Pole küll Andu, aga 1 minut tagasi lugesin just selle kohta, kui inglise keel probleemiks pole:

Cons are that you lose your preflop fold equity against players that fold too much, you diminish your ability to build larger pots when deeper stacked in position and you have to give your opponent a wider range going into the flop usually (if they have a wide limp raising range or call every hand vs a raise this is not going to be very true, but for the most part it will apply because most players fold the bottom 20-50% of hands OOP, thereby narrowing their range going into the flop).

Pros are that you're not building big pots vs unknown opponents early, the theory there goes that you'll be able to exploit them much better once you pick up some reads on them.

You won't be folding your button (though the minraiser will sometimes tell you they wouldn't be folding the button either) so you'll play more hands postflop and pick up reads faster. Against very loose players you can keep the pot especially small, and value bet hard and fast when needed. If a player isn't used to play a competent limping player, you may take them out of their comfort zone more easily (the other side of this would be a good hyper aggressive player, which unarguably tilts opponents at a higher rate than a competent limper).

But the overall lesson here that you should take is that there are times to limp a lot of hands and times to limp zero hands and figuring out when the more ideal times to raise or limp in a match is much more important than marrying yourself to a single style. In fact, you'll be much more limited if you consider yourself a limp only player or a 3x only player, even a minraise only player, though if I had to pick one that is most adaptable, hardest to exploit and exploits their opponents the highest % of the time it would be a minraise button strategy.