Small Blind, You're In Anyways...

[BalancePoint]

it's very situational

[ahsfl]

[ QUOTE ]
So many people play weak-tight poker on the flop/turn that makes these 5:1 PF calls grand for the bankroll.

So, its not about "I'm half in already so I HAVE to call," but more looking at your odds, your opponents, and making profitable plays.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm in the same boat here. By PT I'm much looser in the SB than most consider profitable but that is due to a similar comment to that from a Gus Hansen profile in a certain poker mag. With those odds or even just a player from the button and a weak tight or fit or fold BB, these situations can be turned profitably easily. Keep in mind that there is very few hands that are anything more than a 3:1 dog pf and the chances of even being that are even slimmer after it being folded through so many seats. I also agree that this is a time to play fit or fold. You weren't the pf aggressor and you are out of position so unless you have an excellent read on the limper(s) any bet on the flop with air here is dangerous, no problem with a check/fold on the flop here with air but the 1 in 3 times you connect or the 1 in 15 times (ballpark est) that you flop a monster will make it well worth it.

[pzhon]

It is an extremely common leak to complete the small blind too much, and even to defend the small blind against raises too much.

You flop 2 pair or better about 3.5% of the time. When that happens, you have a strong hand, but you might not get paid off, and you might not win. When you have a trash hand, it is not very valuable to flop one pair out of position. It is hard to get paid off by weaker hands, while you may have to pay off stronger ones.

Let's take a hand like A2o. Most bad players will not consider folding it from the small blind. It can easily be the only ace out there, flopping top pair means you don't have to worry about any overcards, A2o is only about a 70-30 underdog to KK, and it can make a straight using both cards. However, in 10-handed limit games, players lose an average of about 0.27 big bets when they are dealt A2o in the small blind, as compared with losing about 0.25 big bets by folding preflop rather than completing the small blind. While there are profitable times to play A2o from the small blind, players would be better off on average folding it every time rather than playing it as they do now. If A2o is often a close fold, then many weaker hands are easy folds.

In limit, whether the small blind is 1/3 or 1/2 or 2/3 of the big blind matters a lot. When it is 2/3, and the big blind is not raising frequently, completing is better than folding even with the worst trash. When the small blind is 1/2, I usually complete with many, but not all suited hands, and many offsuit connectors and 1-gappers. When the small blind is 1/3, and in NL, I require a decent hand to complete after limpers. I usually fold K9o and A7o. The positional disadvantage is large relative to the discount.

A common mistake is to imagine that you are getting good odds in multiway pots. There is a huge difference between getting odds to beat one player who can often be beaten with one pair, and getting odds that looks the same to try to come up with the best hand out of several. Offsuit disconnected hands do worse in multiway pots relative to par than they do in heads-up pots. That there are several players limping in should make you fold trash hands even faster than when you aren't getting odds that look as good, particularly if the limpers are somewhat selective.

"Position, position, position!"
"It's a kicker game."
These mantras argue against playing trash from the small blind.

[ahsfl]

see pzhon, u kick my butt in the math then come over where I think I know something and make me look even worse [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Xanthro]

Look at the small blind this way. If you were playing .05/.10 Would you limp that hand on the button? If not, why are you completing with it at .10/.20 out of position?

You're out of position, even when you make a hand it's harder to extract value.

Once I stop completing the SB simply because it was so cheap, my winning rate from the SB shot up.

Completing the SB is bleeding away money.

[TheChad]

[ QUOTE ]
It is an extremely common leak to complete the small blind too much, and even to defend the small blind against raises too much.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT all unl and ssnl players need to post this up next to their computers. this isn't to say that you shouldn't defend once in a while. you should. but that % is much lower than ALL of you would like to think.

[thrasher789]

[ QUOTE ]
A lot of money is lost playing junk in the SB because you feel you should call.

If there are a number of limpers I will generally complete. Not saying it is right but if say 4 limps then I am getting 11/1 which is good odds. However, if it folds around I raise or fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

that's actually a pretty good post IMO becuase it's basic message is that if you are getting incredible odds to call you should, that's all there is too it when playing from the SB when it comes down to it. If you are a good player you can get away from your weaker hands post flop so if you are getting huge odds to call PF many pros argue you should fill the blind with almost any two cards becuase the chance of flopping two pair or better is high enough to justify this call in the long run. On the other hand lots of money is lost when you fill it with A4o with little money in the pot becuase you are playing a hand that seems like it's worth half a blind but is easily reverse dominated.

[Sir Folds A Lot]

I just read Harrington II and according to his section on heads up, you should always complete in the small blind with any two cards. He says to do so in heads up, but his argument is that the pot is giving you 3-1, so you have to. I have to assume if their are better odds made by more limpers, you would have to call even with 72o. Am I interpreting this wrong?

[SellingtheDrama]

The main difference is that it takes a much stronger hand to win a multiway pot vs a headsup pot.

Headsup the pair of deuces could well be the best hand on the flop, but it almost never is when you take the flop 4 or 5 ways.

[poker_bill]

[ QUOTE ]
I just read Harrington II and according to his section on heads up, you should always complete in the small blind with any two cards. He says to do so in heads up, but his argument is that the pot is giving you 3-1, so you have to. I have to assume if their are better odds made by more limpers, you would have to call even with 72o. Am I interpreting this wrong?

[/ QUOTE ]

When you're heads up, you're first to act preflop, but last to act post flop. So you have position postflop, which is a good thing. Plus, when it's heads up, it's more likely that the BB doesn't have a hand.

When you're playing 8-10 handed, it's a lot more likely that someone behind you has a hand. And you're out of position. So even if you hit, you could still be dead.

There's a reason Harrington has a whole section on heads up play, it's very different then when it's a full table or short handed.