What range of hands to defend BB with against a UTG raise?

[stoxtrader]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
35% is ONLY a rule of thumb and most applicable to steal ranges where domination is less of a concern.

using 35% equity against tight ranges is a loser, you definitely need to be tighter than this because of exactly what you said - domination and the reverse implied odds that result.

[/ QUOTE ]
Hey stox, cool that you found this thread in the micro's. How much tighter would you need to be exactly? Can you play 66? 77? 88? ATs? A9s? JTs?


-------------- I haven't done the work to give you a qualified answer on this. You certainly need to be tighter, but remember it's not an exact cutoff because of playability concerns. For instance JTs may have worse equity than some Ax hands against a range but JTs much more playable post-flop i.e. less worried about domination, more able to semibluff. I would suggest ballparking 3-5% tighter as a starting point. this is just a total estimate on my part - you also need to factor in the skill level of your opponent. you can play more hands against worst players-----------

[ QUOTE ]
I would say the worst I would go in a tough fullring game is something like 77+, AJs+, AQo HU.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't 77 equal to 22 in this spot because he will (almost) never raise a worse pocket pair preflop and (almost) never a hand that contains a card lower then a 6? Same question for 88?

----------somewhat yes, but even those hands have different equity because of one card straights and less chance of getting counterfeited.------------------

[ QUOTE ]
It's not "defending" if he's not stealing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Basically poker is a game of stealing blinds, so on a fundamental level he is raising to steal the blinds [/nit]

[/ QUOTE ]

my answers in -----------

[Hielko]

Ok, looks like the range Xhad provided is pretty good (77+, AJs+, AQo+). Think that removing 77 from that range is a good idea though, because it has virtually the same equity as for example 55 against 88+,ATs+,AJo+,KQs,KQo (38~39%).

[Xhad]

77 and 88 are the most questionable hands in that range and I wouldn't always play them at 5/10. A lot of it had to do with if I had a significant read on the opponent and how they would play overcards, for example I'd be more inclined to play against someone who will fire all streets if I just called and check/called down. Reverse implied odds becomes a lot weaker if they never check. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]