They bought the button--what should I steal with?

I don't know if you guys have covered this topic before but I'm far better at utilizing poker theory than discovering it--so I'm playin' out here where you guys got the "buy the button" rule." My stealing requirements have to go way down against a single player who's posted both blinds, right? It seems to me that it is probably right to steal from the button with all but the very few worst possible hands and maybe still a few less from the cutoff. The reason being(in case it wasn't obvious) that you only need to get the one player to fold preflop (what percentage of the time?), rather than two players to fold. Of course, it depends on how anxious this player is to defend their blinds, so assume a typical(?) player.


Anyone have any thoughts on this?


Mike

In theory the blind should call more often than normal to keep you honest. So raising with a lot more hands is wrong against smart players. However merely calling theoretically becomes a good play with some mediocre hands because of the dead money in the pot.

"In theory the blind should call more often than normal to keep you honest."


I've probably been robbed as a button-buyer more than anyone on the planet, and I don't seen any difference between facing a raise last-to-act after buying the button, or facing a raise last-to-act as the big blind after the small blind folds.


I do think that most players defend more often after buying the button than they do as the big blind (after the SB folds). But I think that is an emotional decision resulting from the dead small-blind money coming from their own stack, not someone else's.


On the lighter side, one thing we say around here after buying the button, and seeing a few players fold, is, "I chop!"


It never works. Someone always raises. So I came up with a better plan one time, playing $80-160. I bought the button as a brand new player in a five-handed game, meaning I put up both blinds, $120. I said, "If everyone folds, I'll give everyone two dollars, including the dealer."


So happens that the player on the button, who would have likely openraised with anything, was married to the dealer! How could he not fold after everyone else did!


Everyone folded. I paid up the ten bucks, so the way I figure it, I saved $110 minus whatever actual equity I rated to have, which wasn't much against that lineup.


Tommy

I tend to agree with your thinking. A guy who likes to "buy the button" is basically a gambler anyway so I want to open-raise with any pair, any ace, any king, any two suited connector above five-four, and any two cards higher than a nine.

The $80-$160 ran strong every Thursday for a year at LC's, before the big no-limit game started a couple years ago.


(When I say "a year," it assumes a margin of error of at least a year.)


I was pretty much but not quite a regular in the game, often with only half of my action. One hand sticks in my mind above all others, and it's ugly. I was doing what Mason joked about (or was he?) at the Vegas seminar, running bad bad real bad at $20-40 and $40-80 so what the heck, I'll go up in limit after playing stuck all night and play $80-160 with all my own action at 10:00 am with four lawyers and doctors who just had a good breakfast and a workout at the gym.


So I wasn't feeling too smart in the first place. After an hour I'm stuck a rack with a rack on the table. I'm playing bad, looking bad, feeling bad. Then this. I get pocket nines on the button, it gets capped, three-handed. The flop comes 9-5-5 twotone. One guy has AK suited with the flush draw. The other guy has K-9 and an infinite bankroll. I told you this was ugly. We cap the flop. Turn, a king, cap. River, the last king. Two cold to me and I fold, thankful that there's always that extra out ... out the door!


Thanks for the memories, mike. NOT!


Tommy

"A guy who likes to "buy the button" is basically a gambler anyway ..."


Buying the button in an option that is an A+, all-pro-endorsed, rational on every level, dare I say it, correct, decision.


Tommy

I confess that I don't even understand Sunglass Mike's post. Is he saying that you should steal more often from the button when there is only one blind rather than two? If so, the answer of course is "yes". But what I don't get is this "buying the button" business in this context. Buying the button to me means raising from a position other than the button (typically, the cut-off) in order to knock off the button so that you are last to act on every postflop round. But that's not what Sunglass M appears to be asking...and ya, I agree with you that "buying the button" is a good thing. I don't think that Jim would diagree. I think he is saying something other than what you think he is saying.

But then again, I don't even know what I am saying here so who knows:-)

At Foxwoods if you miss your blinds you have an additional way to make them up. Rather than posting in natural sequence or making them up behind the button by posting late, you can opt to "buy the button.". This option is invoked when you are between the small blind and the button. You post your large and small blinds with the small blind being dead in the center of course. The players who would otherwise have had the natural small and large blinds do not post. On the next hand, you get the button and they post as they would have on the previous hand (if had you not "bought the button.")

..aaah...thanks...now, Sunglass Mike's post makes sense....my apologies to him. And Brier is right: This move is tailor made for gamblers!

I bit my tongue the first time because you seem to be a nice guy. But you have done it again. Saying something utterly wrong (contradicting me)with a certainty you do not deserve to have. If you buy the button, you must call more often when raised by good players, in order to keep them from making profitable steals with garbage. Usually the small blind is an ally in this endeavor so you don't need not call as much.


Your first transgression was worse. It involved the thread where I stated that you should probably call a raise in the big blind with 73 suited after a middle positin raise and a cold call. Its close, so disagreeing with my opinion when I haven't done the intricate calculations is fine. But you went on to say something like "I don't care how many logical and mathematical reasons someone shows me on paper for making this call. I would never do it." You wouldn't? You think your instinct about this particular hand is better than the results of perfect mathematical analysis assuming a playing style for your opponents that you yourself would provide? That is a sucker's attitude that you would be well advised to rid yourself of.

I don't believe it is a good decision to toss in dead money in a pot which is what happens when you do this. You also have the worse position at the table. I have seen new players come into a game, chomping at the bit to get into action so they immediately "buy the button" by putting up both a live big blind and a dead small blind instead of waiting for the button to pass and simply posting a live big blind. My own preference is to simply leave on my big blind and return on my big blind. If I am a new player to the game, I prefer to come in on the big blind because I don't like putting extra money in a pot on a random hand which increases the likelihood of the pot getting raised.

I believe Tommy is saying that buying the button is preferable to posting both blinds behind the button. I'm still thinking about that one.

David,


"I bit my tongue the first time because you seem to be a nice guy."


Still am!


"But you have done it again. Saying something utterly wrong (contradicting me)with a certainty you do not deserve to have."


I was thrilled that you had even heard of this rule because I've seen it in action for four years and I think it's great for the players and the house, and last I heard it had barely made it out of the Bay Area except for Foxwoods.


As to being wrong, I'm not afraid of that, and I feel no obligation to be correct, or else I would indeed be terrified into silence. Some of it is wording, I suppose. For over a year I prefaced hundreds of opinions with "I think that ...." Lately I've adopted the more common language devise on 2+2 which is to state opinion as fact. (

(Prior post got chopped off. Here's the rest.)


For over a year I prefaced hundreds of opinions with "I think that ...." Lately I've adopted the more common language devise on 2+2 which is to state opinion as fact. (That's an opinion. See what I mean?)


"Your first transgression was worse."


Transgression?


" ... you went on to say something like "I don't care how many logical and mathematical reasons someone shows me on paper for making this call. I would never do it." You wouldn't?"


Right. I wouldn't. This was not an opinion. I really don't think I will ever call a raise in the situation described.


"You think your instinct about this particular hand is better than the results of perfect mathematical analysis assuming a playing style for your opponents that you yourself would provide?"


No.


"That is a sucker's attitude that you would be well advised to rid yourself of."


Agreed.


Tommy

Jim,


When I first saw Buy-the-button in action, at first I thought it was a sucker play too. What changed my mind was watching the 20 best players around here do it over and over. I had to think I was missing something.


One reason to do it is, they only get to rob me once!


Tommy

While you're thinking about that one, David, how about this one? You have the big blind and they call you for a must-move. You can either play two more hands, taking your small blind and your button hand, or no more hands, moving right away without taking the small blind. Which do you do?

I've always moved before taking the small blind.


Thanks,

Andy

skp,


"Buying the Button" is the best way to re-enter a game if you have missed the blind and is good for the game to boot. We are hoping to institute this option at the Bike soon.


Anyway, below is a link to an article Tommy wrote on "Buy the Button" for Poker Digest.


Regards,


Rick

It's a correct decision when you have missed your blind and are paying rent for your seat. It's debatable in a raked game, since you could just wait for you blind to come around. And it's very questionable if you are a new player, as the extra hands probably aren't worth the dead money you put in. Even worse if the game is only five handed.


But it's by far preferable to posting six chips behind the button. By buying it, you get two extra hands, including the button. Also, everyone else at the table gets a free hand. The Commerce has been allowing this for over a month.

Jim,


I wouldn't enter a game by "buying the button" but certainly would re-enter if I just missed my big blind since I would have to post the dead small blind money anyway two hands later. Under skp's post above I have a link to Tommy's article on "Buy the Button". My guess is Tommy would change your mind.


Regards,


Rick

Brett,


I agree with your analysis.


BTW, has the Commerce been allowing this in the real big games or in all games? I played yellow chip there a couple times in the last few weeks and didn't see it used. Of course it may be an option players are not aware of yet.


Regards,


Rick

I've played a few times at 30-60, admittedly for short periods of time, within the last month, and did not see anyone use the new rule, nor did I know of it until seeing Brett's post.

Andy,


My friend Greg just came over and he has seen it used twice in yellow chip the last couple weeks. He says not everybody knew of it but it seemed to be well received.


Regards,


Rick

Should have said "sin".

last I heard (buying the button) had barely made it out of the Bay Area except for Foxwoods.


It's strange that this topic is just coming up now. Over the recent weekend, I saw two playes "buy the button" at the Bellagio in a 30-60 game. The first time it happened, I didn't even understand what was going on for a moment. I had never seen this before at the Bellagio or anywhere else on the Strip. I hadn't even heard of it.

I prefer buying the button to posting late if I have missed my blinds. I don't know if it's better or not in terms of pure EV, but intuitively it doesn't seem like it could be much worse (and may well be better). Now add in the fact that my personal EV against the other players is generally positive, and I relish the chance to get dealt in sooner against these guys--especially since some of the dealers are s-l-o-w.

I moved the other day instead of taking the small blind on the button. Don't know if it was correct, but it felt that way at the time.


BTW They allow you to buy the button in AZ and I have never done it. I'd rather miss the button and post with position.

...." Lately I've adopted the more common language devise on 2+2 which is to state opinion as fact. "


And that's a shame IMO.


Regards

"Should have said "sin"."


The way the Catholics taught me, a sin is a non-secular transgression. They also taught me to feel guilty about telling the truth.


Are you Catholic? :-)


Tommy

I would think it depends upon the size of the small blind. Consider a $30-$60 game where the small blind could be $20, $15, or $10. I would think it would be unprofitable to take the small blind if it were $20 since two hands are probably not worth anywhere near this much. But if the small blind is only $10, it might well be worth it.


The other consideration is how they handle a player from the "must move" game. If you have paid your blinds in the must move game, do you have to pay them again in the main game?

I agree that "buying the button" when you are an established player returning to the game is better than posting a live big blind and a dead small blind behind the button. But I still think putting in dead money is a mistake.

I frequently see otherwise good players make mistakes. There is an extremely attractive and solid player at the Bellagio who plays $15-$30 and $30-$60. She routinely leaves the table,comes back, and posts both a live big blind and a dead small blind behind the button. She does this about twice an hour. I suspect this is costing her a lot over the course of a year posting all that dead money.

Yes, I agree "buying the button" if your an established player is better than posting a live big blind and a dead small blind behind the button since as you say you get two extra hands for the price of a dead small blind. The other advantage is that there is less money in the pot to start with then when you post all that money behind the button in addition to having a small blind and a big blind. The likelihood of someone raising may be less with less money in the pot to start with.


But I still think putting in dead money is bad.

If you're looking purely at maths and EV, the sums might say don't do this. But what do you miss out on? Your time spent playing. How does that add up when you earn your 1-1.5Bb/hour. Is the earn you miss out on still less than the difference in EV between the two actions. That time waiting is worth something too.


Personally, I don't wait; I also post behind the button. Partly to get into the game and get on with my earn, but also partly not to be seen as a tight nit by the rest of the table.


G

Where I play, the small blind is $20 (30-60) and you get to come into the new game directly behind the button (in the cut-off). Under these conditions, I too feel it's correct to forego your small blind and button and move right away.

There is another problem with posting extra money beyond what the small blind and the big blind post. The problem is that if you are in a game populated with decent players, the likelihood of the pot getting raised will go up substantially because of all the extra money in the pot put in by random hands. I don't like playing in raised pots holding random cards. I don't like doing things that encourage players to correctly raise.

Hi. Here is the situation at the Bellagio. As a new player, you may a) take the big blind, b) post a big blind between the small blind and the button or c) post a big blind behind the button (or anywhere else). The basic definition is: As a new player, you may always post a big blind and start playing. If you post the blind between the small blind and the button, you do not get the button. It skips you next hand. As I understand it, at least below $80-160, you cannot buy the button as a new player (and it is not clear you would ever want to since you can post a blind either now or one hand from now).


When you return from a break and have a blind button, you may chose to buy the button assuming you just missed getting back in time for the big blind. Your other choices are posting both blinds behind the button, or waiting out the round. Clearly, buying the button under these circumstances is 100% correct and has nothing at all to do with gambling inclination.


I hope this helps.


BarryT

I agree with you that it is negative expectation to miss the blinds and then post a big and (dead) small blind behind the button. But I've noticed that several good players don't realize this. Where I play, one player used to do this almost every single round. Then some other (reasonably good) players complained about it to the management. They honestly believed that this guy was getting an advantage by posting the blinds in late position instead of early. Their argument, to put it most charitably, was that the advantage of posting the big blind in late position makes up for the disadvantages of missing the button and losing the equity in the small blind. But of course this is absurd because by posting in late position you are getting 7 hands for the price of 10.


By the way, because of the complaint, the management warned the player in question to stop missing his blinds so frequently and posting behind. As a result, his expectation increased. Eventually however he was barred for unrelated reasons.