Absolute blind structure change, 2/3 SB @ 3/6

[ElSapo]

Apologies if this has been covered... Any thoughgts on how the new structure affects pre-flop play? I'm completing every chance I get, but if it's HU (and it often will be), should you be trying to complete and perhaps limp-folding against more passive BBs?

You're automatically getting 5-1 HU, and against a limper, 8-1... Against a raise, you're getting almost 3-1, which seems like I'd start cold-calling small pairs for the implied odds of flopping a set ...

Thoughts?

[W. Deranged]

The main things are:

1. You have to play every hand when completing a 2/3 blind.

2. You should open up the range of hands you will call raises with from the small blind. Your odds improve considerably over a 1/3 or 1/2 blind structure.

3. You should be limp-folding sometimes in short-handed (particularly heads-up) pots.

4. A game-theoretic corollary to #3: If you are limp-folding sometimes in the SB, you should also be limp-reraising from that position as well. Mix it up more. (There is less reason to limp-reraise in a 1/2 structure because given the odds you're open-completing much less often and almost never complete-folding, since the odds on the completion and on calling the raise are the same).

[oreopimp]

yeah limp re-raise more, limp a lot more especially after 1-2 limpers or just in general, call raises more, 3bet open raises with a wider range of hands. But say co or btn open raises, you could even call more w/ weaker hands.

Also, Deranged, are you calling EVERYTHING, I mean, Id prolly toss the bottom 10 percent maybe...well maybe not the connectors, but hands like 52, 72..etc

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
4. A game-theoretic corollary to #3: If you are limp-folding sometimes in the SB, you should also be limp-reraising from that position as well. Mix it up more. (There is less reason to limp-reraise in a 1/2 structure because given the odds you're open-completing much less often and almost never complete-folding, since the odds on the completion and on calling the raise are the same).

[/ QUOTE ]

The implied odds are different though.

[brazilio]

[ QUOTE ]
The main things are:

1. You have to play every hand when completing a 2/3 blind.



[/ QUOTE ]

That completely depends on how aggressive the BB is, I don't like absolutes like this at all.

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The main things are:

1. You have to play every hand when completing a 2/3 blind.



[/ QUOTE ]

That completely depends on how aggressive the BB is, I don't like absolutes like this at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are some considerations:

I'm not playing everything in a two or three-handed pot. I should be clear on that.

With two limpers or more though, I'm playing every single hand. You're getting 11-1 immediate odds or better and enormous implied odds. This is straight out of HPFAP.

Heads-up and three-handed I'll pitch a few hands though.

[brazilio]

11-1 isn't quite odds to even play offsuited connectors according to that pokerstove jackass, so I still think it's a mistake. And with an aggressive BB, that cost becomes prohibitive. I think it's misleading because the extra 1/3SB doesn't look like much, but the odds it gives you aren't fantastic for a lot of trash.

Doing more complete/folding alleviates that, but in multiway pots not many people are gonna fold.

[Redd]

[ QUOTE ]
11-1 isn't quite odds to even play offsuited connectors according to that pokerstove jackass,

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that pokerstove article valid? I had a glance at it and the math that I saw seemed to be ok, but his advice seemed too tight to me.

[damaniac]

With the preflop odds though, it's way different than getting 11:1 calling a full SB in the BB, for example. You are putting in 1/3 of a SB now, so your implied odds are much, much better. It's like a situation where you might complete in a 1/2 blind structure vs. a limper, then fold to BB's raise still getting 5:1.

[krishan]

[ QUOTE ]
11-1 isn't quite odds to even play offsuited connectors according to that pokerstove jackass, so I still think it's a mistake. And with an aggressive BB, that cost becomes prohibitive. I think it's misleading because the extra 1/3SB doesn't look like much, but the odds it gives you aren't fantastic for a lot of trash.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Stove isn't useful because it's a hot cold sim for 5 cards. We only see 3 cards but based on that we generally have enough info to play the hand well. I call 100% with 2 limpers.

Krishan