some one who limps every hand?
some one who goes all in everyhand?
just a random i want your opinion thread... i know which i think is worse both pretty bad though
Printable View
some one who limps every hand?
some one who goes all in everyhand?
just a random i want your opinion thread... i know which i think is worse both pretty bad though
Limpers are worse for they hit their draws more than often. All iners usually lose and whine. Limpers eat u up
def someone who limps every hand. going all in every hand is actually an ok strategy because it prevents u from making post flop mistakes and most spots in poker are marginal anyway
the limper.... fish r the worst.
some one who goes all in every hand,very annoying.
aww we do think alike :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharking
Well I guarantee if its every hand the limper has a better chance.
I'm a limping sob in the BCP PLO games, people hate me but hey I win $ so hahahahahahaaa
better chance at what? lasting a lil longer? not if the alliner wins a hand.. lolQuote:
Originally Posted by FinishingLast
someone like durr who plays every hand is extremely hard to range and know where u stand in the hand. all inner's are a lot easier to beat IMO.
I tell you what we can play heads up and I'll limp everyhand and you can go all in every hand. We'll play ten games then see who has the better return.
limpers piss me off or the ones who bet into a drypot with nothing
I dont do either one, its just players at extreme opposite ends of each other... both poor strategies it was a hypothetical situation questionQuote:
Originally Posted by FinishingLast
also i needed a few points and tried to think of a not completly dumb post lol
I agreeQuote:
Originally Posted by JLynn171
the all inners everyhand annoy me, but I do this once in awjile on freerolls lol
Sliders (all-in every hand) are losing players. These are the most unskilled and the most annoying type because they drive up the variance so high. Sometimes they donk their way to the top, but usually they just give a huge amount of chips to a good player thus making your life harder. In cash games, I'll welcome these players all day! just gotta have the BR to back up the variance.
if you mean from the standpoint of who is a worse player, then that is clearly somebody who goes all in every hand. with very deep stacks against terrible players it may even be profitable for an expert to limp every hand
I think both are equally bad for two different reasons. Someone who shoves every hand they play just destroys all value because they are going to get called by a hand that is beating them, so they lose value on good hands and get knocked out on hands they are beat (if they don\'t suck out. People who limp every hand are bad for the fact that they do not isolate to play against a few players. Isolation is key to being able to manipulate and range properly. The best poker players use every tool, limping, shoving, small raises, small bets, big bets, etc. to their advantage. They know what the best play for a situation is, so using the same tool for every situation would be like trying to send out a team full of punters to win a football game. They\'d dominate when they have to punt, but would suck every other time.
Hate both of them..especially when limper goes AI after flop cause he got something:D
The limping player is much more dangerous than a kamikaze player. But I will say I have seen some pretty decent players that know how to all in or fold damn good!!!
This. Depending on the table environment, regular limping might be a payoff strategy. A good player is almost never all-in unless he is very sure he has the nuts or the odds strongly on his side.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacoflavoredthunder
limpers are the absolute worst. but in FR's and micros you dont get enuf chips to raise, so limping is OK in micros
Those who beat you hand by hand :-) No matter if all-in preflop or after ... the chips doesn't makes the difference, the result DOES! :-)
All in maniacs. I can punish limpers and often outplay them, but shovers take away all but one option...
them donks is the most dangerous. always beat my awesome hand.
the all iners are far more frustrating. I could force a liper but I fold hands that otherwise would have won becase it is not worth the risk. they also seam to win online more that they should
I think biggest online donk threat is TILTEMKID on ACR
definently the guy that goes all in every hand espescially when he continuously makes hands with crap cards. the guy that limps every hand I think could be a good player. it depending on his position and how many people are in the hand he can always raise and get action,and on the flip side if someone raises to much in front of him he can always get away from the hand with minimum loss. like if he has a big raise and a caller and he has pocket 7's had he raised 1st it might be harder to let go of that hand.
I definitely hate the all in-er more because they rely more on luck than skill to win.
Limping is marginally more tolerable because you have options with them. When close to the bubble the limper lots of times can be made to fold often with a sizable re-raise making it easy to steal blinds from them.
for every tourney you see one of these donks going to the top, there are 10 tournaments they bust out early - and you don't see this because they're gone before you'd notice - so it definitely could seem like they win more than they should when there's 20 of them per 100 players. Chances are one of them is going to bingo their way to the final table.Quote:
Originally Posted by pookat
back in the day i played a $5 sng on pokerstars - i thought - what if my only move was AI? how would i fare? So I decided that any hand i played i went AI and AI only - but it was for good hands (K10 suited and up) - funny thing is I won the tourney - but believe me I will never do it again. i think the AI is better move than limp if its every hand you play
but to be fair it is my opinion that both options are BAD
you can punish a limper by raising, amybe then he will fold..all iners all the time are my fav peeps, i love those guys i usually double up quickly with them..who's the worst, great question.lol
Someone who goes all in every hand it ruins poker.
I would have to say limping because they catch funny shit
If someone didn't know how to fold the hand, it is really no matter the difference. Just taste of poker style.
I would say they both are rough to play against, but in the long run, neither will do so well. I'd rather play an all-inner than a limper.
someone who goes all in every hand, less easy to ignore more easy to tilt u and disrupts the gameplay imo
at least with a limper ull still be in the tourney if he hits as u can fold post flop
some one who limps every hand?
some one who goes all in everyhand?
just a random i want your opinion thread... i know which i think is worse both pretty bad though
A risk taker in my opinion is going to be a better player in my opinion rather than somebody who just limps in. At least an all inner realizes there hand strength relative to the table and pushes whereas a limper is just getting nickle and dimbed.
They're both pretty bad because consistently playing the same way will never make you a lot of money in these 2 cases.