|
|
#21
07-31-2007, 10:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: What range of hands to defend BB with against a UTG raise?
[ QUOTE ]
I just skimmed the thread, but there is no way 22 is profitable against a decent UTG open-raise. (you really can't play it for set value, and have serious RIO problems if you play it as a pair). I would say the worst I would go in a tough fullring game is something like 77+, AJs+, AQo HU. It's not "defending" if he's not stealing. [/ QUOTE ] 
|
|
#22
08-01-2007, 12:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What range of hands to defend BB with against a UTG raise?
Stox, you owe me $1,000 for the stitches required to fix my head after your book made it explode.
On a more serious note, if I ever play high enough and/or get good enough at poker to be able to use the advice in WITHG, I'll be sure to tell you how good it is.
|
|
#23
08-01-2007, 06:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What range of hands to defend BB with against a UTG raise?
[ 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? [ 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? [ 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]
|
|
#24
08-01-2007, 09:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What range of hands to defend BB with against a UTG raise?
[ QUOTE ]
Stox, you owe me $1,000 for the stitches required to fix my head after your book made it explode. On a more serious note, if I ever play high enough and/or get good enough at poker to be able to use the advice in WITHG, I'll be sure to tell you how good it is. [/ QUOTE ] common misconception - LOTS of the concepts in the book should apply to all levels, but more importantly, the PROCESS of analyzing hand values and approaching the game should apply accross levels. thanks for reading.
|
|
#25
08-01-2007, 09:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What range of hands to defend BB with against a UTG raise?
[ 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 -----------
|
|
#26
08-01-2007, 11:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What range of hands to defend BB with against a UTG raise?
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%).
|
|
#27
08-01-2007, 12:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What range of hands to defend BB with against a UTG raise?
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]
|
|
#28
08-01-2007, 06:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What range of hands to defend BB with against a UTG raise?
BTW,
About this comment: [ QUOTE ] Basically poker is a game of stealing blinds, so on a fundamental level he is raising to steal the blinds [/nit] [/ QUOTE ] This isn't always true even in relatively tough games. Yes, if we were trying to play in an unexploitable game-theoretic fashion then our raises should always take into account the blind money, but add in some players who play too loose and your EP raises start to approach the same values you'd raise with if there was no ante at all, given that you know how badly your opponents are playing and are consciously trying to exploit it. Put another way, against 9 other people playing perfectly you should fold KK UTG if there is no ante. On the other hand if they're coldcalling UTG raises with T9s, then you should still raise KK whether there are antes/blinds or not.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
