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.

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.

Cheery pick samples, wiiiiiiiiiiii

Nah i must have miss understood your post, i thought you were saying you limp 3 bet shitty hands early on just to pick up pots, this is obviously terrible advice i just obviously missed that you dont actually do it.

[Simon Galloway]

Just because most people on here are at least aware that limp r/r could mean aces, doesn't mean everyone else has caught on yet.  I still see people get ironed out (or getting lucky) when they were completely oblivious to the play.  I'm all for balancing plays and have limp r/r'd a fair few hands particularly against players who convince themselves that it is "aces every time."  But against players that don't notice or don't think, it isn't worth giving too much away in an attempt to balance.  If they aren't good enough to take advantage of you being out of balance, then being out of balance is fine.

P/F I prefer opening the betting again.  I'm trying to ignore villains actual holding, but if he does have a genuine hand, here's your chance to potentially play for all the marbles.  You may or may not be signalling your hand a little bit, but I'm not sure we are deep enough relative to what will be in the pot to get to the turn for it to matter.

If you lose your customer, hey ho.  At least you can make a note on him that a limp r/r might be useful against him later.  Obv if he raises again you can't really play the hand wrong from there.  If he flats, I would c/r the turn.  If he doesn't fall for that, then a blocking bet on the end when the top card pairs is ok.

When the blinds are this small, I have no problem with gambling with a limp rather than just taking down the blinds.  Of all the rules of thumb and over-generalisations in poker, the one that is most likely to hold true for me is to never go broke after limping with them and not getting sufficent action behind.  If the betting doesn't get re-opened behind, I am usually happy to get to a cheap showdown.

I'm not saying that's the optimal way to play it, just my line...happy to learn from other angles.

[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.

Cheery pick samples, wiiiiiiiiiiii

Nah i must have miss understood your post, i thought you were saying you limp 3 bet shitty hands early on just to pick up pots, this is obviously terrible advice i just obviously missed that you dont actually do it.

Cherry pick samples? I've been a winning live player for 6 consequtive years, I'm a winning sit n go player, I'm a winning STT player, & I'm a winning MTT player for the current year. Who's picking the cherries again? I'm pretty certain my record stands up to scrutiny. I would suggest to any recreational player that if you can play this game for that length of time, have a lot of fun, enjoy what you do, and come out the other end turning a profit you're doing just fine really. Aren't you a full time professional player who dedicates all your time to poker? I'm enjoying a successful career in my chosen profession and playing poker in my spare time. Why do you think it's appropriate to chastise me from your position?

The reason you misunderstood my point is because you don't use PHA to read posts. This might lead you to miss some good stuff. But I don't think anyone misses the fact you lack a bit of class. I think that's pretty common for internet players though.

[EvilPie]

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.

George, I'm seeing a bit of a contradiction here.

You say you're not looking to outplay anyone but then limp AA to mix it up and disguise the hand.

In the early levels there's no point in getting tricky with AA. The chances of building the size of pot that you want by limping are very small. It's only likely to get big when you're beat.

AA is only going to get paid huge if there's a nice cooler involved. You need the other guy to have a big hand as well. If that's the case a raise pre isn't going to make him pass anyway so you're not losing your customer.

Sure in the later stages you can try the odd limp because people are raising and shoving all over the place. You're more likely to get people calling or shoving light because of the temptation of what's in the middle.

Early stages if you're going to limp do it with a bag of spanners. If you hit you might get a nice pay day. If you miss there's no temptation to go broke. If you limp then fold to a raise you might just get someone to notice that you're a weak ass limp folder. Then when you limp a bit later with your AA that same person might decide to squeeze because they know that you're going to pass.

I agree with Simon that if you do limp whilst reasonably deep you should be prepared to give up on the hand if the action gets too hot. There's not much worse than seeing your aces done over by 10 7.

[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.

George, I'm seeing a bit of a contradiction here.

You say you're not looking to outplay anyone but then limp AA to mix it up and disguise the hand.

In the early levels there's no point in getting tricky with AA. The chances of building the size of pot that you want by limping are very small. It's only likely to get big when you're beat.

AA is only going to get paid huge if there's a nice cooler involved. You need the other guy to have a big hand as well. If that's the case a raise pre isn't going to make him pass anyway so you're not losing your customer.

Sure in the later stages you can try the odd limp because people are raising and shoving all over the place. You're more likely to get people calling or shoving light because of the temptation of what's in the middle.

Early stages if you're going to limp do it with a bag of spanners. If you hit you might get a nice pay day. If you miss there's no temptation to go broke. If you limp then fold to a raise you might just get someone to notice that you're a weak ass limp folder. Then when you limp a bit later with your AA that same person might decide to squeeze because they know that you're going to pass.

I agree with Simon that if you do limp whilst reasonably deep you should be prepared to give up on the hand if the action gets too hot. There's not much worse than seeing your aces done over by 10 7.

Trying to get max value from AA isn't outplaying someone is it?

[Simon Galloway]

Why not?  Folding at the right moment every time against an opponent is outplaying them.  There is kind of an unwritten suggestion when limping with AA that you are going to play the hand at some point in a kinky enough way to induce a mistake.  If it so happens that you get it all in AA v AA and 4flush it - of course that isn't outplayed.  But if you get 2 or 3 decent streets of enlarged value, then you have probably outplayed them.