experiment:- is it profitable to limp with any two suited?

beeasyonme

recently i read a post asking if a player plays some outragous odds and only hits a that amount of times, in the long run will he be profitable. Over the last two days i put his theory to the test on 4 pence tables. I fully understand that two days and 121 hands is not enough time to conduct this experiment but these are my results so far. Iv decided to limp any two suited and raise my big ones AK etc, cards knowing that i have about a 16/1 chance of hitting a flush, but i believe the payout tends to be more than 16/1 once you hit.

Iv counted all my BBs and SB as full loses if i lose and also my AK's etc. I have put this experiment on hold when playing 3 or more tables as writing my results down was abit more difficult.

So far i have played 121 hands and hit the flush 7 times. I lost 75 of these hands totalling a loss of £8.42, my biggest loses were 89 where i had a flush draw and a BDSD on the flop vs a two pair shove, i lost £1.62. My next biggest was when i was BB with A7 and came up against a someone who slow played 2 pair and hit his full house on the river as i hit my flush, this loss was £1.60. there are a few at 10 BB or so but there the big ones.

I have won 46 of these hands totalling a value of £17.72, my flush wins are A2 winning £3.20 hitting a flush when i came up against AK with a A on the table. (a hand i would not of played) J8 winning £2.90 (another hand i would not of played). JT winning £1.60 ( i would of played this hand), Q7 winning £1.17, J6 winning 70p, 85 winning 18p and A5 winning 17p, and of course winning the others by playing my own way or still hitting good cards.

I know the higher level you play the harder this becomes as there is alot more preflop play, but at this level in the long run worth it?

YOUNG_GUN

no its not ever profitable to limp just because they are suited. its really bad and you have been running good

stien

No he's not he's simply running standard.

DeucesLive

I think at 4NL, provided there's no regs about, you could probably make a decent profit from serial limping- I'd widen my range to literally any connected cards and any suited cards along with any pair though, since chances are every pot will be limped, and if you don't connect strongly- get out of the way. When you do connect, stack the muppets that call along with top pair/second pair.

All depends on the kind of table you get but I think it could work at that level. Nowhere else though.

YOUNG_GUN

way to get people in good habits guys WP

FWIW i do think u had a lucky day and it would be more unprofitable long term then profitable, if you want carry on for few weeks keep doing it if it works, but personally i doubt it would last for weeks and would start going down eventually. thats like saying playing everyhand from the button(although that would be better then limping any suited cards

Thats just my opinion, maybe harsh but at nl4 i have played and personally dont think its a good idea. maybe the odd limp or on a certain table but as a general rule no from me

DeucesLive

you can't treat NL4 like any other level- because it's not. It's jam packed with people who are quite willing to go allin virtually every hand- if you treat every pot you get involved in as a long term investment, you probably aren't gonna go far wrong.

When you make raises, you're probably getting a lot of callers pre- joining the limpers crowd with superior postflop play could, I think, be a profitable scenario. Look at setmining for example- you limp every pp you're dealt, and 1/8 times you hit a set. When you hit those sets, you've got a good chance of stacking someone (depending on board texture) since most of the table is involved.

I'm not saying definitively it's a good or bad plan, but I think the constant hammering of 'never limp' might not quite apply to NL4. Perhaps having a slightly more conservative approach to which cards you limp (i.e limp any suited cons, any suited ace or king, possibly some suited 1 gappers as opposed to literally any suited cards) would be more profitable. But it's an idea that bears some merit, I think. Don't be too quick to dismiss ideas that simply don't work at higher levels until it's proven to be a bad idea.

YOUNG_GUN

I didnt say never limp, i said should not be applied for just suited cards..

Im happy to limp with pp up to 9's and hands like KQ hands that play well post flop or can flop well giving you implied odds. In regards to NL4 just ask Dohhhhman ABC Tight aggressive poker is the best way to combat the constant limpers and everything else. I think limping is ok used correctly at nl4 otherwise it will just be spewy imo

beeasyonme

well its dohhhhh who actually gave me the idea of doing this, i do think this kind of thing needs to be played over several hundred hands before anyone can call it a sure thing and im going to stick at it abit longer just to see what happens in the long run, if this is standard then no matter where im sitting i might just allways have a nl4 table open to keep doing what im doing.

YOUNG_GUN

IMO i think your mis-interpreting what dohhh put. He didnt specifically mention Suited cards i dont think or specifically limping into pots for implied odds purpose. if you have had a discussion with JJ then fair play but sounds like the total opposite to what he has said to me in the past and ill be a bit suprised if he did say something.

Ill have to wait till tomorrow to see what he puts on the matter as he's been of all eve, im not claiming to be a NL4 specialist either cos im not just really offering my advice on this matter

Regards
John

beeasyonme

no seriously im greatful for your advice and you might just be right, maybe i am running good at the mo and after a week, 2 weeks etc i may fall. Doubling up over 121 hands gives me a gap and if i see my loss total catching up then i'l know that im wrong to do this and stop either way im up. Whenever anyone thinks they may just have a system when gambling this system needs to be tried and tested and all im doing is trying and testing. I dont think dohhhhh was supporting this kind of play but merely putting the question to the community, i just acted on this to see if playing the odds can work.

i am honestly greatful for your thoughts

thanks
Zena

unknown_username

Limping into pots can have some good results. Limping into every pot is nonsense.

In tournaments limping is a useful tactic when you are strong stacked. It isn't a good idea when you are low stacked as it will eat away your stack, you will lose fold equity and have a weak image at the table. However, limping marginal hands can bring big rewards if you have the ability to read board texture and have a read on your opponents. If you're limping hoping for the flopped house - forget it. Stick to ABC poker.

I can't believe Dohhhhhhh recommends a limp of any kind. I don't think he's reached that level of subtlety yet - although I'm sure he will one day.  )

DOHHHHHHH

...... my thread was about getting money in behind every single time, and showing a profit over time. (When the pot odds give you 25/1 and you're only a 20/1 shot to hit your hand for example)

I meant all in situations though.....

As regards limping, I reckon I could limp every single hand at 4nl and show a profit still.

BlackFish3

It's not about what is profitable and what isn't... it's about what is the most profitable long run decision in every situation. Your play post flop will also change whether it is profitable or not... it isn't just about pre flop actions.

FlashFlush

at 4nl I think a good player playing any 2 cards full stop is going to win. The money going into the pot does not come from preflop hand selection, its a matter of making the maximum and losing the minimum once the flop is out. A good player can extract maximum value from every pot but will lose minimum when they are not ahead.

Once you move from 4nl this will not be the same so this is not a true test because players understand board texture.

stien

In Response to Re: experiment:- is it profitable to limp with any two suited?:You move from 4nl this will not be the same so this is not a true test because players understand board texture.
Posted by FlashFlush

Some do, some don't. There are plenty of donks playing above nl4 who limp call with any two and hit huge, usually when I have AA, in fact mostly when I have AA or KK..... I think i'm onto something here. If you know the guy has AA or KK limp calling looks like a big +EV play but only with those quality hands T4, K5, 53. If you don't know he's holding AA or KK you'll need to get one of those huge fishy flop coming alarms to alert you.

BlackFish3

In Response to Re: experiment:- is it profitable to limp with any two suited?:

at 4nl I think a good player playing any 2 cards full stop is going to win. The money going into the pot does not come from preflop hand selection, its a matter of making the maximum and losing the minimum once the flop is out. A good player can extract maximum value from every pot but will lose minimum when they are not ahead. Once you move from 4nl this will not be the same so this is not a true test because players understand board texture.
Posted by FlashFlush

Sounds more like a great player / perfect player...