Defending your blind with a medium pair

Here is a situation that comes up quite often. Middle stage of a tournament, folded round to the button who raises. You are in the BB with say 88 and it is 15% of your stack to call. What should you do ?


"Conventional wisdom" seems to be that you should either fold or raise. However I think you can put up a strong argument for calling. If the button is a loose raiser you have too much of a hand to fold. For example if he will raise with any Ace, pair or two face cards then you are at least 55% to win the hand "hot and cold". Furthermore, if he like the "lone Ace" button raise, and God knows too many people do, then a very high proportion of his hands include an Ace. And a lot of the others (smaller pairs) are miles behind. So if the flop does not contain an Ace you can be very confident of being in front and can play the hand accordingly, betting or check-raising according to your opponent. If an Ace flops you can give it up.


This is a related to the principle that AK wants to get all the money in pre-flop. Surely this must mean that in an overcards v pair situation, the pair does not want to get all the money in pre-flop.


Needless to say the downside is that you might lose to a hand which would have folded to a pre-flop raise. But if your read is correct then this is quite unlikely, because you get away when an Ace flops and many hands which beat you otherwise (overpairs) would not fold pre-flop anyway. You also get a second chance to read your opponent's reaction to the flop. If you read it correctly and your opponent calls on the flop with only 3 or 6 outs that's good in my book, whatever happens on turn or river. Finally of course you can flop a set and trap at your leisure.


Comments welcome,


Andy.

You better be pretty good at reading his hand, or you'll be the one making too many postflop mistakes.


Just because I'll raise there with any A, doesn't mean I won't also raise with hands like KT, QJ, etc. So, since there will almost always be at least 1 overcard to your 88, you really won't know if it (they) hit me or not, unless you can tell by my reaction. I think you're probably better off doing the raise or fold in most spots and against most opponents.


The exceptions might be if the button will not raise with two big cards unless one of them is an A. Now, it is much less likely that the non-A overcards hit him. However, if he's willing to put a lot of chips in postflop, maybe that one overcard did hit him, eh?


Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

Can't argue with that ! It's worth thinking about though I reckon.


Andy.

Is this limit or no limit? I am assuming this is no limit, if it is limit nobody is going to muck preflop so you can forget that.


This is a tricky situation, and a lot depends on what the Button will do when he misses.


A couple of options here each to be used against different types of players:


Limit:


Against some players re-raise preflop, not because they will fold but because when you then bet the flop they have to fold unless they miss. If they call the flop after you have re-raised and bet--just quit (unless of course you hit).


Against others just call and check raise the flop no matter what comes. Even an ace, although he may be raising with an ace, he may be raising with JJ so a check raise probably gets you the pot.


Against a particularly tight player, just call and bet the flop. A tight player will usually just fold here.


In NL:


I personally like the call and bet the flop play.

You can use the same number of chips and just make it much harder for him to call.


For example if he has AK or AQ he may call your preflop re-raise, and now you have committed a lot of chips with a lot of uncertainty.


OTH if you just call and the flop comes 2-4-7, and you come out betting, AK will usually fold (of course a player like Raymer may move in on you so against him this may NOT be the best plan, unless you have the guts to then committ here when you MAY be a healthy favorite.)


Still MOST players will give up on steal hanbds here because they dont want to chase, and yes this goes hand in hand with the theory that Overcards want all 5 cards so pairs only want to let them see 3 cards.

> This is a related to the principle that AK wants to get all the money in pre-flop. Surely this must mean that in an overcards v pair situation, the pair does not want to get all the money in pre-flop.


No. One of the reasons why AK wants its money in preflop is to deny dominated hands a chance to get away from the hand if you both miss (and AK dominates most unpaired stealing hands).

The same principle also applies to pairs: You don't want to give your opponents a chance get out cheap if he misses. So unless I'm sure the button will always bet when checked to, I prefer to reraise against a probable steal.


cu


Ignatius

I'm not sure about either of your assertions.


In any case I maintain that, and this has cropped up in other threads recently, when you have a better idea of what your opponent holds than vice versa, you surely do better to see the flop than to bash it all in. Look at it from his POV - he raises on the button and I call. I could have anything. He's guessing on the flop much more than me.


Incidentally if you make a habit of this play it might be right to occasionally call in the BB with A-big, and check an Ace high flop.


Andy.

I usually reraise in this situation and manage to pick up most of the pots. Still, the real problem occurs, when the original raiser calls the reraise. What is the proper play postflop in this situation? Andy says something of a raise which was about 15% of my stack. Let´s say I reraise, it would be about 40% - 50% of my stack. Does this mean that I´m potcomitted and move in the rest no matter what comes or is it the proper play to give it up without flopping a set, since the button has position and probably a better hand (I assume that both player have an equal ammount of chips and still a playable stack after the reraise/call)


Regards


Martin

> when you have a better idea of what your opponent holds than vice versa, you surely do better to see the flop than to bash it all in.


I think this is an oversimplification: Even if you know for sure that your opponent holds an ace, you still run a 1/6 chance that he will hit his kicker. If the call costs 15% of your stack, you still lay him enough implied odds to make his play worthwhile, since he'll get your whole stack in this case, while he can safely fold if he misses. The point is that you know you hold a pair now and your opponent doesn't i.e. you're ahead and should make him pay to catch up.


> He's guessing on the flop much more than me.


Sure, but only if he misses, and then he won't make much of a mistake to automatically fold, anyway. But if he hits the flop, he knows that he's ahead most of the time while you are the one who's left guessing in a situation where the money is much more likely to go in.


Of course, this all assumes that a call is 15% of your stack. When the money is deeper, calling makes much more sense b/c of the implied odds when you flop a set.


It's a general rule that the implied odds are always on the side of the draw. What exactly makes up a draw, however, depends on how deep the money is: a pocket pair can either be considered as a made hand (with moderate stacks) or a draw to a set (when the money is deep), the same applies to big aces: when you're very short stacked, the possiblity to win unimproved is important, while with larger stacks, you usually have to hit a pair to go to a showdown. Your preflop action often allows you to decide in which fashion you want to play your hand while you can force your opponent to play his hand in a way he didn't intend.


cu


Ignatius

Good points, though I would amend one of them :


"Even if you know for sure that your opponent holds an ace, you still run a 1/6 chance that he will hit his kicker"


Yes, but if he has any Ace, then half the time hitting his kicker is no good !


It depends to a large extent what your opponent is going to do in the various situations : if you reraise pre-flop, if you bet into him on the flop when he misses or catches a small piece, and if you check on the flop when he misses.


If you reraise pre-flop let's do some quick sums. Blinds 100-200, he makes it 600 to go, you could then put in 2000 (1400 more) sounds about right. You are betting 2000 to win 900 and so if he folds more than 69% of the time you can make the raise with any 2 - and that's not even including the pots you can win when he calls you. So there is an element of Sklansky's "Don't turn AQ into 72" at work here, if your opponent will fold enough hands you can raise with 72, but with AQ or similar you might like to call rather than open yourself up to a re-reraise. Depends whether you think a medium pair is good enough.


One more point is that as you say it is different if you are sure the button will bet when checked to - a lot of my opponents will do exactly that.


So I think we should say that calling is a possibility depending on your opponent, and your opponent's play is the most important deciding factor.


Thanks,


Andy.

> Let´s say I reraise, it would be about 40% - 50% of my stack.


IMO, this is pointless - go all-in or don't raise at all.


> is it the proper play to give it up without flopping a set


Even 10% of your stack is too expensive if you only go for the set. With 40% of your stack in and a pair in your hand, you're not going anywhere (which is why you should go in preflop in the first place).


cu


Ignatius