BB Defense Range Based on Limits (or Villian Attempt to Steal %)

[Langerz]

I've been away from this board for a while (NL hiatus) and since I have been back mostly lurking (lurking since the noise to content ratio seems to have greatly improved since I left - basically I don't have much to add to what the excellent posters here already say).

One thing that seems to have changed since I used to be here is that in general people have loosened up when defending their blinds. Maybe I'm just not remembering right, but I did check the FAQ and Wookie's stat post list a goal of 60-70% for fold BB to a steal. I've seen a couple stat posts lately where the poster was around 50 and people told him he was way too tight in the BB.

I'm a little curious about this and wonder if some of it has to do with the experts here playing at higher limits where the games are more aggresive. Since moving back from NL I started low and am working my way up wanting to play at least 10K at each level as I move up. I started at .25/.5, currently at 0.5/1 and almost ready to move to 1/2. I've been doing well (pretty fishy at these limts) but my fold BB to a steal was in the 70% range for 0.25/0.5 and now in the 60% range for 0.5/1. From what I have been reading that is way too high, but I'm questioning that a little. I'm guessing the recommendations to defend a lot more are coming from people that play in games where stealing 40% of the time is the norm.

I did a quick pokertracker study and my sample size isn't huge, but the majority of the people at this level don't steal nearly enough. Of the people that I have 100 hands on 40% steal less than 10% of the time and 60% steal less than 20% of the time. The average steal percentage was 17%. There are a few TAG types out there, but they aren't common at this level.

So I guess in summary my main question is am I too much of a nit in the BB if my Fold BB to a steal is 65% given the people I am playing against aren't stealing nearly enough?

For a secondary question it seems like it would be possible to assign an ideal range to defend for a given villian's attempt to steal %. Something like if they steal 10% we defend with 25%, 20% defend with 35% etc. Are there posts etc that address this? It seems like maybe Stox's book has something like that, I'm rereading at the moment and haven't found it yet though. Any thoughts?

[Twilight]

Yes you are too much a nit if you don't defend more. What many people are beginning to understand is equity and the effect it has on your results. Many have been spoon fed ideas like; if a tight solid player raises in ep and I fold a hand like J8o in the bb I don't give up much.

However many have now started to put these hand ranges into pokerstove and discovered that when they play the hand they average to lose 0.3 bb while folding loses them 0.5. Oooops here's 0.2bb that I just threw away. Then they ask themselves questions like, how many times am I doing mistakes like this per 100 hands?.

You can find a nice chart in stox book at the quiz section on page 309 I think. What you should note though is that these ranges that are given are based upon a preflop hand range and a hot cold simulation. It says nothing about how the difference in players post flop abilities affect your results.

The worse your opponents play the more you will lose by being a nit.

[Langerz]

My question though is doesn't that nittiness depend on the villian attempt to steal %?

In a game where people don't steal even 20% of the time is J8o really profitable? Stox recommends playing hands that have 35% equity against the villians range. The villians range has to be at least 30% for J8o to be profitable based on the 35% number. My experience is that 30% is rare at the lower stakes.

Now I agree the worse the villian the father from that 35% equity number you can go, but I'm not sure J8o is going to be profitable against someone that only steals 10%.

Oh and thanks for the page number I think this will answer my question. I never got to the hand quizzes on my first time reading. I disappeared on my NL hiatus before I finished.

[Twilight]

I'm not sure what you mean by profitable. The idea is to minimize the loss you take from posting a blind.

example:
opponent raises top 10% of hands (ATo+,KJo+,KJs+,ATs+,AA-99) against this range a hand like j8 or 75 will have about 30% equity.

hot cold sim:
EV folding = -0.5BB
EV calling = 0.28*1.25 - 0.72*1 = -0.37BB

So if you had only 1 sb left in your bb after posting the blind you would make a 0.13BB mistake by folding compared to calling. (note that I didn't account for rake in the example,adding rake 5% should make it about -0.39)

In the book stox makes a few assumptions that really aren't that applicable to lower limits.
1 they assume that people raising or stealing are doing so with their top % hands (anyone who has played a bit at the lower limits knows that when someone with vpip42 and pfr 10 raises his hand might as easily be Q5o as JJ)
2 they assume that your opponents are very strong players and will punish you severly when you are behind (due to better position)
3 when an opponent plays poorly they tell you to ease up on your range, however note that playing poorly is quite different at lower limits than at the higher. A 25\15 tag at high limits that are weak tight postflop is a poor player in this example.

[detruncate]

Obviously you want to loosen up when your opponents are stealing a lot. And it's fine to batten down the hatches if you're against a very tight range. Stox does a good job of spelling some of this stuff out in his book (Winning in Tough Holdem Games). He's comparing broader ranges, but the methodology is the same.

There are three things you need to consider in my opinion.

1) Opponent's likely range. Against a 10% stealer I'm folding a ton. Against a 40% stealer I'm defending a huge range since I'm getting an effective 5:1 (including his c-bet). I can play a lot of fit or fold and still make it more profitable than folding. And I'll hopefully win a reasonable % of the time when we both miss despite being OOP vs LP stealers unless Villain is showdown bound, in which case I should get good value if I get to showdown a lot and remember to not bluff.

2) Relative skill level. I'm obviously more willing to mix it up with bad players than tough/tricky ones. Bear in mind than many LAGs naturally play well HU since their style is often well suited to it.

3) Rake structure. I'm happy playing tighter in a high rake environment. We're dealing with small edges that often disappear entirely when the pot is raked, which it usually is given the propensity for both players to be more aggressive. Add in my tendency to spew a bit at bad times and it can get expensive in a hurry.

You should also think about the blind structure a bit. Defending HU in a 2/3 is going to be more attractive than a 1/2 or 1/3 obviously, but you probably don't have to worry about that for now.

[frenchpignouf]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure what you mean by profitable. The idea is to minimize the loss you take from posting a blind.

example:
opponent raises top 10% of hands (ATo+,KJo+,KJs+,ATs+,AA-99) against this range a hand like j8 or 75 will have about 30% equity.

hot cold sim:
EV folding = -0.5BB
EV calling = 0.28*1.25 - 0.72*1 = -0.37BB

So if you had only 1 sb left in your bb after posting the blind you would make a 0.13BB mistake by folding compared to calling. (note that I didn't account for rake in the example,adding rake 5% should make it about -0.39)

In the book stox makes a few assumptions that really aren't that applicable to lower limits.
1 they assume that people raising or stealing are doing so with their top % hands (anyone who has played a bit at the lower limits knows that when someone with vpip42 and pfr 10 raises his hand might as easily be Q5o as JJ)
2 they assume that your opponents are very strong players and will punish you severly when you are behind (due to better position)
3 when an opponent plays poorly they tell you to ease up on your range, however note that playing poorly is quite different at lower limits than at the higher. A 25\15 tag at high limits that are weak tight postflop is a poor player in this example.

[/ QUOTE ]

Defend the BB with J8o agasint ATo+,KJo+,KJs+,ATs+,AA-99 is a mistake imo. It seems we have the odds to peel but this a reverse implied situation, because you often have to fold on the flop and you can't spike a pair on the turn or on the river.

If you spike a pair on the flop, you can't know if utg has better pair. You can't avoid to do mistakes in this situation, so it is better fold.

35% equity against the villians range is a good baseline. But you have to be tighter if there is some risk of domination. With a rake of 5%, we have to choose a threshold of 36% imo. The implied odds of the hand is impotant too, but i don't know how to measure them.