Banana with 2 pears gets minclicked

Obvious result is obvious when downswinging...

Yea its just been like this endlessly for a few weeks and I stopped playing now because its at a point where I'm afraid to raise with JJ pre because I know I'll have the worst hand by the river

Yeah agree with a lot of this. Need to be aggressive pre flop and not pay people off post. Playing passively is just the worst in both cases. If we are afraid of variance we shouldn't be playing at all

Sent from my Mi 9T using Tapatalk

In a 1/2 or 1/3 game no value in limping small pockets and suited aces with weaker kickers?

I'm not sure I understand the rake argument, if you raise you are paying more in rake.

In the games I play say I raise A4 suited I usually getting called by 3-5 people. Additionally if someone 3 bets now you probably have to fold and don't even get to see a flop.

When you are called by so many you usually are going to have to hit something regardless.

But it also seems too nitty to just fold a suited ace in most positions (and I will raise these type of hands or even 3 bet sometimes too but not always)

There's obviously different ways rake is taken.

Timed rake presumably would have no impact on decisions. whereas an instant drop of 5 or 6 bucks is definitely very bad for limping. A progressive drop (up to a cap) would be somewhat less bad for limping than an instant drop.

Im not seeing a flop maybe 1 in 20 times so that's not a big consideration.

I assume you play mostly online? Otherwise your games are much much tougher than what I've played in.

Say I raise to 16, now I have 3 callers and we are going to a flop with $6 going to the rake.

If I limp often see the flop 4-7 ways with a $1 raked and have a higher SPR vs poor players.

My range has a few less suited aces and very low pocket pairs for the absolutely miniscule percentage of players who notice this.

If I hit a set or an ace high flush I consistently get paid so they don't seem to be catching on too well.

At least in theory, if we raise bigger pre, or 3B more, we should see fewer flops, and avoid rake, assuming it's only taken post-flop.

Most rake structures seem to be a capped percentage up to a certain dollar figure, once the pot gets over a certain amount. So, in my regular cardroom, 1/3 has a 10% rake up to $5, once the pot gets over $10, and a $2 drop for the bad beat and high hand promotions.

So if I raise to $15 or 3B to $45 and take the pot down pre-flop, there's no rake. If I raise to $20 and get 3 callers, the rake is capped at $5+$2, but the pot is over $60. If I raise to $15 and get 3 callers, the rake is the same, but the pot is only $45. Raising bigger decreases the rake as a percentage of the pot.

If you're constantly limping in and going multi-way, the rake is a killer. Say five people limp in. The pot is $15. Then you stab at the flop for $10, and get 2 callers. Now the pot is $45 going to the turn instead of being $45 going to the flop, and you're still multi-way.

The pots that get raised pre are generally going to be larger, so the rake becomes a smaller portion of the pot on each subsequent street. In order to beat the game, we have to beat the rake, and it's just harder to do when we're frequently limping in and going multi-way.

So, let's say player A limps a lot, and wins 3 pots post-flop, for $50 each, or $150 total. He's paying $21 in rake + drops. If player B is raising and 3B'ing a tighter range, and he wins one $150 pot post-flop, he pays $7 in rake + drops.

Both A and B won the same amount post-flop, $150, but A payed triple the rake compared to B. Additionally, player B has the opportunity to take down pots pre-flop, and pay no rake at all. Those pots won pre-flop are just pure profit for B, compared to A.

Assuming both A and B are losing the same amount in the pots they don't win, player B is going to have a larger win rate overall, because A is paying a higher percentage of his winnings in rake.

In order to overcome that disadvantage, player A has to be VERY good at building bigger pots post-flop, which means he has to have a very large skill edge on his opponents.

Ahh, the joyful confidence of the guy with 377 posts replying to the guy with 37k posts and a giant thread explaining his strat. and results showing how he's a bigger winner than anyone at LLNL.

As to OP, river seems too big. Guy called on a Q turn with diamonds that missed and then it was overcalled ... wtf is he going to call 3/4 pot on the river with when there's someone behind him?
I think people see one time that a V has AQ/QJ and can't fold river, or even K8, and decide it's great to bet big here with the 666th nuts when mostly you are just getting folds from the hands you beat.

I'd either bet small (maybe as high as $40) to maybe get some calls, or if V can bluff or overvalue then check/call.

As for the bet and min-click ... maybe 1% of the time someone does this with Q8/K8 or something, and after checking back the flop I don't see how he's ever bluffing.

Also ...

I've been here, for the second time somewhat recently ... it's difficult. You need to take time off, but even with it you won't be playing optimally when you get back.
Table select, take time off, study when you can and quit games early. Esp. quit early if you feel/see any signs of tilt/despair or bad play. That extra $300 you didn't torch is free money when the doom switch seems to have turned off.
If you can get into some online private games for much smaller stakes that can help, but you won't feel close to normal again until you've put piles of money in with 80% and actually won the pot a few times. gl.

You look at all these sims on gto wizard, surely they never say to open limp? I'm confident that open limping is bad because that's the computers say and pretty much all the top players. Is there anyone who beats top games suggesting to open limp a lot? I don't think even negreanu, who plays exploitative rather than gto like polk, says to open limp. And they explain why it's bad. Range splitting gives away too much info, you get capped and compressed ranges which are tough to play, you lose rake and fold equity. You have poor boars coverage on different run outs. I'm sure GG can win with this strategy because he is obviously much better than the people he plays with. So he plays way better post flop. But does op have a post flip skill advantage? If not he should try to make the absolute best pre flop decisions and try to avoid tough spots like multi way. If anything he should play a bit too aggressive pre flop rather than a bit too much calling.

Sent from my Mi 9T using Tapatalk

I don't think GG is range splitting. I think he's playing his entire range as limp or fold, from every position.

I 4b pre and happily call river as played.

What GG said about playing a smaller stack to book a win or two makes sense. Just need to get the ball rolling.

I remember watching a video by Sauce123 where he notes there is a player, I think his name was eccentricBG, who would open limp in LJ and HJ (6 max) and Sauce said he’s very good.

Just because GTO prefers a certain play doesn’t mean it’s the highest EV play vs non GTO humans.

IIRC GG buys in short, like 66 bbs and uses a heavy limp/re-raise strat to create small SPRs where stacking off with overpairs is automatic. It seems to work b/c his player pool doesn't adjust and keeps going after his limps. I think he also leaves if he gets over 100BBs. So not the best strategy for growth in the game or expectation. On the bright side, he doesn't have to study very much and has good results with his hobby. Either that or he is the best level account on 2+2 ever created.

Basically, put yourself in spots that are good for you. OP is currently on a 14 BI downswing, so my guess is that he's not doing that. Meanwhile, I kinda can't remember the last time I had a meaningful difficult decision (this doesn't necessarily translate into the highest EV possible, but it sure makes winning at an ~ok rate easy and stress free for my limited lol skillz).

I mean, it is really really difficult to lose at your typical LLSNL game. If you are, you really need to re-evaluate whether the lines you are taking are good for you (GTO, and pretty much everything else, be damned). FWIW, raising marginal hands deep and OOP is pretty much step one in how to make poker difficult, at least for me; if you're having success doing that, then keep doing that, otherwise, maybe don't.

GpokeriseasyifyoumakeiteasyG

I'll admit that my instant and natural reaction to seeing GG post "I limp pre, but that's me" was pure revulsion. I mean, open-limping? WTF?

But there seems to some general consensus that he's a winning player, and as annoying as it is, I have to also admit that his supporting arguments are difficult to refute logically.

Eventually I'll get around to reading his mega-thread about his strategy. Until then, I think the most reasonable stance to take is to keep an open mind, at least allowing that there may be more than one route to the same end-point.

I will say that I think all things being equal, playing one's entire range as raise or fold is probably going to lead to better results for most players than playing one's entire range as limp or fold. GG should be willing to admit that his strat runs counter to what most modern theorists advocate.

I am not remotely a crusher.

But I'm also not remotely close to breakeven.

If you're crushing using whatever method you are using, them keeping doing that.

But if you're not doing that well doing what you're doing, then obviously don't keep doing that and instead consider doing something different (even if different isn't exactly cool with the backpack kids). Do what works for you, and this most definitely won't be the same for everyone.

Having said that, I was only a couple of hundred hours into my Super Nit method when I went into a ~14 BI downswing (albeit 66bb BIs). So it can happen to all of us using whatever stoopid method we're using. It's up top Banana to figure out for himself whether this is just a bump in an otherwise good path or something else.

Ggoodlucktousall,imoG

Interested to see a link to the thread of you can post here? I would have thought that a no raise strategy could be (has been?) logically refuted using Nash/ GTO analysis. Obviously it can still win if people are just v bad, which many are.

Sent from my Mi 9T using Tapatalk

Clearly GTO prefers a raise nearly every time strategy, and by definition, GTO should at worst be EV neutral, but in real life I suspect:

TAG Strat EV > Nit Strat EV > GTO EV for typical low stakes.

i.e. the other strategies are not just that positive EV (as you say), but better (and possibly significantly better) than GTO, i.e. we should always favor these exploitative strategies in typical low stakes games

And of course the Nit Strat EV likely comes with lower variance too.

By thread do you just mean my stoopid Super Nit strategy? I discuss it in my A Clueless Noob Reaches 1000 Hours of Live 1/3 NL thread.

Updated Bottom Line: ~6K+ hours @ ~7 bb/hr, with the last ~half of those hours using my Super Nit strategy. Part of the Super Nit strategy is having a 0% raising range in the LJ- and only considering raising the HJ if a Button straddle + effective stacks create a comfortable stack off with TP. I haven't raised a hand in the LJ- in ~8 years, and I can probably count on one hand how often I raise the HJ per year. This is part of being a position nit (although there are other reasons).

Obviously LLSNL games are so good that almost any non-moronic strategy will beat them. I think beating my particular game for ~7 bb/hr, especially in a raked environment that is currently at $9+$1+$1, is ~ok. More skilled players likely do better than that and wouldn't be as happy with a mere ~7 bb/hr as I am.

And of course none of this concludes that doing something different than this won't work out better for you. It basically just concludes that limping probably isn't nearly as bad as you think it is, and might actually be a reasonable approach for some people given their skillz set.

Gbut,youdoyouG