I never limp on the button, one off the button, in super high ante structures, with high cards, when it is my birthday, when I'm drunk and I could go on. Bottom line: I'm not a big fan of limping. - Gus Hansen.
In an earlier post (To limp, or not to limp?) I suggested limping was a bad idea. My anti-limping stance is getting stronger. I now have a little evidence to back up the idea that limping in and allowing the big blind a free look at the flop is a very bad habit.
Earlier this month I wrote a post (Tight is right) promoting the idea of playing tight poker. I committed myself to playing only certain hands in certain positions for 1,000 hands of poker to see how I would fair. As I started my experiment, I realized I had a problem - how would I count hands I played from the big blind when I got to see the flop for free? Obviously most of these would not be premium hands, so how did they fit into my experiment? I decided simply to track the number of times I got to see the flop for free and whether I made or lost money over-all from this situation.
Well folks, I've played the 1,000 hands and the results are in. 43 times while in the big blind I was allowed to see the flop for free with hands I normally would have folded. It is important to understand I am not counting the times I was dealt a playable hand in the big blind - I'm only talking about hands I definitely would have thrown away (because I forced myself to stick to my experiment) had I not been allowed to see the flop for free.
So how did I do in this situation? Obviously I ended up losing most of these hands, I had bad cards and was playing out of position after all, but almost all of these losses were folds right after the flop, so I only lost the one bet of the big blind and I would have lost this to any pre-flop raise anyway. Here's the interesting thing; the hands I won from this position had big enough pots to more than make up for all the hands I lost. In fact I came out ahead by 160 bets just because I got to see the flop for free. For my $50 big blind (play money, mind you) this came to a total profit of $8000. Okay, yes. It was play money. But still it illustrates a point - don't limp! You are just giving the big blind a free pass! Over time the big blind will profit every time he or she sees the flop for free, so do not let that profit come at your expense.
How many times has something like this happened to you: You are in the big blind with 4c 2d. Some guy limps, there are a couple callers and you just check, getting to see the flop for free. The flop come Kh 2h 4d. Sweet! The original limper bets half the pot, everyone folds except you. You call. The turn comes 4h. He bets. You raise. He goes all-in. You call. He shows Ah 8h - an Ace high flush. You turn over your full house and he goes nuts! He starts screaming "You played 4-2 off suit!?? Are you an idiot?" Then you remind him you were in the big blind and saw a free flop. Ha ha.
This happens a lot, particularly on the internet where so many hands come so fast people easily forget who was in the big blind. You can hit all sorts of weird hands that nobody will put you on, and you can win very big pots.
It happens. Just don't be the dumb sap on the other side of the story.
Never limp.If someone limps before you, and you have a hand worth playing, you should strongly consider raising.
Revisiting this: If your math holds true, wouldn't it also be an advantageous strategy to limp into every hand at tables where limping is common, then playing tight (i.e. only betting further if you're pretty sure you're ahead) thereafter?
ReplyDeleteInteresting that you would make this comment. Lately I have been wondering something similar. I don't think it is a good idea to be the first to enter the pot with a limp, unless perhaps (here is where is am waffling) it is with "speculative hands" like medium and small pairs. By limping first with these, you set the tone - often you get others following your example and calling behind you, thus building the pot. If you hit a set you often get paid off handsomely - because so many others saw the flop there is a good chance someone else hit the flop too - just not as hard as you did! Remember that with any pocket pair your odds of flopping a set are 1 in 8 (I think) so proceed when you think the implied pot-odds make it worthwhile.
ReplyDeleteThe negative is that you will be out of position, so you need a pretty strong hand to proceed ("no set - no bet") and I wouldn't suggest limping with any two cards because you can't call if someone raises behind you.
I do see what you are getting at though - I haven't answered your question, have I? I think I need a little more time to address the question.
That adds some subtlety and shading to my rather crude question. I wonder if you ran the numbers it would work out:
ReplyDeletePretend you're always the big blind; i.e. it costs you a bet to play a hand. (You get a break, though, anytime someone raises ahead of you preflop.) Any time you can see the flop for the cost of the blind you do so.
Wouldn't you hit playable but "unexpected" hands presumably as often doing this as you do in the big blind?
Natch, when you're playing with better players and/or against the same people all the time they'd catch onto you pretty quick, but it might be worth experimenting on.
It's an extension of "over time the big blind will profit every time he sees the flop for free." In my mind that's the same statement as "Over time you will profit every time you see the flop for one bet." Discuss. :)
ReplyDeleteAlso: in a previous post you said you don't really understand why position is important. Your above comments suggest you now think it is. Will you be exploring this further?
Absolutely!
ReplyDeleteI think it's very important to re-visit and re-test. Your comments have raised so many trains of thought that my cognitive station-master is getting pissed off at me.
I will try to give as complete and well-thought-through an answer as possible but may need, as you suggest,to run more tests. Patience.
The major problem I have with my own "tight is right" experiment was that I ran it with play-money. As we both know, play money poker is very different from real money poker. Probably the best thing would be to do the experiment again, but with real money.