9c8c blind defense at 3/6

[Aces McGee]

I've found myself in a lot of blind steal/blind defense situations at the Party 3/6 lately, and I know that's a popular game among this crowd. I think some good discussion can come from this hand.

UTG+1 in this hand is a possible 2+2er. His handle is similar to a 2+2 handle, and he's been playing pretty tight preflop. My image at the table is probably pretty loose and aggressive; I've been doing a lot of isolating and open-raising from late positions, but my hands haven't been hitting and I'm stuck a buyin or so.

UTG+1 openraises. Folded to me and I defend with 9c8c. Heads up.

Tc 7h 2h
I check, he bets, I raise, he 3-bets, I call.

Turn is Th [Tc 7h 2h]
I bet.

Comments? I'll respond to any questions/posts tonight.

-McGee

[LImitPlayer]

I'd probably play it the same way.

[imported_leader]

double post. /images/graemlins/blush.gif /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[imported_leader]

Doesn't anyone think CR is better then just betting out? (on the turn)

[dark_horse]

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't anyone think CR is better then just betting out? (on the turn)

[/ QUOTE ]

depends on the player. hero's flop c/r tells villian he has a ten, villian's 3bet could mean "no, i have a ten/overpair" or, "i don't believe you and i think my high cards/middle pocket pair are good."

checking on the turn with the intention of raising isn't bad, but villian might be scared that he's going for a c/r since he knows he's expected to bet since hero only called the flop 3bet. villian could fold to a c/r, however. getting it checked behind on the turn isn't a disaster, as it does give hero a free shot at the gutshot. but betting out does look like a stop n go, hoping to 3bet if villian chooses to raise turn. if villian raises turn and hero 3bets turn, it could get villian to lay down an overpair. it's not out of the question to defend in the BB with a ten in your hand without 3betting preflop.

if i had the ten i'd be betting out on the turn to confuse the villian, knowing he's probably a good player, hoping it gets him to not believe i had the ten. checking the turn without the ten probably is only asking villian to bet, though, and would put hero in a difficult spot. i like the bet, and fold to a raise.

if villian just calls the bet on the turn, however, i'm absolutely lost on the river if i don't hit anything. i'm probably check/folding.

[imported_leader]

[ QUOTE ]
i like the bet, and fold to a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

I got you up to this point but now I'm confused. Hero has an OESD he can't fold.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
UTG+1 in this hand is a possible 2+2er. His handle is similar to a 2+2 handle, and he's been playing pretty tight preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]
A tight-playing 2+2er is not likely trying to steal from EP. I would not consider this to be a blind defense hand.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with how you played it. But, it's not a blind defense hand in the traditional sense of the term.

[thejameser]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
UTG+1 in this hand is a possible 2+2er. His handle is similar to a 2+2 handle, and he's been playing pretty tight preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]
A tight-playing 2+2er is not likely trying to steal from EP. I would not consider this to be a blind defense hand.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with how you played it. But, it's not a blind defense hand in the traditional sense of the term.

[/ QUOTE ]

crunchy is never wrong.

[dark_horse]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i like the bet, and fold to a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

I got you up to this point but now I'm confused. Hero has an OESD he can't fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

My bad, you're right. It's not a gutshot, so he has to see the river.

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
But, it's not a blind defense hand in the traditional sense of the term.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough.

-McGee

[dark_horse]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
UTG+1 in this hand is a possible 2+2er. His handle is similar to a 2+2 handle, and he's been playing pretty tight preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]
A tight-playing 2+2er is not likely trying to steal from EP. I would not consider this to be a blind defense hand.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with how you played it. But, it's not a blind defense hand in the traditional sense of the term.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where does it say he was in EP? He only said it was folded around to hero. Could mean villian was in the CO and he opened from there.

[Bluffoon]

Seems like an expensive way to play a hand you can't showdown if you miss.

[mtdoak]

Why are you defending your blind against a UTG+1 raiser? He's not raising to steal your blind...he's raising for value and to thin the field.

[imported_leader]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
UTG+1 in this hand is a possible 2+2er. His handle is similar to a 2+2 handle, and he's been playing pretty tight preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]
A tight-playing 2+2er is not likely trying to steal from EP. I would not consider this to be a blind defense hand.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with how you played it. But, it's not a blind defense hand in the traditional sense of the term.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where does it say he was in EP? He only said it was folded around to hero. Could mean villian was in the CO and he opened from there.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not picking on you but.

[ QUOTE ]
UTG+1 openraises.

[/ QUOTE ]

[thejameser]

it does help to read the posts doesn't it?

[Aces McGee]

As crunchy1 pointed out, this is not a steal situation. I mis-spoke in my post, and I apologize. I should've said that I find myself playing a lot of heads up pots recently.

That being said, I don't think calling out of the BB with a medium suited connector in a pretty tight and aggressive game (as the 3/6 seems to be these days) is wrong. [EDIT: what I mean by that is that because of the game conditions, UTG+1` might be raising just a tad lighter. It's probably irrelevant. I actually don't think it's incorrect to call heads up with 98s out of the blind here against anyone but an absolute rock]

-McGee

[madscout]

I like the preflop call much better if someone else comes with to pad the pot. As it is you are playing a marginal (preflop) hand against an early position raiser in a small pot. I like postflop however. If you get raised on the turn, I'd call and see the river and then check fold UI. If I get called on the turn, I am also lost on the river if I don't improve... check fold? I can't see villain folding a medium/big pocket pair... if he called you on the turn I think he has to call you on the river.

~mad

edit: I just noticed that villain could be on AKh / AQh / etc... not sure how this changes things.

[private joker]

This seems like overly FPS. You have 9-high, and the pot isn't big on the flop -- yet. Just check and call the flop and turn (your pair outs might be as good as the straight outs), and fold the river UI.

[nolanfan34]

OK, this is a good hand, I like it. Some thoughts, after reading the responses so far.

I don't care if villain was UTG+1, I still call this a blind defense. Live, the best way to do it is to scream "I DEFEND MY BLIND!" as you throw the chips into the middle.

Seriously though, getting 3.5-1, it's a very easy call from the BB. Especially since against a possible 2+2er, it's going to be a little bit easier to play post-flop based on the likely range of hands he's raising from UTG+1.

On the flop, I think I kind of like betting out better. Some of this though is influenced by already knowing the turn card. With two hearts on board, I think if you bet and he raises as expected, that you're setting yourself up better for a big semi-bluff on the turn if another T, or any heart comes on the turn.

Against a better player, you may take it down with a check-raise more often than just the bet out on the turn. That T is an awesome card, and if you check-raise, he's going to have a very hard time continuing if he just has overcards. I think you have to be willing to fire again on the river though if a 4th heart, A or K doesn't hit.

Conversely, since the turn is now somewhat scary, you may get a free card by checking, if the villain "avoids" the check-raise.

Anyway, on this board, when top pair doubles up, and the flush hits, I think a turn check-raise has a better chance of taking it down right there. Since by betting out you're often going to get raised again by an overpair anyway, and you can't fold really, I'd rather be the aggressor when putting in 2-bets. If he 3-bets, I guess I hold on for dear life and click call.

[dark_horse]

[ QUOTE ]
This seems like overly FPS. You have 9-high, and the pot isn't big on the flop -- yet. Just check and call the flop and turn (your pair outs might be as good as the straight outs), and fold the river UI.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's FPS mean? I really like this post because it reminds us to think in not so complicated terms sometimes. I think a lot of us lately are playing these mad aggressive games to counter each other's TAG style, and what ends up happening is we are spewing chips with draws. At least that's what I've noticed about my own play lately. Too aggressive with draws in TAG-heavy games. The line in this post is actually kind of refreshing.

I would always call a PF raise with a middle suited connector like this one in a heads up game, so I can see someone looking at this situation the same way, as it's folded to you in the BB, but the only difference is that it was raised from early position. In a heads up game someone's position doesn't give info about the nature of their raise. But that's all obvious so why am I writing this.. uhm, back to the tv.

p.s. Sorry about my "where does it say villian is in EP" post. That was the donk post of the week (hopefully).

[private joker]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar på:</font><hr />


What's FPS mean?

[/ QUOTE ]

Fancy Play Syndrome. It's what you adequately described in the rest of the body of your post.

[mtdoak]

I have no problem with the call...but I would have a problem with it if you were calling to defend your blind. You likely have two live cards here are are likley not a 3-1 dog. However, given the strength that the PFR has shown so far, I would check hoping that he has a big pair and gives you a free card here. I doubt he has much folding equity, unless he has a hand like AQo.

[dark_horse]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


What's FPS mean?

[/ QUOTE ]

Fancy Play Syndrome. It's what you adequately described in the rest of the body of your post.

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/tongue.gif you guys love to gang up on me. i always thought i looked at hands in a straightforward manner. when i see people with "FPS" i internally make fun of them, and knew that a while ago i played like that as well. i didn't realize that my plays were fancy only for the sake of being fancy. i did describe the logic behind each action in my suggestions. but perhaps the logic exists only to rationalize the fancy play. inconceivable!

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
I have no problem with the call...but I would have a problem with it if you were calling to defend your blind. You likely have two live cards here are are likley not a 3-1 dog.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, I clearly chose the wrong words here. It's still a "blind defense" in that I'm calling a raise out of the BB, but I certainly didn't see him as raising light to try and "steal" my blinds.

-McGee

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
This seems like overly FPS. You have 9-high, and the pot isn't big on the flop -- yet. Just check and call the flop *snip*

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that if you can't win at least some of the time unimproved, then preflop this becomes a lot closer to a fold than a call. I'm semibluffing the flop, sure, but I'm perfectly content to have him fold there.

-McGee

[Aces McGee]

Hi nolanfan

[ QUOTE ]
On the flop, I think I kind of like betting out better. Some of this though is influenced by already knowing the turn card. With two hearts on board, I think if you bet and he raises as expected, that you're setting yourself up better for a big semi-bluff on the turn if another T, or any heart comes on the turn

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't like betting out because he's autoraising whatever he has there and it doesn't help to define his hand any. I was obviously hoping he'd simply call the checkraise and then fold to my turn lead.

I had planned on check calling the turn, but the perfect bluffing card came. My thoughts on why I bet: I figured that I was putting a bet in on the turn anyway, and with both the hearts coming and the board pairing I had picked up some fold equity. I felt I was unlikely to get raised because of the dangerous board.

[ QUOTE ]
Against a better player, you may take it down with a check-raise more often than just the bet out on the turn. That T is an awesome card, and if you check-raise, he's going to have a very hard time continuing if he just has overcards. I think you have to be willing to fire again on the river though if a 4th heart, A or K doesn't hit.


[/ QUOTE ]

A checkraise didn't occur to me much at the time, to be honest. As I think about it now, there a couple of things that stand out to me:

1)Checkraising and then leading the river costs me 3 bets. Betting both the turn and the river costs me 2. I think both lines accomplish the same results roughly the same percentage of the time. Perhaps I am underestimating how often he folds to the checkraise, though.

2)I actually think the checkraise looks really suspicious. He has to know that the board got super dangerous on the turn and I'd be risking a checkthrough -- which would be pretty bad, in my opinion, giving infinite odds to a high heart. I see him calling BS on the checkraise a good portion of the time and calling down.

-McGee

[Nick C]

To me, UTG+1's flop 3-bet of your checkraise indicates he quite likely has a hand he won't release to a bet on the turn. He'll think he's quite likely beat (unless he just made a flush or has, say, ATs), but I think he'll probably call anyway. And obviously he'll at least call if he has a big heart, as he often will.

I don't know, though. If UTG+1 would 3-bet the flop checkraise with AKo (and no hearts), I guess there's a good chance he'll decide to give up now, if that happens to be what he has.

You're putting in a bet on the turn anyway, though, and I suppose the turn lead does set up a potential steal on the river versus, say, A /images/graemlins/heart.gif Q /images/graemlins/club.gif. That's not the hand I'd have my opponent on at this point, but some of you do play overcards more aggressively than I do when played back at, I think, and maybe UTG+1 does as well.

If UTG+1 has a hand like Q /images/graemlins/club.gif Q /images/graemlins/spade.gif instead, I think there's a decent chance he'll just call at this point (unless he decides to make a free-showdown raise or puts you on a semi-bluff and decides he can raise you for value), and maybe then you can steal on the river if another heart falls. I don't know.

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi nolanfan

[ QUOTE ]
On the flop, I think I kind of like betting out better. Some of this though is influenced by already knowing the turn card. With two hearts on board, I think if you bet and he raises as expected, that you're setting yourself up better for a big semi-bluff on the turn if another T, or any heart comes on the turn

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't like betting out because he's autoraising whatever he has there and it doesn't help to define his hand any. I was obviously hoping he'd simply call the checkraise and then fold to my turn lead.

I had planned on check calling the turn, but the perfect bluffing card came. My thoughts on why I bet: I figured that I was putting a bet in on the turn anyway, and with both the hearts coming and the board pairing I had picked up some fold equity. I felt I was unlikely to get raised because of the dangerous board.

[ QUOTE ]
Against a better player, you may take it down with a check-raise more often than just the bet out on the turn. That T is an awesome card, and if you check-raise, he's going to have a very hard time continuing if he just has overcards. I think you have to be willing to fire again on the river though if a 4th heart, A or K doesn't hit.


[/ QUOTE ]

A checkraise didn't occur to me much at the time, to be honest. As I think about it now, there a couple of things that stand out to me:

1)Checkraising and then leading the river costs me 3 bets. Betting both the turn and the river costs me 2. I think both lines accomplish the same results roughly the same percentage of the time. Perhaps I am underestimating how often he folds to the checkraise, though.

2)I actually think the checkraise looks really suspicious. He has to know that the board got super dangerous on the turn and I'd be risking a checkthrough -- which would be pretty bad, in my opinion, giving infinite odds to a high heart. I see him calling BS on the checkraise a good portion of the time and calling down.

-McGee

[/ QUOTE ]

Good points all. Some good things to think about, I'm glad you responded. I still don't know what the best line is. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Aces McGee]

He folded the turn.

-McGee

[soweak.]

What happens if he plays back at you on the turn?

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
Poster: soweak.
Subject: Re: Results (because people like results, not because it proves anything)

What happens if he plays back at you on the turn?



[/ QUOTE ]

As in raises? Like I said, I think it's fairly unlikely, but if he does, I check-fold the river unless I hit my straight.

-McGee

[Brian]

I wouldn't ever call here pre-Flop, especially against someone who is a suspected 2+2'er. Playing out of position against a good player with a marginal hand (which 98s most certainly is) isn't how you make money at these games. Because you are out of position, you are often not going to be able to get the most out of your good hands, while your opponent will be able to extract the most out of you when he has the best of it.

98s is a much bigger underdog here than most people think. While 98s is only a 2:3 underdog against two overcards, that's assuming you see all 5 cards. Are you going to ever hit that Ten when the Flop comes QJ5? Or are you going to look for a 9 or 8 when the Flop is 643?

And I know I don't have to mention how disgusting things are when you're playing a tiny pot with two undercards vs. a big pair.

I'd have played the hand exactly the same post-Flop.

-Brian

[NDHand]

Perhaps this isnt the correct line of thinking but I respect check-raises a lot more than donkbets/stop'n'gos. Only times im willing to call BS on a check-raise is if villain is very laggy or tricky.

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps this isnt the correct line of thinking but I respect check-raises a lot more than donkbets/stop'n'gos. Only times im willing to call BS on a check-raise is if villain is very laggy or tricky

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll know to go for the checkraise against you then.

Seriously, though, if you look at this situation, this is a pretty suspicious time for me to go for a checkraise if I have a powerful made hand. Number one, if I have something like trip tens, it's vulnerable to the heart re-draw, so I can't risk getting it checked through. Number two, with the board pairing and the heart flush coming in, the turn is definitely a scare card, so from his perspective, I've got to think there's a decent chance it'll get checked through.

-McGee

[dark_horse]

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps this isnt the correct line of thinking but I respect check-raises a lot more than donkbets/stop'n'gos. Only times im willing to call BS on a check-raise is if villain is very laggy or tricky.

[/ QUOTE ]

I second this. More often than not, when villian pulls a stop'n'go on the turn and i raise him again, I don't get 3bet. He just likes his ace with bad kicker and is betting once again "for information." If I get 3bet, then I have something to think about. All situational, of course.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
...it's folded to you in the BB, but the only difference is that it was raised from early position. In a heads up game someone's position doesn't give info about the nature of their raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh???...Opponent didn't know that everyone was going to fold when he raised in EP. I think his raise means that he has a real hand.


[ QUOTE ]
p.s. Sorry about my "where does it say villian is in EP" post. That was the donk post of the week (hopefully).

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that your more recent post with the top quote is actually more donkeyesque. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[dark_horse]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...it's folded to you in the BB, but the only difference is that it was raised from early position. In a heads up game someone's position doesn't give info about the nature of their raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh???...Opponent didn't know that everyone was going to fold when he raised in EP. I think his raise means that he has a real hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

But that's exactly what i'm saying. You must be misreading it. When someone raises from EP in a full ring, it indicates way more strength than when someone raises in a heads up game. It does indicate some strength when your opponent raises you PF from the BB in a heads up game (only two players sitting at the table, NOT folded around in a full ring), but not as much as when someone raises from EP in a full ring.

[jstewsmole]

[ QUOTE ]
This seems like overly FPS. You have 9-high, and the pot isn't big on the flop -- yet. Just check and call the flop and turn (your pair outs might be as good as the straight outs), and fold the river UI.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is the best line IMO. This line is completely correct and its WAY less complicated than the others mentioned.

The bettor is going to bet like 110% of the time after hero checks the flop and if he checks behind u get a free card.

Why make this hand way more complicated then it is? U dont always have to fight fire with fire and win with out SD's unless u love more variance.

Though i think all the lines mentionded were good for the most part, i just think taking the simple +EV line if its available is better. Save the Fancy plays when the simlple stuff isnt going to get the job done.

out

[mterry]

I still can't decide whether the chosen line or the straightforward check/call line is best. However, I don't agree that a line shouldn't be taken because it is complicated. I'll take greater EV over less complicated any day.

Also, against a 2+2er there may be a need to mix things up if he/she may be picking up on your tendencies, espeically for the sake of future shorthanded battles. This may sway the argument toward or away from a more straightforward play.

[slavic]

I guess I'm a little different than most players. I "defend" with many more hands getting 3.5 to 1 in this case though it's 10 to 3 but your still not a 10 to 3 dog. As the limits go up you have to get pretty good at saving value in the blinds. The thing that changed my opinion on this was watching UB's video series with Howard Lederer and he talked about his blind defense standards.