In the blinds: S&M vs C&B

[2ndGoat]

Been reading Ciaffone and Brier "Middle Limit Holdem Poker." Good read so far. Came across an interesting point in the section about playing in the blinds pre-flop.

C&B (pg. 51):
When dealing with a legitimate raise from an early or middle player or a late player who raises after others have limped in, we like the "Ciaffone Rule." If you would not call the raise on the button, then you should not call the raise when in the small blind.

Contrast to HEPFAP pg. 44, where they discuss the BIG blind:
Against a legitimate raise, you still need a fairly good hand to call. In fact, a good guideline is to play essentially the same hands [in the big blind] that you normally would cold call a raise or reraise with if you were in a late position.

So what do you guys think?

2nd

[mantasm]

These aren't contrasting statements.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
Been reading Ciaffone and Brier "Middle Limit Holdem Poker." Good read so far. Came across an interesting point in the section about playing in the blinds pre-flop.

C&B (pg. 51):
When dealing with a legitimate raise from an early or middle player or a late player who raises after others have limped in, we like the "Ciaffone Rule." If you would not call the raise on the button, then you should not call the raise when in the small blind.

Contrast to HEPFAP pg. 44, where they discuss the BIG blind:
Against a legitimate raise, you still need a fairly good hand to call. In fact, a good guideline is to play essentially the same hands [in the big blind] that you normally would cold call a raise or reraise with if you were in a late position.

So what do you guys think?

2nd

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not voting. It sounds pretty much the same to me either way which I'll paraphrase: "Against a legit raise, call from the blinds only hands you would have cold called with from late position."

[2ndGoat]

Ciaffone says to apply this particular rule of thumb in the small blind, Sklansky says to apply it in the big blind.

They are not entirely opposing positions, but they certainly not the same thing. Treating small blind play as identical to big blind play is less than optimal.

2nd

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
Ciaffone says to apply this particular rule of thumb in the small blind, Sklansky says to apply it in the big blind.

They are not entirely opposing positions, but they certainly not the same thing. Treating small blind play as identical to big blind play is less than optimal.

2nd

[/ QUOTE ]

One talks about small blind play. The other talks about big blind play. Apples and Oranges.

[2ndGoat]

I assumed one of the purposes of this board was to discuss the finer distinctions in hold'em. I guess I'm wrong.

Let's also assume it never matters whether you're up against 2 or 4 limpers, whether a preflop raise came from early or late position, or whether two players who checked from EP on the flop are habitual checkraisers. I'm sure it all comes out the same either way.

2nd

[Yosemite Mark]

Well, here its a distinction of "same play, different situation," so comparing the two strategies doesn't seem to make much sense. If it was a case of "different play, same situation" then there would be a good basis for debate.

An for what it's worth, I voted for the third option: I agree with both.

[2ndGoat]

Didn't seem I'd have to spell out the explicit comparison. Apparently it's not that transparent.

If you chose the play the SB as if you're coldcalling on the button, you should play the BB looser than that. If you chose to play the BB as if you're coldcalling on the button, you should play tighter in the SB.

Thus we have different plays. C&B implictly suggest playing looser in both blinds than do S&M, by saying half a small bet already in the pot does the same thing to your calling frequency that S&M say a full small bet does.

Clearly S&M and C&B are not explicitly contradicting each other, because S&M speaks in affirmatives and C&B speaks in negatives, thus swallowing a large part of the space of acceptable play in the middle part of a venn diagram. Perhaps I did not include some contextual quotation that would better clarify the distinction. But really, I give up. I'll keep these things to myself from now on.

2nd

[DMBFan23]

do the two sets of authors have similar cold calling standards on the button? and how many limpers are we talking here?

[2ndGoat]

Sir, I might almost mistake that for some sort of logical application of thought. You may yet restore my faith in humanity.

The similarity in both works is the mention of a "legitimate raise." In C&B, they specify this as an open raise from early/mid position or a late position raise with at least one limper up before the raise. There is no mention of the number of limpers, though it is implicitly included in one's coldcalling standards, which you astutely discern may or may not be the same standards referred to in S&M. I had not considered this.

S&M refer to a legimate raise in a paragraph where it simply means "not a steal-raise," and a steal-raise is defined as a late position player opening with a raise. I believe this defines the exact same situation C&B mention.

As for coldcalling standards, I will actually have to go back and look at that. I know from the recent read that C&B mention some limited and specific times when they suggest coldcalling; if I recall S&M mention very few appropriate coldcall spots specifically, if any.

If S&M advocate less coldcalling than C&B, then they are definitely suggesting tighter play in the blinds, except for technicality that C&B say what NOT to do without explicitly stating that the converse of their statement is true.

2nd

[DMBFan23]

I should pick up MLH, I've only really seen whats in HPFAP

[Sully]

What an ass.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
I assumed one of the purposes of this board was to discuss the finer distinctions in hold'em. I guess I'm wrong.

Let's also assume it never matters whether you're up against 2 or 4 limpers, whether a preflop raise came from early or late position, or whether two players who checked from EP on the flop are habitual checkraisers. I'm sure it all comes out the same either way.

2nd

[/ QUOTE ]

You're discussing 2 different situations all together and trying to compare the right play (as written by the authors). One talks about Small Blind play, not Big Blind play. The other talks about Big Blind play, not Small Blind play. They might both be right, they might both be wrong, but just because one person says one thing and one says something else doesn't mean one has to be wrong. These 2 situations are independent of each other.

[spamuell]

They're not contrasting, Ciaffone and Brier are saying to play tighter from the sb than S&M are saying to play from the bb because "the button" is not the same as "a late position".