Why Not to Limp

[Nade]

Why Not to Limp written by Jay Rosenkrantz (KRANTZ) I almost never start big strategy threads, but I thought I'd make one on this since lately there seem to be a bunch of posts that start out with a preflop limp. OP's explanation is usually something to the effect of "sometimes I raise, but this time I decided to limp." Editor's note: I doubt this holds true much anymore, most people have figured out that raising is the standard. But do they know why? So I think for the benefit of newer posters/regulars who are looking to move up, there needs to be some discussion on why, in almost all scenarios, raising or folding is generally better than limping. The limped pot conundrum: You limp a hand like a pocket pair or suited connector. It's limped to the flop. You're immediately facing two significant problems: 1- How do I win a big pot? You're almost never going to win a sizable pot unless your opponent hits the flop very hard, but you hit it harder. When you raise preflop, you're introducing another layer to the game: c-betting with air, double barrel bluffing, the over-valueing of hands by your opponent due to the appearance of an aggressive image, bluffing from your opponent, etc. That's NOT happening in a limped pot, or rarely. A raised pot is also better suited for stacking someone; the bet sizes are able to more easily facilitate an all-in. 2- I can lose a big pot. You limp a hand like Q3d and flop a flush. The BB had K4d and would have folded to a preflop raise. Stacked. I think this is a bad example because it works the other way, too. A better way to put it is that limping may put you in tough situations with big hands that become ABC situations if the pot is raised. The idea of raising vs limping directly correlates to the idea of switching gears, or changing tempo during your session. Still something that not many people have figured out how to do effectively... maybe I'll write more about that topic in the future. The more often you're raising preflop, the more likely it is that your opponent will take a stand against your frequent preflop raises in the wrong spot or spew chips off by making a heroic calldown. As you notice people making plays at you, or calling you lightly, react by either a. firing more barrels at them or b. folding the suited cards from EP preflop. The great thing about a raised pot is that you don't need to get to showdown to win. And if you do hit, your hand strength is disguised. People will often be calling your frequent raises (key point here - THEY are calling and YOU are raising. That's the way it should be.) thinking that they have implied odds to crack you if you hit; of course, that's not true, because you can easily pitch your hand postflop - the money is only going in with the best of it, or with a great read that they'll have to fold a better hand. Limping bleeds money. Why limp 44 UTG and then call a raise from BTN, only to c/f a J high flop that you could easily have won by raising preflop and then c-betting? A hand occurred a few days ago where I had been liberally raising, floating and otherwise solid LAG 2+2 regular. I picked up QQ on the BTN, he raised, and I 3-bet. He called, and c/red a T high flop all-in with 88. Stack to me. That would not have occurred had I been playing weak/tight/passive and limping. He would have checked and folded the flop. I doubt this applies anymore. With all the 3-betting and 4-betting that goes on today, no one is folding 88 there if you have any sort of aggressive image. But take this from this paragraph: you are more likely to stack 88 here if you are aggressive rather than passive. By raising preflop, you're creating +EV situations where none existed before. Couple this with solid postflop play and you will already be improving. Limping is just asking for good players to pick on you. The only time I would advocate limping is when there's some kind of giant fish at the table who'll pay off like a slot machine when you hit. Otherwise, RAISE. Besides, raising is fun. :-P