The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

Ive done some thinking, not a lot, but a little bit and here are some of those thoughts. BTW This post is a little long, but if you dont wanna bother reading it or want the "short form" then ask soemone else to do a write up for you. However if you want to learn/improve then maybe try not to info handed to you on a silver platter.

In nl the blinds are fairly trivial. They are more like a guideline than anything else. If you are playing 5/10nl and everyone has 1k stacks, the game is significantly different than if everyone has 2k-3k stacks. Often when ppl get deeper, they will still open to $40 (4bb), which is actually sort of silly. In essence they are minraising in a 10/20nl (except some playing in this "deep" 5/10 game might be "underolled" for how big their game plays). The standard open isnt always standard.... like the raw monetary number might happen to be the same, but if its expressed as a % of stacks, the number does change. That phenomenom is obv a boon to some and a bane to others and their respective play styles or tendencies.



Moving along, so if the blinds are more of a guideline, then why do we follow it? Well I suspect its moer out of habit than anything else, or even just lazyness in not wanting to make constant minor adjustments based on the stack sizes around the table.

I think we are really only pretending to fight for the blinds in nl cash game play. What we are really fighting for, is edges based on a % of stack sizes. For example, if I make almost all my money on the CO and the Button, why am I folding 58s to a raise in that position? On the button and in the co you ARE paying a blind. That blind is the money, as expressed as a % of stack sizes and modified/altered based on both the relatively quality of your opponent and lastly the quality of your hands, that you give up by folding it.

Look at it this way, if someone "defends" jts in their bb vs a button open, what exactly are they defending? They are defending an extremely miniscule amount of the final pot - an amount that doesnt even matter. The equivalent of what happens in such a hand is that the blidns are really just UTG limpers, and the guy on the button raised them. Hand ranges aside for each preflop play (call in teh blinds vs limpcall utg 6max), the way the money goes in is the same (not that the money really mattered that much!).


You guys should go to pt, open up your positional stats, and look at how much money you make (and lose) from each position. You'l notice that the closer you are to the button, the more you make. The reason for that isnt b/c you have to pay a blind, its bc you have to pay an "imaginary out of position" blind that not only charges you money preflop for your initial call, but also *taxes you every single street in the amount of money that you can make*. Often times, the amount that being oop *taxes* certain hands (ie k5o) is so much higher than the hand can *earn*, that the hand actually loses money.


So now that you know that button = moneymoneymoney, what does that mean? Well ive talked to a few peeps who are very good players, and despite many of them having diff styles, they all agreed that on the buton you should be cold calling more preflop and 3betting less. Now to me this at first seemed a bit backwards, since I assumed that in position I wanted to play bigger pots.... but i was misaplying that idea. On the button I have a great deal of control of the pot size. By 3betting preflop,. I inflate the pot which ends up giving me less control postflop of the hand as its played out. You know how I mentioned when new streets come for certain hands they are *taxed* for being out of position? Well, the less they have being, the less those hands have to give - It hard to use your position to make money when the guys decision on the turn is either call a psb for his stack or fold. By 3betting preflop in position, I am effectively diminishing my positional edge (much like how ppl 3bet button raises from their small blind both for initative nd to decrease the buttons edge by giving him less room to manuver postflop.... the money goes in preflop in both cases, how it got there isnt that important once its there). Of course, if you have ever played with shortstacks, you know this b/c with them its so often you either hit it or you miss it, and you cant (and they cant) draw to it (it being the best hand in a showdown that takes place).



All of this is pretty interesting to me after I changed my preflop ranges. I run about 25/20/3.5 now, which I guess is lagtag to some, but really, its not for everyone. For the most part I stopped opening scs and friend until the CO, and added more hands (ie 58s 6ts etc) to the CO and Button. As a result, I open frequently, pretty much playing the lions share of mey hands in position. I think some tags (2p2rs) look at my stats and have all the wrong assumptions about my play. They seem to expect me to be a lot more aggressive preflop than I really am and generally play back far too much postflop in 3bet pots given my range (Whihc against many ppl, in most situations save for hu in the blinds is almost always something silly-tight like jj+ aqs+). I guess thats sort of a reminder that pokertracker stats only tell you the numbers, they dont tel you what they mean.


Anyways guys, cold-calling in position + raising flops = free money in midstakes games vs tags. enjoy

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

Enlightening. Thank you.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

A couple more things I forgot to mention or elaborate on:

1) If you are playing 5/10nl with 2k stacks, you SHOULD change your opening range to 70 dollars unless you want to alter your preflop ranges so that they are "in tune' with the stack sizes.

2) The hands that are *taxed* for being out of position rae commonly refered to as reverse implied odds hands. Some hands have worse reverse implied odds hands than others, and you can get away with playing them with deep stacks if you are a better player than your opponent, if you are in position, or if he reverse implied odds arent too severe (ie compare 78o vs q7o). One thing that imo is very very important in nl is limiting the amount of reverse implied odds hands you play. I try to play as few as possible save for times when I am taking shots at a guy in position by calling his raises to fkk with him postflop or overcaling preflop with good relative position (ie co opens button calls sb calls im in the bb with 9to I call b/c of good relative position. Compare this to absolute position which is having the button. Relative position usually deals with your position in relation to the preflop raiser or the person you expect to make the first bet on the flop. Relative position can change street to street though, while absolute position cannot).

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

I'm bumping so I can read tomorrow or sunday or whatever, keep this near the top.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

wow...
this is very good.

Nice job

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

holla

this is sort of discussed somewhere in NLHETP i think, but you did a lot better job mr bright

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

Good post.
-Tagging it so I can reread at not 5 am.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

Incidentally I was just discussing with NoahSD earlier how I 3-bet hands like AQ and TT less then some other hands like 89s or A7s from the blinds vs tags/good lags that raise with position.

I feel like 3-betting turns these mid-high strength hands into bluffs too often, and actually is lower EV than just calling (factoring in shania also).

I'm not really sure how relevant this is to the OP but it's a little mini-ephiphany I had about preflop situations today. Does this make sense to anyone?

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

"Now to me this at first seemed a bit backwards, since I assumed that in position I wanted to play bigger pots.... but i was misaplying that idea. On the button I have a great deal of control of the pot size. By 3betting preflop,. I inflate the pot which ends up giving me less control postflop of the hand as its played out."

This had been bugging me for a while. I also thought 3-betting in position should be profitable [edit: it's still profitable with many hands i think though], with position and all. But if you 3-bet you either take a small pot preflop or play a big pot postflop, with only a limited number of possible lines to take because stacks are small compared to potsize, and you miss the flop most of the time, especially with marginal hands.

Also, after thinking about the importance of position and reverse implied odds/dominated hands, I started wondering why anyone would play such hands in EP. I mean like A4s, ATo, KJo, KTs, etc. UTG. In late position these are great hands, but I doubt they are profitable UTG.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

dan ur an idiot filled with cheesecake

just kidding nice post

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
Incidentally I was just discussing with NoahSD earlier how I 3-bet hands like AQ and TT less then some other hands like 89s or A7s from the blinds vs tags/good lags that raise with position.

I feel like 3-betting turns these mid-high strength hands into bluffs too often, and actually is lower EV than just calling (factoring in shania also).

I'm not really sure how relevant this is to the OP but it's a little mini-ephiphany I had about preflop situations today. Does this make sense to anyone?

[/ QUOTE ]

Makes a lot of sense to me. I have been reraising these hands, but let's say you have TT. You reraise in the BB, cbet any flop, and are raised. Without a good read, you have to fold here every time, because JJ+, as well as lower sets, are in villain's range. If villain just calls flop you have to be very, very careful too, even if there are no cards higher than T on the board.
So you're basically hoping he folds every time...

This reminds me of a thought I had yesterday. I thought that in stead of reraising something like 99+ or TT+, it would be better to reraise QQ+ and 22-44. Anyone agree?

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
This reminds me of a thought I had yesterday. I thought that in stead of reraising something like 99+ or TT+, it would be better to reraise QQ+ and 22-44. Anyone agree?

[/ QUOTE ] Depends on the aggressiveness of the game and how good villain is. Basically if villain is bad and/or predictable hands like TT become easier to play in an unraised pot (you can c/c a flop with 1 over and fold to a turn bet ect) and so I'm happier just calling it. Vs. a good player, TT OOP with relatively deepish stacks due to not reraising is harder to play. Also, the more aggressive the button opener (some people open a huge range from there) the more likely I am to repop tens. This is because I'm repopping alot more hands to counter his agressiveness and if villain chooses to play back at me in a serious way alot of it will be through rebluffs rather than waiting for a real hand. Waiting won't really work in the long run since the real hands compose such a small part of his button opening range. So I will be mpore likely to repop tens when doing so doesn't turn them into air, i.e. when I'm more able to play them for value as an overpair postflop. So the higher you play, the better your opponents and the more likely they open alot from the button, the more you should be popping tens. And be more likely to call with them vs. an opponent who is tighter from the button.

Essentially its best to keep your range to nuts-or-bluff like you suggested, but the higher you go the more often TT is the nuts.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

Dan I'm not sure about your argument for opening based on stack % instead of absolute size of the blinds. It makes sense to some extent, but there has to be a line. I don't think even with position you could outplay aces that put 4% of its stack in preflop. Obviously he won't have aces every time, but you see the point... he can tighten up to the point where his preflop advantage over you will not be made up by your positional advantage postflop.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think we are really only pretending to fight for the blinds in nl cash game play. What we are really fighting for, is edges based on a % of stack sizes. For example, if I make almost all my money on the CO and the Button, why am I folding 58s to a raise in that position? On the button and in the co you ARE paying a blind. That blind is the money, as expressed as a % of stack sizes and modified/altered based on both the relatively quality of your opponent and lastly the quality of your hands, that you give up by folding it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're obscuring the matter. It's easier to just think in terms of +EV/-EV instead of "Invisible blinds of %Edges based on Stack Size..." and they mean the same thing. My opponent raises to 3.5 BB in the CO and I have JTs, the only consideration is: are my implied odds good enough to show a profit here?

The reason online NL poker seems like it's not a struggle for the antes is because people play too many hands given the size of the ante. Their pre flop looseness creates a chain reaction which allows you to play more hands to take advantage of their mistakes. A table where everyone was playing correctly would be very tight indeed compared to the games we know and love.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

I agree wholeheartedly and think this is a good post.

The varying your preflop raise size thing could get tricky if you have a mix of stack sizes at your table.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

I disagree with increasing your raise sizes just because you are deeper. The only time I think it would be a good idea is if some very strong players had position on you with +200bb's. By increasing your standard raise size to 8bb assuming you and your oponents are 200bb's deep decreases your edge greatly. By increasing your raise size there will be far less postflop decisions to make thus decreasing your edge.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

I think nits will make more if you are opening to 7x.

I think continuing to open to 40 or whatever is fine just adjust your range.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

Interesting, but your last sentence said raising TAGs on the flop = money. I thought your post talked about preflop play?

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
Interesting, but your last sentence said raising TAGs on the flop = money. I thought your post talked about preflop play?

[/ QUOTE ]

preflop play and post flop play have an uncanny resemblence!

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think some tags (2p2rs) look at my stats and have all the wrong assumptions about my play. They seem to expect me to be a lot more aggressive preflop than I really am and generally play back far too much postflop in 3bet pots given my range (Whihc against many ppl, in most situations save for hu in the blinds is almost always something silly-tight like jj+ aqs+). I guess thats sort of a reminder that pokertracker stats only tell you the numbers, they dont tel you what they mean.

[/ QUOTE ]

this has always been a bit of a leak for me, people just dont understand what your doing.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

Dan,

Well done sir. I enjoyed it and have been thinking about that stuff a little more recently as I revamp my game again.

Now, what is this reverse implied odds? I never really got that...

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]


1) If you are playing 5/10nl with 2k stacks, you SHOULD change your opening range to 70 dollars unless you want to alter your preflop ranges so that they are "in tune' with the stack sizes.


[/ QUOTE ]

good post, but i disagree with this part... if stacks are 500BB at 5/10 then are you suggesting we raise to like 200 preflop?

if everyone has 200bb at 5/10, it becomes a much different game from 5/10 with 100bb... you shouldn't be trying to turn it back into a 100bb game

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think we are really only pretending to fight for the blinds in nl cash game play.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is just wrong imo and I'm surprised anyone would agree with you here.

[ QUOTE ]
Well ive talked to a few peeps who are very good players, and despite many of them having diff styles, they all agreed that on the buton you should be cold calling more preflop and 3betting less.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think the general point you're making here is that people who are "chasing the invisible antes" like Sklansky put it are easily exploitable by a good player in position. While I understand your argument why calling > 3-betting, I still have to semi-disagree with you there. I've experimented with both ways and I've come to the conclusion that vs. the vast majority of the people 3-betting is just more effective, maybe because it gives your opponent one extra decision to think about where you can n+1-level him. This works as long as people are not opening up their 4-betting ranges to counter-act and deny all the free flops you'd be otherwise seeing with your steal hands. It never hurts to mix up between the two methods though.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
Dan,

Well done sir. I enjoyed it and have been thinking about that stuff a little more recently as I revamp my game again.

Now, what is this reverse implied odds? I never really got that...

[/ QUOTE ]

hit your hand and lose anyway, like having an under flush.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
Now, what is this reverse implied odds? I never really got that...

[/ QUOTE ]

with implied odds, the idea is that you can play a big pot when you're ahead and a small pot when you're behind. hopefully, the big pot when ahead will be more than enough to make up for the more frequent small pots when behind.

with reverse implied odds, the opposite happens. you will tend towards playing a small pot when ahead, and a big one when behind. for instance, hands like KT or A9 are generally instafolds in the blinds, because usually when you're ahead, your opponent won't want to put much in the pot. however, flopping top pair with these hands can lead to playing a big pot when behind, because you're stuck in the mystery zone and end up calling down or something, and you let your opponent control the pot to his liking.


dan b, sweet post although i'm not sure i agree with opening to 7x when stacks are deep. It seems like you're looking to simulate standard conditions of 100x deep, which is generally optimal for the style of many good players (particularly those who have moved up through the ranks of online games that are almost always that deep). However, unless your opponents are playing along as you'd like (calling/raising/folding the same way they would to a standard raise), this probably won't happen. You'll end up playing relatively bigger pots with relatively worse hands, because your opponents will tighten up their calling/raising ranges to include stronger hands.

Now obviously if this is part of your gameplan, you should probably be able to adjust better to the situation than your opponents will, because they'll be surprised by the change of pace and may take a while to adjust. But I don't know if thats necessarily a great thing. I think their short-term adjustment will tend towards weak-tight, with longer-term adjustment tending towards "ohhhh, he's playing bigger pots with smaller hands, i can take advantage of this". At least with the good players. The bad ones obviously will be own-able regardless.

I'll have to think about this some more, because you're certainly onto something conceptually there, but I'm rather inclined against abnormally large opens at this point.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

Please explain to me why you would want to raise more pf the deeper you are. That seems plain wrong to me as I don't see any specific correlation to you're stack size and the preflop raise. The size of the blinds are much more important to the amount you raise than your stack size, so unless the blinds are rising I see no reason to increase your raise amount.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
Please explain to me why you would want to raise more pf the deeper you are. That seems plain wrong to me as I don't see any specific correlation to you're stack size and the preflop raise. The size of the blinds are much more important to the amount you raise than your stack size, so unless the blinds are rising I see no reason to increase your raise amount.

[/ QUOTE ]
^ agree, and hi hiltonian

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
Please explain to me why you would want to raise more pf the deeper you are. That seems plain wrong to me as I don't see any specific correlation to you're stack size and the preflop raise. The size of the blinds are much more important to the amount you raise than your stack size, so unless the blinds are rising I see no reason to increase your raise amount.

[/ QUOTE ]


There's definitely a correlation to stack size and the amount you open to, however I think something missing from DB's equation is the type of player that is also deepstacked. If it's another nittish TAG at the table, then there pretty much is no point in doing so since you won't be playing many hands with him anyway. If it's someone who's a bit looser, and position on you and is going to play deepstacked poker, then you would want to adjust your opening size in order to lessen his implied odds. Otherwise, he can call you with a TON of hands if your bet is a mere 1.5% or less of his stack (in the case that you cover or you're both evenly stacked). In doing this, you also put a lot more pressure on the rest of the 100 bb stacks at the table and cause them to have to make adjustments. Don't know if you guys have noticed this but a lot of TAGish players are not very good at making good adjustments. Some inevitably will and you'll just have to watch for that, but the great thing about this is that it is more likely to induce tilt, looser play, etc etc. Obviously the bad players will also be more apt to get the money in with weaker holdings preflop, etc. Basic point is that you're going to be increasing the action and your open sort of acts as a live straddle.

If the other deep stack is a bad player then this should be a no brainer. You DEFINITELY would want to adjust the size of your open raise: isolation, action, profit.

Anyway... this is less than detailed but hopefully this gets the ball rolling. Good thread, DB.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
Please explain to me why you would want to raise more pf the deeper you are. That seems plain wrong to me as I don't see any specific correlation to you're stack size and the preflop raise. The size of the blinds are much more important to the amount you raise than your stack size, so unless the blinds are rising I see no reason to increase your raise amount.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sit down with 5 other people and play NLHE, all of you have 5k each. You decide the blinds should be $50. You decide the blinds should be 50 cents. Are you open raising to $175 in the former situation and $1.75 in the latter, or the same amount in both scenarios? I argued with a couple other 2+2ers about this at Fallsview, as we all started 800BB deep. I'm not sure what to think, but I def believe that as stacks get deeper, the blinds get less relevent, so it makes sense that you should stop using them as the main determinent of your pf raise size.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
You sit down with 5 other people and play NLHE, all of you have 5k each. You decide the blinds should be $50. You decide the blinds should be 50 cents. Are you open raising to $175 in the former situation and $1.75 in the latter, or the same amount in both scenarios? I argued with a couple other 2+2ers about this at Fallsview, as we all started 800BB deep. I'm not sure what to think, but I def believe that as stacks get deeper, the blinds get less relevent, so it makes sense that you should stop using them as the main determinent of your pf raise size.

[/ QUOTE ]

Raising to $175 with a $.50 BB is straightforwardly retarded.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]

Raising to $175 with a $.50 BB is straightforwardly retarded.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assume all the players at the table believe they are the superior player. (not a stretch) Would that not eliminate the need for blinds? If there were no blinds what would you open raise to?

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

haven't read all the comments yet, but about the preflop opening amount, I agree that it changes something, but I personally change my hand values and not the raise amount. With deep stacks a bigger preflop raise just effectively turns a deep stack game into a non-deepstacked game, and I don't understand why you would choose to do this, when you are presumably a better deepstacked and postflop player than your opponent. I would be interested to see how exactly people think the hand values change as stacks get deeper.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please explain to me why you would want to raise more pf the deeper you are. That seems plain wrong to me as I don't see any specific correlation to you're stack size and the preflop raise. The size of the blinds are much more important to the amount you raise than your stack size, so unless the blinds are rising I see no reason to increase your raise amount.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sit down with 5 other people and play NLHE, all of you have 5k each. You decide the blinds should be $50. You decide the blinds should be 50 cents. Are you open raising to $175 in the former situation and $1.75 in the latter, or the same amount in both scenarios? I argued with a couple other 2+2ers about this at Fallsview, as we all started 800BB deep. I'm not sure what to think, but I def believe that as stacks get deeper, the blinds get less relevent, so it makes sense that you should stop using them as the main determinent of your pf raise size.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually not. If the standard raise in that game was much higher than the blinds the correct strategy would be fold 220 out of 221 hands and just move allin every time got aces. If it was already raised before the action came to you, you would probably profit more from that hand than the blinds you would have to pay for seein 221 hands.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please explain to me why you would want to raise more pf the deeper you are. That seems plain wrong to me as I don't see any specific correlation to you're stack size and the preflop raise. The size of the blinds are much more important to the amount you raise than your stack size, so unless the blinds are rising I see no reason to increase your raise amount.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sit down with 5 other people and play NLHE, all of you have 5k each. You decide the blinds should be $50. You decide the blinds should be 50 cents. Are you open raising to $175 in the former situation and $1.75 in the latter, or the same amount in both scenarios? I argued with a couple other 2+2ers about this at Fallsview, as we all started 800BB deep. I'm not sure what to think, but I def believe that as stacks get deeper, the blinds get less relevent, so it makes sense that you should stop using them as the main determinent of your pf raise size.

[/ QUOTE ]

just read all comments and this one interested me. Raising to $175 with 5k stacks and a 50 cent blind seems pretty reasonable to me. I think basically your preflop opening range should be mostly dependent on how deep you want the game to play, which depends entirely on the table dynamics. Against a player who plays loose preflop and fairly tight and/or well postflop and won't adjust, obviously bigger raises preflop are good.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please explain to me why you would want to raise more pf the deeper you are. That seems plain wrong to me as I don't see any specific correlation to you're stack size and the preflop raise. The size of the blinds are much more important to the amount you raise than your stack size, so unless the blinds are rising I see no reason to increase your raise amount.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sit down with 5 other people and play NLHE, all of you have 5k each. You decide the blinds should be $50. You decide the blinds should be 50 cents. Are you open raising to $175 in the former situation and $1.75 in the latter, or the same amount in both scenarios? I argued with a couple other 2+2ers about this at Fallsview, as we all started 800BB deep. I'm not sure what to think, but I def believe that as stacks get deeper, the blinds get less relevent, so it makes sense that you should stop using them as the main determinent of your pf raise size.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually not. If the standard raise in that game was much higher than the blinds the correct strategy would be fold 220 out of 221 hands and just move allin every time got aces. If it was already raised before the action came to you, you would probably profit more from that hand than the blinds you would have to pay for seein 221 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nah... In theory, sure. In practice you have things like position, perceived skill advantage, etc coming into play and good and bad players alike will open up their range substantially.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please explain to me why you would want to raise more pf the deeper you are. That seems plain wrong to me as I don't see any specific correlation to you're stack size and the preflop raise. The size of the blinds are much more important to the amount you raise than your stack size, so unless the blinds are rising I see no reason to increase your raise amount.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sit down with 5 other people and play NLHE, all of you have 5k each. You decide the blinds should be $50. You decide the blinds should be 50 cents. Are you open raising to $175 in the former situation and $1.75 in the latter, or the same amount in both scenarios? I argued with a couple other 2+2ers about this at Fallsview, as we all started 800BB deep. I'm not sure what to think, but I def believe that as stacks get deeper, the blinds get less relevent, so it makes sense that you should stop using them as the main determinent of your pf raise size.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually not. If the standard raise in that game was much higher than the blinds the correct strategy would be fold 220 out of 221 hands and just move allin every time got aces. If it was already raised before the action came to you, you would probably profit more from that hand than the blinds you would have to pay for seein 221 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

no. that would be the correct strategy if you sucked compared to your opponents, which I don't think should be our assumption. What would you raise to? $1.75? What would your preflop range for raising, calling, 3betting, 4betting, 17betting, etc. With a 50 cent blind would you be comfortable raising KK to $1.75 when you and your opponents have 5k stacks?

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
just read all comments and this one interested me. Raising to $175 with 5k stacks and a 50 cent blind seems pretty reasonable to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol. Can't believe anyone one think this is reasonable. Take 2 minutes to think about why it's not.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
just read all comments and this one interested me. Raising to $175 with 5k stacks and a 50 cent blind seems pretty reasonable to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol. Can't believe anyone one think this is reasonable. Take 2 minutes to think about why it's not.

[/ QUOTE ]It may be a bit of an exaggeration, but raising to say 50 seems reasonble. Please explain how you would exploit this.

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please explain to me why you would want to raise more pf the deeper you are. That seems plain wrong to me as I don't see any specific correlation to you're stack size and the preflop raise. The size of the blinds are much more important to the amount you raise than your stack size, so unless the blinds are rising I see no reason to increase your raise amount.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sit down with 5 other people and play NLHE, all of you have 5k each. You decide the blinds should be $50. You decide the blinds should be 50 cents. Are you open raising to $175 in the former situation and $1.75 in the latter, or the same amount in both scenarios? I argued with a couple other 2+2ers about this at Fallsview, as we all started 800BB deep. I'm not sure what to think, but I def believe that as stacks get deeper, the blinds get less relevent, so it makes sense that you should stop using them as the main determinent of your pf raise size.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually not. If the standard raise in that game was much higher than the blinds the correct strategy would be fold 220 out of 221 hands and just move allin every time got aces. If it was already raised before the action came to you, you would probably profit more from that hand than the blinds you would have to pay for seein 221 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

no. that would be the correct strategy if you sucked compared to your opponents, which I don't think should be our assumption. What would you raise to? $1.75? What would your preflop range for raising, calling, 3betting, 4betting, 17betting, etc. With a 50 cent blind would you be comfortable raising KK to $1.75 when you and your opponents have 5k stacks?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are missing my point. If everyone was raising to 175$ preflop you wouldnt need to play KK. You could show a guaranteed profit just playing Ace Ace. If a monkey could play such a game profitably, then there is something wrong with it

Re: The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
just read all comments and this one interested me. Raising to $175 with 5k stacks and a 50 cent blind seems pretty reasonable to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol. Can't believe anyone one think this is reasonable. Take 2 minutes to think about why it's not.

[/ QUOTE ]It may be a bit of an exaggeration, but raising to say 50 seems reasonble. Please explain how you would exploit this.

[/ QUOTE ]

See previous statement.

It's not [censored] rocket science to see why those raise sizes are retarded.