Do you think limping is ever correct at tough tables?

Some data seem very difficult for a rise, especially against mania. Do you ever purposely limp — or is it always a leak?

I do this sometimes, depending on the situation and the opponents. But it doesn't always give the desired result.

No. (Assuming you mean limp in first; you should have a limp behind range. Although you said tough table, so there should not be a lot of opportunities to limp behind, either.)

Personally, I don’t think limping is the right move at tough tables. It usually just puts you in a passive and defensive position right from the start, which strong players can easily exploit.

At tougher tables, I believe it’s better to take control of the hand with a raise — show strength and force your opponents to react, not the other way around. Limping often invites pressure, and you lose the initiative early.

For me, aggression is the best option. It allows me to apply pressure, build fold equity, and define ranges more clearly. Even when I miss the flop, having the initiative often gives me more ways to win the pot.

DIt depends a lot on your game strategy, on the hand you have, but I don't think it's very profitable to limp in because it could be that hands that you would isolate come in and you end up taking a bad hand without needing to.

Newzooozooo said:

I do this sometimes, depending on the situation and the opponents. But it doesn't always give the desired result.

Click to expand...

That's fair. Poker is full of variables. As long as you adjust and learn from it, it's all part of the game.