Welcome.

Take a tour. Enjoy some free sample content.

How it works

Free Video: CLP Video No. 287: Home Game Bart Reviews His Splashy At $1-$3 Deep Part 2

Free Podcast: CLP Podcast No. 54: Time Warp And Turn Value
New to Crush Live Poker?

Crush Live Poker Video No. 292 "Betting with a Purpose"

BartBart Posts: 6,077AdministratorLeadPro
In his first video for CLP, Rob takes a look at some situations in which players were a little eager to put money in the pot with hands that they shouldn't have. He examines some situations involving players making raises to protect their hands instead of aiming for value or bluffs.

http://www.crushlivepoker.com/videos/betting-with-a-purpose

Episode posts at 2PM ET
Tagged:

Comments

  • GSpot Posts: 97Subscriber
    RE: 1st hand between Bill & Harlan

    I have a different view on the UTG+1 open Limp with 44's. I like this move for the following reasons:

    1) In less sophisticated games and especially against less sophisticated players, I like to weave in UTG limp re-raise bluffs. I rarely see anyone do it. Reason is simple, whenever you see this vanilla move, I hardly see anyone lighter than AK and more commonly see AA or KK. Most importantly even less sophisticated, non thinking players recognize this pattern as a top premium pair, thus I think it's a fantastic bluff spot.

    2) I like the utg limp raise bluff line because of the squeezing opportunity with all limpers revealing the strength of their hand pre with weak overcalls and 44 does not play well multi way just limping praying to set mine.

    3) I like attacking Bill for two reasons, his sizing and position. If I were at the table, I'd put Bill on a range of 77-JJ, AJs, AQ. His sizing is too small and because he is on the button it almost looks like a squeeze attempt gone bad. However, because he is stereotypical OMC, that would factor in and in this case it is true cause the guy has QQ! But my plan would be to barrel overcards and take him to value town on a disguised flopped set if I am fortunate. OR as played, bomb dry boards representing AA KK myself. I would think there is fold equity pre and certainly post with my perceived range of premium overpairs to a non thinking level 1-2 player.

    I recognize there are some inconsistencies referencing 'non-thinking' players but an older gentleman like that has played enough Poker to have seen what a limp re-raise UTG usually means...

    Now I do not necessarily give Harlan credit for having this plan but I like the line in a vacuum even if it might entail different rationale. My sense is Harlan thought to himself the $50 raise pre on the button was weak (I agree) and then decided to attack it because of all the dead money. Whereas with me, if I limp with that, that is my plan from the onset. However, most of the time, I'd simply come in for an open UTG of $35-$45, yes with 44, and then evaluate villain moves, stack depth & street by street texture/dynamic/tells accordingly. However my bluffing frequency would be lower with this line because my perceived range of AA/KK would be lower to typical OMC.

    My sense based on seeing OMC play this way would be that he would just flat the $35 pre and then who knows if he would fold post on what amounts to a fantastic flop for QQ. That's why I like the limp reraise bluff line for the most fold equity.
  • Krista Posts: 166Subscriber
    I thought this video was great. Rob should do more videos!
  • RobFarha Posts: 191Pro
    Hello. There's a couple problems with limp/raising 44 UTG. I'll skip the discussion about the initial limp for 10, because as I mentioned in the video there are some spots where it might be the best play. In this specific game with these specific stacks I'm not a fan of it.

    When the action gets back to Harlan, there is $140 in the pot - 30 more for him to call. There are also 2 other limpers behind him, which given this amazing price should be coming along very close to 100%. So given that action, Harlan is effectively calling $30 to win $200 if they come along behind. This is almost 7-1 preflop with a pocket pair that plays horribly in a bloated 3bet pot OOP. The reasons it plays horribly -

    You have awful card removal. Limp reraising shouldn't really be something done with any sort of regularity, but if you MUST have this play in your arsenal, why not choose a hand like AK/AQ or KQ or something that significantly cuts down the combos of strong pairs the raiser can have, whilst also having some equity to barrel on future streets? You can use big unpaired hands that have equity/removal to balance out the times you want to do this with AA/KK.

    44 is a hand that is often only drawing to 2 outs. 44 also does great in these type of limpy/splashy/gambly games. Flopping a set in a huge pot while you're seven ways in very valauble, I think squandering this opportunity to massively bloat the pot OOP is a very large mistake.

    I have a feeling you wont like my second argument here and this is also a reason to not favor a limp/raise strategy in general.

    If you are limping up front with AA/KK, what does that do to your opening range? It weakens it significantly. I understand the argument that our opposition is often so bad that they wont ever properly deduce this information and correctly use it to exploit us, but what if that assumption is wrong? IME it's very commonplace for regs to vastly underestimate people that they view as inferior poker players and as a result they change their strategy to the point it's nearly unprofitable, or at the very least not as profitable as it would be if they took a more standard and balanced approach.

    If you're limping AA/KK, your raises are now weak.


    GSpot said:
    RE: 1st hand between Bill & Harlan

    1) In less sophisticated games and especially against less sophisticated players, I like to weave in UTG limp re-raise bluffs. I rarely see anyone do it. Reason is simple, whenever you see this vanilla move, I hardly see anyone lighter than AK and more commonly see AA or KK. Most importantly even less sophisticated, non thinking players recognize this pattern as a top premium pair, thus I think it's a fantastic bluff spot.

    The problem is that the times you run into a hand. This is why removal is so important, it doesn't matter if he thinks you only do this with premiums if he has a premium himself. You have bloated the pot OOP with very little equity, nor blocking any of his strong hands. You're actually blocking weaker hands.


    GSpot said:


    2) I like the utg limp raise bluff line because of the squeezing opportunity with all limpers revealing the strength of their hand pre with weak overcalls and 44 does not play well multi way just limping praying to set mine.

    Strongly disagree with this. Why do you think 44 plays poorly multiway in a game/spot like this? When you hit you'll often have people drawing very slim with a somewhat disguised hand on a lot of brick board. Hands like this do much better in multiway pots as opposed to heads up 3bet pots (especially OOP).

    GSpot said:

    3) I like attacking Bill for two reasons, his sizing and position. If I were at the table, I'd put Bill on a range of 77-JJ, AJs, AQ. His sizing is too small and because he is on the button it almost looks like a squeeze attempt gone bad. However, because he is stereotypical OMC, that would factor in and in this case it is true cause the guy has QQ! But my plan would be to barrel overcards and take him to value town on a disguised flopped set if I am fortunate. OR as played, bomb dry boards representing AA KK myself. I would think there is fold equity pre and certainly post with my perceived range of premium overpairs to a non thinking level 1-2 player.
    I agree I would percieve Bill's raise to be weak, would not expect him to have QQ+ here. However, our hand matters and this is one of the worst hands to attack with as we are foregoing an incredibly profitable setmining spot in favor of using a hand that often has 2 outs and zero barreling equity. You have much better candidates for bluffs if limp/raising is something that must be done.
    GSpot said:

    Now I do not necessarily give Harlan credit for having this plan but I like the line in a vacuum even if it might entail different rationale. My sense is Harlan thought to himself the $50 raise pre on the button was weak (I agree) and then decided to attack it because of all the dead money. Whereas with me, if I limp with that, that is my plan from the onset. However, most of the time, I'd simply come in for an open UTG of $35-$45, yes with 44, and then evaluate villain moves, stack depth & street by street texture/dynamic/tells accordingly. However my bluffing frequency would be lower with this line because my perceived range of AA/KK would be lower to typical OMC.
    As I've said, the real problem with this hand OOP is the fact that you almost never pick up equity or have relevant blockers. I think open raising makes much more sense than limp raising. I think raising is slightly unprofitable (you find yourself cbetting with 2 outs) while limp/raising is very unprofitable (bad removal, when big money goes in your're cooked).

    Thank you for the reply!
  • RobFarha Posts: 191Pro
    Krista said:
    I thought this video was great. Rob should do more videos!
    Will definitely be making more :)

    Will certainly announce if I get a regular slot. I'm sure Bart and the guys will change the calendar to reflect that as well.

    Thanks for the kind words :)
  • GSpot Posts: 97Subscriber
    While in a vacuum I agree with coming in for a an open of 35 to 45 is usually the best opening line...I think you can also have the UTG limp re-raise in your quiver...because of the reasons I already mentioned...but also by limping, I can see a flop often (since it is a typical low stakes passive preflop game) The limp re-raise arrow is used based on villain raise-sizing, position, etc.

    Rob says:
    "When the action gets back to Harlan, there is $140 in the pot - 30 more for him to call. There are also 2 other limpers behind him, which given this amazing price should be coming along very close to 100%. So given that action, Harlan is effectively calling $30 to win $200 if they come along behind. This is almost 7-1 preflop with a pocket pair that plays horribly in a bloated 3bet pot OOP. The reasons it plays horribly -"

    Gspot: Basically you are giving up the initiative and praying to hit a set, which is rare.

    Rob says:
    "You have awful card removal. Limp reraising shouldn't really be something done with any sort of regularity, but if you MUST have this play in your arsenal, why not choose a hand like AK/AQ or KQ or something that significantly cuts down the combos of strong pairs the raiser can have, whilst also having some equity to barrel on future streets? You can use big unpaired hands that have equity/removal to balance out the times you want to do this with AA/KK."

    Gspot says:
    If I have AK for example in that spot, I am raising for value. The elimination of cards is done via their preflop action, which translates to none of the hands you cite except for AQ, KQ, which again based upon my action sets up a barrel situation. Again the premise is that this bluff line is HIGHLY BELIEVABLE which is the key to a successful bluff right?

    Rob says:
    "44 is a hand that is often only drawing to 2 outs. 44 also does great in these type of limpy/splashy/gambly games. Flopping a set in a huge pot while you're seven ways in very valauble, I think squandering this opportunity to massively bloat the pot OOP is a very large mistake."\

    Gspot says:
    Agreed, which is why I take the sincere bluff line to begin with. I disagree that a PP does well in limpy/splashy/gambly games... Again if you don't hit a set, you're done. Further if you do hit a set in a limp pot, villains are getting away from hands easier even if they hit top pair. You are only getting paid if there is a 2-pair+ inferior hand being made against your set. Again, very rare...

    Rob says:
    "I have a feeling you wont like my second argument here and this is also a reason to not favor a limp/raise strategy in general.

    If you are limping up front with AA/KK, what does that do to your opening range? It weakens it significantly. I understand the argument that our opposition is often so bad that they wont ever properly deduce this information and correctly use it to exploit us, but what if that assumption is wrong? IME it's very commonplace for regs to vastly underestimate people that they view as inferior poker players and as a result they change their strategy to the point it's nearly unprofitable, or at the very least not as profitable as it would be if they took a more standard and balanced approach.

    If you're limping AA/KK, your raises are now weak."

    Gspot says:
    You cite the answer in your response. "our opposition is often so bad"... 5/5 players aren't exploiting unbalanced ranges or betting patterns. But I do agree with potentially underestimating your opponents; that is a bad characteristic of mine. Thus if I am proven differently, I adjust against that opponent. That is the rare not the norm in $5 blind cash games.

    At the end of the day, I suspect you don't play a lot of $5 blind, $100BB cash games. I do. The opponents in droves are weak. My bluff line noted above has a ridiculously high success ratio, evidenced by this video. How often do recreational, $5 blind cash players fold QQ when there is no overcard, no 4-flust or straight? You, undoubtedly are a fantastic, thinking, analytical, GTO optimized pro. However, I disagree with your commentary on this specific line and in general for these stakes. In the end I would say you need to adjust your thought process to accommodate this lower level of thought or lack of... I would be interested in hearing what BART, TUCK, COLLIN and other CLP pros have to say...

    In the end Rob, no one would argue your thought process is solid. I'm just saying this is a better line given the stake that I'm thinking you're not too familiar with.

    Thank you for the feedback.



  • RobFarha Posts: 191Pro
    Thank you.

    I do play a lot of 2/5 here in Vegas but the games are obviously much different than California.

    One thing in my original response I screwed up was that Harlan is actually calling $40 more to win 140 immediately, with two players behind him that are also likely to call 40 more. So effectively 40 to win 220 which is still a very good price.
Sign In or Register to comment.