Completing in the SB in an unraised pot

[AragornX151]

I've been thinking about this topic from a poker theory/reality perspective of late, and I'm curious to hear the thoughts of everyone here.

Poker theory dictates that you can profitably complete from the sb with any two cards in a 2/3 blind structure, and you can profitably complete with a majority of holdings in a 1/2 structure, assuming there are a few limpers+. This is obviously true in a mathematical sense; your pot odds are excellent, and are even better because of the implied odds against inferior competition.

I think this is clearly always +++ev for excellent players, especially laggy ones. For instance, players like HOWMANY and Death Donkey probably make a ton of money completing with mediocre hands and outplaying opponents postflop. I've made plenty of money this way as well. So before I continue, I want to stress that I am NOT saying that playing most hands from the SB in an unraised pot is normally an error. I think it's entirely player dependent, and quite often correct.

However, I wonder if many players would benefit from not getting involved in these spots. I think completing with crap can have a lot of unexpected, negative consequences for even above-average players. You wind up involved in a lot of pots where the proper decisions are difficult, and you're out of position. Say there are two limpers, you complete for half a bet with 95o, and the big blind checks. The flop comes T54. What's the proper play? Obviously, this is game and player dependent. The answer isn't important. But if your game is off, if you aren't as sharp as usual, or if your post-flop play isn't up to snuff, you may wind up getting involved when you shouldn't, or folding when ahead. And it may wind up having negative effects on the remainder of your session.

If you're prone to tilting, I think it's probably more +ev to fold marginal holdings in the sb in the 1/2 structure, and to fold your worst hands in the 2/3 structure. This is also an excellent way to decrease variance, a particularly useful tool if you tend to play worse after losing some big pots, or are in the midst of a losing streak which is affecting your confidence, or if you're taking a shot at a higher game than usual. I do this sometimes to cool off if I'm running badly and while I probably lose a slight bit of "pure EV" during these times, I think it's done wonders for my overall results, especially from a psychological perspective. When you're down, it's always tempting to play more hands to win back "your money" from the numerous fish at the table. It's human nature. And it normally happens [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]. But I think that most mid-limit players could benefit from avoiding these ultra close-decisions at times when things aren't going their way.

I know the forums here are mostly obsessed with maximizing EV to the limit, and I totally understand and agree with that as a long-term goal. However, since poker is about so much more than just the most effective mathematical play, I think this can be a good way to minimize risk when other factors aren't aligned like you'd like. And let's face it, we all have those times. When you suffer bad beats against weak players, it can subtly make you play worse. And when I read some stories in the low-content thread about really rough runs...

Thoughts? And just to clarify, I play most hands in the SB, and don't think people here "call too much" or anything. I just think there can be merit to folding more than what's "correct."

G