Ax suited in the blinds?

When raised by a MP or LP player should you call from the blinds with A2 through A9 suited? Which situations should you call vs. fold?

I almost always call except against the super rocks. The reason I fold against the super tighties is because I can't be losing much money in the long run by just refusing to give them action. Fortunately these types of players are few and far between.


If you feel confident enough in your hand reading skills to not pay off to the river with only top pair, then I think you can play Ace-crap suited from the blinds for profit. If you just got a bad beat, or are annoyed with another player then probably it's best to fold. I find that all of these factors negatively affect hand reading skills. There is too much extraneous noise entering the poker thought process.

This is actually a fairly complicated question. I'll just address the case when you are in the big blind.


First, I distinguish whether the raise is a possible steal or a more legitimate one. I consider a raise from MP as legit, or a raise from LP if someone else has already limped in as legit. (Note: These are rough guidelines depending on the player and whether I think he likes to isolate a lot.)


Against a legit type raise I want three players in to call unless at least one of the players plays very poorly. Then I can go with two.


Against a possible steal type raise I call.

Is this the type of situation where A2s and A3s are more problematic than A4s thru 9s?

It may help to break the hands up into two catergories (suggested by Kevin). A2-A5s and A6-A9s. The first group has flush plus good straight(wheel) potential aside from making top pair.


Then decide on possible steal raise or legitimate raise from the MP or LP player on deciding if a call, fold or possible reraise is warranted.


There is also the added complexity of SB vs. BB play.


Thus, I think a reraise is also an added option to your play in this situation.


Others may have more suggestions or could elaborate further.


-Zeno

Pursuant to the statement that self proclaimed poker author/experts should be held to held to a higher standard:


It should be clear to those more theoretically inclined that Malmuth's answer is lacking in specifics and wants in poker theory insight. (To be generous). I would inclined to let others elaborate if it weren't so obvious.


For more specific advice (although not necessarily completely correct-although more more specific and more scientifically valid- I would refer you to www.posev.com (http://www.posev.com), where Abdul has outlined some more specifics.) This can be improved on, but requires a treatise.


To be fair to Mason (something I always grant, inspite of the poster's conduct), his statement that the answer is not easy is correct. This is particularly true if you merely rely on anecdotal evidence.


In the meantime, get lots of experience playing headsup (and read TOP) and you will find yourself acting in ways that the full ring players' philosophies never dreamed of.


Regards.


[b]There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

William Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act I, Scene 5[/b}

I'll 3-bet in the SB with A9 suited against the Button or Cutoff's steal-raise.


If the raise is Legit, muck it unless it's a multi-way pot(3-ways or better).


As for BB play, I don't like to call many raises - Legit or not. I want to reraise or pass unless I have a hand I want to play multi-way and get this type of pot. I'll fold A9 suited in the BB to an EP raiser w/ no callers. Would you? What's the cutt-off for "playable" in this spot... A8, 9, 10, J...?


Let me know what you think...

Is that three players counting yourself or excluding yourself?

The advice at the posev site seems to state what a player should do against the aggregate of players who raise from early position when you are in the big blind with Axs (where x is a smaller kicker). At least I didn't find any distinction of what to do regarding the player type and thus the "legitimacy" of the raise (quality of the cards the player is raising with in early position). So basically the advice at the posev site would recommend defending with Axs against an early position raise which is basically opposed to the advice that Mason gave (I agree with Mason). Personally I try to get a read on the quality of the cards a player might be raising with i.e. the range of hands.

Tom,


In order for advice to be fully useful it must address:


a) the players hand range, which should be as specific as possible


b)his style, and relative skill between opponents (HU)


c)rake/tip/blind structure


Anything that does not directly deal with at least these three things is not good enough for a poker author on this forum. The rest of us nobodies can say anything /images/wink.gif Notice that the raiser's position is only relevant as far as it goes to his hand range.


One of the problems with not being specific is that it leads to confusing interpretations. What's tight? What's a steal hand range?


If you reattend Abdul's site u will see that it specfiically gives the raiser's hand ranges, and against a tight raise he does not advise calling with worse than AJs.


Beware of some of the advice there, he has since corrected it in follow up posts both here and on RGP.


For instance,


Re: Holdem Preflop...Abdul

Posted by: Abdul Jalib (AbdulJ@PosEV.com)

Posted on: Tuesday, 9 January 2001, at 6:24 p.m.


1. For 3-6, use the loose game advice, probably even if you think the game is "tight," because a tight 3-6 is not my idea of a tight game. Drop the plays that are made for the sake of balance/camouflage.


2. Yes, I do try to maximize expected value, but note that the best way to lower your variance is to fold preflop, especially reverse implied odds hands like JT that I advise against playing. In low stakes games, you don't want respect, because you are going to get callers, so you might as well get a lot of callers. You really want people to think you're a maniac, so that they will all call when you jam with draws. So I don't suggest being too conservative, though again, do dump those trouble hands.


3. I tried to gloss over the big blind advice for the sake of brevity, because there are a zillion different situations. I'll try to summarize here. Facing a raise in the big blind, the basic idea is that you've got big implied odds to flop something, but you don't want to flop a dominated hand and pay off all the way. Heads up against a late raiser, you can just play to flop any pair, pretty much, but add in another player and suddenly any pair (or a weak ace high) is no good. Heads up against an early raiser, flopping a low pair is usually no good, so you must play very tight. With lots of players in, you can play for straights or flushes.


More precisely... Assuming there is no rake, versus a steal raise, call with 22, any two suited, any ace, K7+, and connectors 53+, but make sure you fold hands like Q3 and J3. You can reraise with hands like 66/KJs/AJ. Versus a steal raise and a cold caller, it bumps the requirements up to maybe 22/54s/A9/T9, and you need maybe 99/KQs/AQ to consider a reraise. Versus a tight early raiser, you need a very strong hand to call, maybe 88/KQs/AQ. Versus a raise and many cold callers, play any pair and any two suited and medium to big connectors, but make sure you muck A9, K9, and their friends. Reraise here with AA, KK, and AKs for sure, but also a lot of other suited aces and medium to big suited connectors; QQ and JJ can go either way, so I suggest just calling versus a tight raiser, 3-betting versus a loose raiser. Finally, if there is a rake or a risk of an early limp-reraise, you have to play tighter, particularly versus late raises.


Regards.

Yes I found it and thanks for the update. I now remember a post some ago by John Feeney comparing Abdul's recommendations vs. HFAP recommendations.

Wow! There should be two different strategy discussion areas -- one for LV and one for LA!