It depends on who your opponents are, but limping shows weakness and it's telegraphing that you don't have a strong hand.
Think if it this way, if you see an opponent limp in, what range/hand are you putting them on?
That said, limp isn't always bad, some players use it to trap but usually checking is better than limping for trapping.
Think if it this way, if you see an opponent limp in, what range/hand are you putting them on?
That said, limp isn't always bad, some players use it to trap but usually checking is better than limping for trapping.
When books say "its not good to be a limper" they are assuming a lot. They are assuming that you want to play a tight aggressive strategy. They assume that you are not trying to trick anyone. They are also assuming your opponents are good, and they are aggressive. So in this "book case" you are first to act with A-10 and limp. You get two more limpers...then someone late puts in a big raise and the limpers all fold. In this case its not good to be a limper.
But if this happens often at your table, then you can limp first to act with A-A. A few limpers and a big raise late. Then you can put in a bigger re-raise to put the late raiser in for at least half his chips. Your looking to take down a nice pot with no flop, or go heads up for a huge pot with the best starting hand.
Sometimes limping is just the way the table goes. Everyone limps. If this is the case do NOT limp with A-A. You want to play A-A vs 1 person not 5 people.
And sometimes you have some chips to play with, and want to play loose. If the table is weak and people are limping why not. I would say in general, limping is not bad...its just seen as weak. Playing weak is OK, as long as you are doing it for a reason.
But if this happens often at your table, then you can limp first to act with A-A. A few limpers and a big raise late. Then you can put in a bigger re-raise to put the late raiser in for at least half his chips. Your looking to take down a nice pot with no flop, or go heads up for a huge pot with the best starting hand.
Sometimes limping is just the way the table goes. Everyone limps. If this is the case do NOT limp with A-A. You want to play A-A vs 1 person not 5 people.
And sometimes you have some chips to play with, and want to play loose. If the table is weak and people are limping why not. I would say in general, limping is not bad...its just seen as weak. Playing weak is OK, as long as you are doing it for a reason.
By limping, you allow players with weaker hands to see the flop cheaply and give them the chance to outflop you and get ahead of you. If you have strong hands, you should raise to try and pick up the blinds. If weaker hands now play, you have the edge over them with your stronger hand and you've got a bigger pot to play for.
Firstly, because with limping you cant win blinds and antes by making others fold. Raising gives you two ways to win the pot, either you have the best hand or you get folds. You cant get folds with limping.
Secondly, why to limp?
- If its because you have a hand that you like to see the flop but dont feel comfortable enough to bet on it. What does that tells to your opponent? That you have a weak hand. Its never good to telegraph the strenght of your hands in poker and playing your cards face up. You can be easily exploited once your opponent smell weakness in you, and understands that if you are not comfortable at least minimum betting your hand preflop, you are certainly not comfortable calling a shove or a big bet with your hand. And everyone understand that limping is a show of weakness.
- Based on limping=weakness, you may limp with a premium holding, or a really nice hand to trap others believing you have a weak hand. But thats not a good strategy. Because you allow more players into the pot, making your premium holding odds to win plummet and even if you manage to make it heads up on the flop, you cant build easily a big pot from a small preflop pot.
While I am pretty sure there are exceptions to this like limping with a marginal hand and flopping a monster, or limping with a premium when you fear that if you raise everyone will fold and there will be no action, (although thats a recipe for disaster, and for "bad beats" lost-aces-when-7 2-flopped trips). The thing with limping I believe is in the long run you are losing money, or at least not winning the most for the 3 reasons described above.
Secondly, why to limp?
- If its because you have a hand that you like to see the flop but dont feel comfortable enough to bet on it. What does that tells to your opponent? That you have a weak hand. Its never good to telegraph the strenght of your hands in poker and playing your cards face up. You can be easily exploited once your opponent smell weakness in you, and understands that if you are not comfortable at least minimum betting your hand preflop, you are certainly not comfortable calling a shove or a big bet with your hand. And everyone understand that limping is a show of weakness.
- Based on limping=weakness, you may limp with a premium holding, or a really nice hand to trap others believing you have a weak hand. But thats not a good strategy. Because you allow more players into the pot, making your premium holding odds to win plummet and even if you manage to make it heads up on the flop, you cant build easily a big pot from a small preflop pot.
While I am pretty sure there are exceptions to this like limping with a marginal hand and flopping a monster, or limping with a premium when you fear that if you raise everyone will fold and there will be no action, (although thats a recipe for disaster, and for "bad beats" lost-aces-when-7 2-flopped trips). The thing with limping I believe is in the long run you are losing money, or at least not winning the most for the 3 reasons described above.
In poker the limp is a sign of weakness. It means, you have a hand with what you want to play, but it's not so good to raise it. Flop cheaply you want to watch, to strengthen your hand.
With this game you bring yourself difficult decisions,because you pass the initiative to your opponent.Poker is always the most aggressive winner,
With this game you bring yourself difficult decisions,because you pass the initiative to your opponent.Poker is always the most aggressive winner,
depends on the situation of limping i think...if you have 2 pairs and top 2 and its rainbow flop and no straight is starting i think is good time to limp....or other night i had 34 and flop came 33j...turn was 3....and river was j....guy 3 bet me after river and i went all-in he called...obviously assuming i was betting the board and maybe he had a J....same thing similar happened when i flopped a straight....i let them catch 2 pairs to go all-in...but i believe it is bad to limp just with 2 pairs...assuming your opponent can catch up with a straight or flush or trips...
da22duke said:
This is different though. If you are set mining, you don't mind a bunch of limpers to build a pot for you and if you miss, dump it cheap.
The question is more of an overall strategy. It is much easier to play against one opponent than it is 5 or 6. By raising and limiting the field, you not only are able to better predict situations but also open up your options on how to play against your opponents.
