-
Medium Pair in SB facing 2 limpers
This is a 100NL 6-max cash hand that I played on Ignition. It was interesting enough that I turned it into a Twitter poll.
Ignition Hand #4175017912 TBL#25044065 HOLDEM No Limit – 2021-09-22 02:01:35
Table Info: Version: 1, Type: Ignition, Stakes: $0.50-$1
Seat 1: Dealer ($98.50 in chips)
Seat 2: Small Blind [ME] ($99 in chips)
Seat 3: Big Blind ($25.23 in chips)
Seat 4: LJ ($112.13 in chips)
Seat 5: HJ ($29.36 in chips)
Seat 6: CO ($101.22 in chips)
Small Blind [ME] : Card dealt to a spot [9d 9h]
LJ : Folds
HJ : Calls $1
CO : Folds
Dealer : Calls $1
So we are facing 2 limpers with 99 in the SB. It’s noteworthy that the original limper and the Big Blind are short stacked while the overlimper on the Button has a full 100bb stack.
This was only my second hand at the table. So reads were only based on stack size and action so far. My guess was that HJ (short stack and limp) and BB (short stack) were likely weaker players. Button could be a competent player.
With a hand as strong as 99, I’m raising with only the sizing being in question. I am trying to get the possibly competent player (Button) out and don’t mind keeping in weaker players. I chose to raise to 8bbs.
I’m raising for value with 99. I’m attacking the wide limp and overlimping range. I upsize my bet to get more value from weaker players that will play too many hands.
In my Twitter poll, I didn’t even include completing (limping) as an option. To my surprise, several people chose “Other” and explained that they preferred a limp. These were good players whose game I greatly respect.
Do you prefer the complete or the raise? If raising, what size?
-
3 Replies
-
I’m definitely raising. These middle pocket pairs are the most clear raise of anything in my mind. My overlimping/completing hands are going to be much stronger or much weaker. I’m overlimping/completing with a hand like 22 or T9o, and then sometimes a hand like AA, particularly if I think big blind has any chance of getting squirrely.
But these middle pair holdings are strong but vulnerable and benefit a ton by raising against limping ranges. Unlike 22, 99 can win a lot of pots if we go heads up. If we just complete here, we’re turning 99 into 22. This will now go 4 ways and we basically need to hit a set. Even a board like 542 feels gross if a lot of money goes in the pot, especially given the almost 100% range of big blind.
So I definitely like a raise and I think it is a fairly big EV error to complete with hands like 88-QQ. In terms of sizing, we’re OOP and limpers like to see flops. My goal is to either take it down or get this heads up, so I’m charging a decent amount. I like your sizing and would configure in the 6-10 bb range based on table dynamics, but I would usually start right where you did.
-
This is a clear raise, especially in a cash game. I am sizing 7 or 8 bbs. We are out of position and want to narrow the field. If we limp, we are almost exclusively set mining as there are few flops where we are comfortable even with an over pair to low cards. I agree we need to size larger than a standard raise size because of 3 opponents, our specific hand and being out of position. We are trying to isolate against one opponent.
There are some tourney spots where I don’t mind completing here depending on effective stacks. But you are going to see a situation like this very, very rarely in a tourney.
-
definitely putting this one on the Forums podcast @Binkley you should join the panel that night!
Log in to reply.