I take the line on board, although I don't agree with it. If I am playing A7s here with two callers and a few players still behind me, then I am raising. Sometimes I'd fold, sometimes I'd raise, but I would only limp with a sequence of seriously passive players behind me or if I were on the button (and even then I would probably raise). For a start, you lay yourself open to the raise on the button and the reraise from the blind. Then what do you do, throw it away? At least if you raise and are reraised there is a chance that it will be heads up and your pair of Aces (if you hit the flop) will be up against KK or QQ, rather than AJ.



Now, (and this is why I mentioned this hand), this leads us straight to the situation where I am not building pots, but looking for heads up situations and then to take the pots down without a showdown through sheer agression.

I don't win many big multi-way showdowns, but I win an awful lot of small uncontested pots that I probably don't have a right to. The thing is, I might be winning a lot of small uncontested pots that I have every right to, where I should be building the pot and looking to win a big contested pot.

Limit is known as "death by a thousand cuts", and to say that one big win compensates for a lot of small minus EVs does not cover the point that it does not necessarily compensate for them in the long run. it may well do (it's an area that I am looking at), but it isn't a given, so to speak.

And I still hate the limp :-)