Re: Poker Theory: Position and Blind Defence
 

I am a position nit. For the longest time I would not defend my blinds. Finally, though, I started realizing that it isn't hard to figure out who is raising light from LP and then 3bettting them.

If you 3bet you aren't going to end up playing out of position because you usually aren't called. And when you ARE called you'll have a monster pot in which you'll have first bluffing position, which actually isn't bad. I mean, the value of position is information, but once you are in a HU pot with stacks very short relative to the blinds information is much less valuable than aggression. It's not like villain will easily be able to float you when he'll have to push the turn just to make a credible bluff.

You'll be able to force villain to make a stack decision without committing your own, and acting first in such a situation often gives you a better chance to win the pot than acting second.

Re: Poker Theory: Position and Blind Defence
 

No reason to defend your blinds other than 3betting a little wider.

Re: Poker Theory: Position and Blind Defence
 

[ QUOTE ]
No reason to defend your blinds other than 3betting a little wider.

[/ QUOTE ]The reason to defend your blinds is when you know players are raising hands in LP that they'll fold to a 3bet, so against these opponents 3betting is more profitable than folding.

Re: Poker Theory: Position and Blind Defence
 

Unless you're defending to make your image good there's no reason to do it. 3bet the high attempt to steal people with cbet fold % of >70 infrequently.

Re: Poker Theory: Position and Blind Defence
 

I will add that I tend to "defend" against LP raises more from the button than the blinds . . .

Re: Poker Theory: Position and Blind Defence
 

[ QUOTE ]
Unless you're defending to make your image good there's no reason to do it. 3bet the high attempt to steal people with cbet fold % of >70 infrequently.

[/ QUOTE ]
Uh, what? This makes opposite-sense to me.

Re: Poker Theory: Position and Blind Defence
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Unless you're defending to make your image good there's no reason to do it. 3bet the high attempt to steal people with cbet fold % of >70 infrequently.

[/ QUOTE ]
Uh, what? This makes opposite-sense to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

He's saying infrequently as opposed to never. 3betting like 20% is just way too high.

Just steal more than you get stolen from. Thats the real key.

Re: Poker Theory: Position and Blind Defence
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Unless you're defending to make your image good there's no reason to do it. 3bet the high attempt to steal people with cbet fold % of >70 infrequently.

[/ QUOTE ]
Uh, what? This makes opposite-sense to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

He's saying infrequently as opposed to never. 3betting like 20% is just way too high.

Just steal more than you get stolen from. Thats the real key.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, got it. I thought he meant "infrequently" as in "these are bad people to 3-bet light", which obviously is not the case.

Re: Poker Theory: Position and Blind Defence
 

Wow, thanks guys,
I didn't think my post would get this much attention. I just got home from work and had a couple of drinks afterwards with my boss, so I will fully digest all this and the Pooh-Bah posts (what does Pooh-Bah mean BTW?) when I'm awake and my brain works again.
so far I just want to thank all of you for contributing to this thread teaching a sucker.

Sugar Nut

Re: Poker Theory: Position and Blind Defence
 

Your under title becomes Pooh Bah after your 1600th post and people usually make a special post for that occasion.