I do appreciate this is going through the levels a bit so may make less insightful players lol a bit.

Anyways that was just addressing the point that it will be obv you have A-A which I don't really agree with. But I do agree with the advice to raise pre at these blinds, cos he's neither punishing you or making a big pot by jacking it up by 150 chips.

Disagree.

Do you know why? Or is it just a general feeling of disagreement? If you want to keep your reasons secret I will understand.

[George2Loose]

Surely if we're limping pre and then someone raises we've gotta 3bet this as we can never look that strong ?

surely that looks like Aces?

Not necessarily if you limp/3-bet a serial limp bully. That could just be good poker.

I really don't he would 4 bet here which is why I flatted. If I 3 bet pretty certain he would just give up

So my point was that if you're pretty certain he gives up after you limp/3-bet you don't necessarily need A-A to limp/3-bet. Let's say you limp for 50 with small suited connectors hoping to generate a multi-limped pot that's gonna suit your hand....but that doesn't happen and villain alone raises. You're now gonna be faced with the prospect of playing a raised HU pot oop....and that doesn't suit your hand so much. If you're pretty certain villain folds to a 3-bet you can now chose to 3-bet rather than limp/call into an unfavourable place. If villain was a rock who never folded to a limp/3-bet then limp/3-betting would look much more like a big hand than using the same strat vs someone who prob folds to this move. Hence against this type of villain because you don't need A-A to perform the move successfully it wont look so obviously like A-A...as obv as it is vs a non-folding rock anyway. If you did use this strat with a small hand, like I said, it would be good poker. As a side note I do appreciate this is going through the levels a bit so may make less insightful players lol a bit.

Anyways that was just addressing the point that it will be obv you have A-A which I don't really agree with. But I do agree with the advice to raise pre at these blinds, cos he's neither punishing you or making a big pot by jacking it up by 150 chips.

Disagree.

Do you know why? Or is it just a general feeling of disagreement? If you want to keep your reasons secret I will understand.

lol- do u know which part I'm disagreeing with?

[MANTIS01]

Surely if we're limping pre and then someone raises we've gotta 3bet this as we can never look that strong ?

surely that looks like Aces?

Not necessarily if you limp/3-bet a serial limp bully. That could just be good poker.

I really don't he would 4 bet here which is why I flatted. If I 3 bet pretty certain he would just give up

So my point was that if you're pretty certain he gives up after you limp/3-bet you don't necessarily need A-A to limp/3-bet. Let's say you limp for 50 with small suited connectors hoping to generate a multi-limped pot that's gonna suit your hand....but that doesn't happen and villain alone raises. You're now gonna be faced with the prospect of playing a raised HU pot oop....and that doesn't suit your hand so much. If you're pretty certain villain folds to a 3-bet you can now chose to 3-bet rather than limp/call into an unfavourable place. If villain was a rock who never folded to a limp/3-bet then limp/3-betting would look much more like a big hand than using the same strat vs someone who prob folds to this move. Hence against this type of villain because you don't need A-A to perform the move successfully it wont look so obviously like A-A...as obv as it is vs a non-folding rock anyway. If you did use this strat with a small hand, like I said, it would be good poker. As a side note I do appreciate this is going through the levels a bit so may make less insightful players lol a bit.

Anyways that was just addressing the point that it will be obv you have A-A which I don't really agree with. But I do agree with the advice to raise pre at these blinds, cos he's neither punishing you or making a big pot by jacking it up by 150 chips.

Disagree.

Do you know why? Or is it just a general feeling of disagreement? If you want to keep your reasons secret I will understand.

lol- do u know which part I'm disagreeing with?

Nah George I dunno, your post doesn't give a lot away. Maybe it's the bit about 150 not being punishment.

[George2Loose]

Surely if we're limping pre and then someone raises we've gotta 3bet this as we can never look that strong ?

surely that looks like Aces?

Not necessarily if you limp/3-bet a serial limp bully. That could just be good poker.

I really don't he would 4 bet here which is why I flatted. If I 3 bet pretty certain he would just give up

So my point was that if you're pretty certain he gives up after you limp/3-bet you don't necessarily need A-A to limp/3-bet. Let's say you limp for 50 with small suited connectors hoping to generate a multi-limped pot that's gonna suit your hand....but that doesn't happen and villain alone raises. You're now gonna be faced with the prospect of playing a raised HU pot oop....and that doesn't suit your hand so much. If you're pretty certain villain folds to a 3-bet you can now chose to 3-bet rather than limp/call into an unfavourable place. If villain was a rock who never folded to a limp/3-bet then limp/3-betting would look much more like a big hand than using the same strat vs someone who prob folds to this move. Hence against this type of villain because you don't need A-A to perform the move successfully it wont look so obviously like A-A...as obv as it is vs a non-folding rock anyway. If you did use this strat with a small hand, like I said, it would be good poker. As a side note I do appreciate this is going through the levels a bit so may make less insightful players lol a bit.

Anyways that was just addressing the point that it will be obv you have A-A which I don't really agree with. But I do agree with the advice to raise pre at these blinds, cos he's neither punishing you or making a big pot by jacking it up by 150 chips.

Disagree.

Do you know why? Or is it just a general feeling of disagreement? If you want to keep your reasons secret I will understand.

lol- do u know which part I'm disagreeing with?

Nah George I dunno, you're post doesn't give a lot away. Maybe it's the bit about 150 not being punishment.

I disagree 3 betting with air here out of position is good poker. I'm not looking to outplay anyone this early. If he wants to continue to punish limpers then so be it.

FWIW I very rarely limp with anything- just wanted to mix up my game seeing as I had opened with so many premium hands and showed them. I hadn't limped once so thought aces would be well disguised coupled with the fact that villian was popping it up frequently.

[MANTIS01]

Surely if we're limping pre and then someone raises we've gotta 3bet this as we can never look that strong ?

surely that looks like Aces?

Not necessarily if you limp/3-bet a serial limp bully. That could just be good poker.

I really don't he would 4 bet here which is why I flatted. If I 3 bet pretty certain he would just give up

So my point was that if you're pretty certain he gives up after you limp/3-bet you don't necessarily need A-A to limp/3-bet. Let's say you limp for 50 with small suited connectors hoping to generate a multi-limped pot that's gonna suit your hand....but that doesn't happen and villain alone raises. You're now gonna be faced with the prospect of playing a raised HU pot oop....and that doesn't suit your hand so much. If you're pretty certain villain folds to a 3-bet you can now chose to 3-bet rather than limp/call into an unfavourable place. If villain was a rock who never folded to a limp/3-bet then limp/3-betting would look much more like a big hand than using the same strat vs someone who prob folds to this move. Hence against this type of villain because you don't need A-A to perform the move successfully it wont look so obviously like A-A...as obv as it is vs a non-folding rock anyway. If you did use this strat with a small hand, like I said, it would be good poker. As a side note I do appreciate this is going through the levels a bit so may make less insightful players lol a bit.

Anyways that was just addressing the point that it will be obv you have A-A which I don't really agree with. But I do agree with the advice to raise pre at these blinds, cos he's neither punishing you or making a big pot by jacking it up by 150 chips.

Disagree.

Do you know why? Or is it just a general feeling of disagreement? If you want to keep your reasons secret I will understand.

lol- do u know which part I'm disagreeing with?

Nah George I dunno, you're post doesn't give a lot away. Maybe it's the bit about 150 not being punishment.

I disagree 3 betting with air here out of position is good poker. I'm not looking to outplay anyone this early. If he wants to continue to punish limpers then so be it.

FWIW I very rarely limp with anything- just wanted to mix up my game seeing as I had opened with so many premium hands and showed them. I hadn't limped once so thought aces would be well disguised coupled with the fact that villian was popping it up frequently.

That's perfectly fair buddy. And your strat is working around a decent theory. I was just sounding out how concrete your conviction was that if you limp/3-bet this villain he'll fold....cos that shapes your pre-flop thinking. You say you're almost certain this guy gives up if you 3-bet him...and i was wondering if you really think that...or you think that cos you got A-A. I would say if you think it's almost certain he folds if you limp/3-bet then limp/3-betting with air is clearly good poker vs this villain. Unless of course you don't think it's so certain he folds...and then maybe limp/3-betting with A-A could be considered as an option. I wouldn't really consider all this bollox though...I'd just raise pre

[noble1]

just going along with this limp 3betting thing , i agree with mantis that if you did add this move to your game then you have to balance your range out with other hands so that you can catch the blighters out when you do have it..also you may
be able to get away with limping a little bit more with speculative hands , observant players behind may be wary of raising your limps.

[Royal Flush]

Surely if we're limping pre and then someone raises we've gotta 3bet this as we can never look that strong ?

surely that looks like Aces?

Not necessarily if you limp/3-bet a serial limp bully. That could just be good poker.

I really don't he would 4 bet here which is why I flatted. If I 3 bet pretty certain he would just give up

So my point was that if you're pretty certain he gives up after you limp/3-bet you don't necessarily need A-A to limp/3-bet. Let's say you limp for 50 with small suited connectors hoping to generate a multi-limped pot that's gonna suit your hand....but that doesn't happen and villain alone raises. You're now gonna be faced with the prospect of playing a raised HU pot oop....and that doesn't suit your hand so much. If you're pretty certain villain folds to a 3-bet you can now chose to 3-bet rather than limp/call into an unfavourable place. If villain was a rock who never folded to a limp/3-bet then limp/3-betting would look much more like a big hand than using the same strat vs someone who prob folds to this move. Hence against this type of villain because you don't need A-A to perform the move successfully it wont look so obviously like A-A...as obv as it is vs a non-folding rock anyway. If you did use this strat with a small hand, like I said, it would be good poker. As a side note I do appreciate this is going through the levels a bit so may make less insightful players lol a bit.

Anyways that was just addressing the point that it will be obv you have A-A which I don't really agree with. But I do agree with the advice to raise pre at these blinds, cos he's neither punishing you or making a big pot by jacking it up by 150 chips.

Doing stuff like that might explain why you lost at MTT's mate.

[MANTIS01]

Surely if we're limping pre and then someone raises we've gotta 3bet this as we can never look that strong ?

surely that looks like Aces?

Not necessarily if you limp/3-bet a serial limp bully. That could just be good poker.

I really don't he would 4 bet here which is why I flatted. If I 3 bet pretty certain he would just give up

So my point was that if you're pretty certain he gives up after you limp/3-bet you don't necessarily need A-A to limp/3-bet. Let's say you limp for 50 with small suited connectors hoping to generate a multi-limped pot that's gonna suit your hand....but that doesn't happen and villain alone raises. You're now gonna be faced with the prospect of playing a raised HU pot oop....and that doesn't suit your hand so much. If you're pretty certain villain folds to a 3-bet you can now chose to 3-bet rather than limp/call into an unfavourable place. If villain was a rock who never folded to a limp/3-bet then limp/3-betting would look much more like a big hand than using the same strat vs someone who prob folds to this move. Hence against this type of villain because you don't need A-A to perform the move successfully it wont look so obviously like A-A...as obv as it is vs a non-folding rock anyway. If you did use this strat with a small hand, like I said, it would be good poker. As a side note I do appreciate this is going through the levels a bit so may make less insightful players lol a bit.

Anyways that was just addressing the point that it will be obv you have A-A which I don't really agree with. But I do agree with the advice to raise pre at these blinds, cos he's neither punishing you or making a big pot by jacking it up by 150 chips.

Doing stuff like that might explain why you lost at MTT's mate.

Why do you post on PHA James?

But not only that, why do you want to discourage other people from posting on here and discussing poker? I was looking at this hand from another angle, discussing poker & learning some stuff. This is the purpose of the board. I said 2 or 3 times this isn't something I'd do...but thought discussion about George's thought process could be worthwhile. It appears you don't learn much here so I can only assume you like the feeling when new players massage your seemingly fragile ego.

By the way mate, in 2009 since switching to i-poker my MTT ROI is 443%, and i've been a winning live MTT player for 6 years straight.