Why don't people like limp?

I always see criticism of those who clean up. Is it so wrong to go into a clean pre-flop?

Don't worry about the criticism, do your statistics and play based on that.

Even I personally feel that limping or slow-rolling at times is a great stratey!
Some aggressive players will never understand its worth!

Yes, playing poorly preflop is a concept that refers to playing too many hands, especially in situations where it's unprofitable, such as with very weak hands or without a clear understanding of strategy. Modern poker strategy recommends playing more aggressively and focusedly, rather than simply playing every hand in a row, which reduces your overall win rate and can lead to losses.

Many poker players dislike limping because it’s seen as passive and weak.
Limping often gives up control of the hand and lets aggressive opponents dictate the action.
It can lead to multi-way pots, which reduce the value of strong hands.
Players who limp frequently are viewed as inexperienced or overly cautious.
In modern strategy, open-raising is preferred to apply pressure and build bigger pots.
That’s why limping has a reputation as a suboptimal play.

Some examples when limping may be a valid strategy:

• Low-stakes live games: Players are passive, so limping lets you see cheap flops and exploit mistakes.
• Deep-stacked tournaments: Early levels allow speculative hands to be played profitably via limps.
• Heads-up or short-handed: Limping balances your range and disguises strong hands.
• ICM-heavy spots: Limping avoids risk when survival matters more than chip accumulation.

You get a note right away.

Honestly, I think a lot of the hate for limping comes from the old-school way poker was taught. For years everyone repeated that you should either raise or fold, so anyone who limped was instantly seen as someone who didn’t know what they were doing. But the game has changed a lot. There are situations, especially in softer games or when people love going multiway, where limping or overlimping actually makes sense. It just depends on what you’re trying to do.

For me, the real problem isn’t the limp itself, it’s when people limp without a plan. If you’re doing it because the table is passive, or you want to keep the pot small with medium hands, or even to trap sometimes, that’s fine. It only becomes a leak when you limp everything and keep getting punished by iso-raises. Like most things in poker, context matters way more than trying to follow one “correct” rule.

The more limpers the more chance someone hits the flop and crushes AA with 72.I raise preflop to try to get 72 to fold and protect AA.

If you are a winning player and if you find you make profit using limp, why not? If you are a begginer, learning poker player, etc. I would suggest to follow those who have more eperience and do not open limp. Limping behind is already something different. Also, it would be smart if limping did not describe your cards - I mean when you open-limp with weak hands and open-raise with strong hands - it can be easily exploited.

Anyway, I do not understand "not liking" open-limping or any kind of weak plays - if I have a player at my table playing the way I recognise as weak - I am happy to play at the same table

While a large number of players say never limp, I bet they all have limped at least once.

Short and skinny of why limping and trapping can be bad... it costs you a lot of money to let them see cards for free, or you could be building the pot.

Basic idea, if you have AK, and you limp UTG, and 7 other players flat call... your hand is now a slot machine, good luck.

That isn't a guarantee, sometimes you trap em' and stack em', sometimes you really regret letting him see the turn for free while you check that set.

Variance, chaos theory and all that.

I find when I play overly tight, it gets picked up on, you'll even try to min raise your monster pair into a pot and get folds, so that starts the light bulb upstairs to get a bit trappy. The dance of poker, try to make the best decisions on the information you have.

If you've made the best decision, and you simply lost due to luck, remember tilt is the biggest drainer of your account.

I find newer players really get lured into the "mystical" side of poker, and they get teased by seeing runners after folding, or missed flops with bad hands and that really gets the VPIP going into bad directions.

Because you don't want everyone to come along and see the flop. Your aim is to cut out hands that unknowingly crack your strong holding.
Limping shows weakness, you are giving your opponents the green light to exploit and bully you

There will always be players who think that way, but what you should do is concentrate on your strategies to play each hand as well as possible; the rest, I think, will detract from your game instead of adding to it.

I dislike limping because it usually leads to weak, difficult situations post-flop. When someone limps, they give up initiative, invite multiple players into the pot, and end up playing a bloated pot with a capped, obvious range. In other words, limping puts you in a spot where the others can easily apply pressure and make your decisions harder.

Raising instead of limping lets you take control, isolate weaker players, build the pot when you have the best hand, and deny cheap flops to the blinds. That’s why I prefer raising or folding. Limping often just creates trouble unless you have a specific exploit in mind.

Based upon my playing experiences, particularly Replay Poker, I am a limper. I used to go the other way, and usually got clobbered almost every time! At least if I lose, I still have some chips left!
It may not be to the liking of some other players, but it's what works best for me.

Most strong poker players avoid limping because it puts them at a disadvantage. When you limp, you give away the initiative, invite too many players into the pot, and make your range look weak. Raising builds value, isolates opponents, and keeps you in control of the hand. Limping might feel “safe,” but in the long run, it costs you chips. Raise with your playable hands, fold the trash and your results will immediately improve.

gabriel31 said:

I always see criticism of those who clean up. Is it so wrong to go into a clean pre-flop?

Click to expand...

To limp or not to limp is a pretty personal choice and honestly, it depends on your playing style.
The thing is, when you look at poker within the limits we play (low and mid stakes) and the most popular theories on how to play (GTO and Exploitative Play), there's a general consensus that open-limping pre-flop isn't great.
Why? Poker is a game that relies on aggressive actions to give us an edge over our opponents. I can't remember which author said it, but poker is "a game of aggressive actions." Being aggressive gives us initiative in the hand and an edge over the villain.
When we open-raise pre-flop, we're saying we have a range of hands we've decided to play aggressively, and at the same time, we're selecting which opponents get to call and enter the pot.
When we open-limp, we also have a range, but our range is so wide it could include almost 70% of all hands. And by limping, we lose the initiative and often create multi-way pots, which isn't great for us in the long run, no matter what kind of hand you have.
Example: Let's say we have Aces pre-flop and we want to set a trap for our opponents. So, we're in UTG and we limp with AA. The MP calls our limp, the CO calls, the BTN calls, and the SB calls too. The BB checks. By doing this, we've given our opponents excellent odds to enter the hand, and the player in the Big Blind didn't pay anything to see a flop!
Besides, AA is a great hand in a heads-up pot, but when three or more players are fighting for the pot, AA becomes a much more marginal hand. In this example, by limping, we allowed 4 other players to come along and share the equity with us. A lot of the time, one of them will have called with something like 52s or 22 and end up hitting, and suddenly we're in a massive pot losing a huge stack. Why? Because we didn't take the initiative to be aggressive and raise pre-flop to narrow the field.
Passivity often gets punished, and aggression often gets rewarded. But then you might say, "If I raise with AA, everyone just folds." Great! You still win the blinds, and that adds up significantly in the long run.
I think limping can work in some specific tournament situations and at some high-stakes cash tables, but generally, the criticism most players have against limping isn't just a matter of taste—it's a logical, theory-based argument grounded in the experience of the world's best players who have developed and refined their strategies over the years.
If our hand isn't good enough to open-raise pre-flop, the best move is usually to fold and wait for one that is. We raise with AA, but we also raise with JTs, 76s, 33, 22, etc. We're raising with our range, not just with one specific hand.
The reason we play this way is that we believe limping creates more bad situations than good ones in the long run. It's an illusion to think that by limping we're being clever or setting traps for our opponents. The most likely outcome is that your opponent will mark you as a passive player, and there are many ways to exploit players who give away free information like that. We don't want to give our opponents any information, and aggression is a way to maintain a neutral game where our opponent can never know if our pre-flop raise is AA or 65s.

Not at all — going in “clean” pre-flop (meaning you’re not limping with weak hands or chasing junk) is actually a solid approach. A lot of criticism you see is usually directed at players who limp into every pot or call with marginal holdings, which can be a losing strategy in the long run.

If you’re entering pre-flop with strong ranges — pairs, suited connectors in position, big broadways — that’s perfectly fine. In fact, tightening up your pre-flop play is one of the fastest ways to improve.

Your action should bring money, the LIMP can be used as a trick and blame opponents to make mistakes, but this action does not bring profit against any opponent