Small Blind Garbage Question

[David Sklansky]

Our books recommend that you call with any two cards in the small blind when there is no raise, the small blind is two thirds of the big blind, the BB almost never raises, and you know how to play crappy hands well. But even with all these parameters this advice is theoretically, mathematically wrong. Terrible hands would have a bit better EV by folding against most opponents.

That doesn't mean that our advice is wrong. Reason being that players who are seen folding in this spot may create an image problem for themselves. My question is this. If you disregard the image factor, are an excellent player, and always call in the small blind when you don't fear a raise, how much EV would you cost yourself per hour in a 15-30 game (as opposed to folding some hands)?

[Clarkmeister]

As a poster who frustratedly follows your many theoretical questions like this one:

Do you actually know (and can you demonstrate) the answer to this one or are you trying to get the forum to come up with the answer for you?

Assuming you do know the answer, do you plan on returning and providing it, or will you let it sit unanswered as usual?

Or is this another not so subtle shot at Tommy?

[droidboy]

I thought everyone already knew that answer:

"It depends."

I'll let others elaborate.

[kelvin474]

At 40 hands per hour (is that reasonable?) you will be the small blind 4 times per hour. I'll estimate that 3 of those 4 times, you'll not fear a raise (including those times when it's already been raised).

Not all your SB hands will be horrid- say I will fold unsuited cards that can't make a straight, where both cards are smaller than a King. That makes 21 hands, each of which can be dealt 12 ways (since it has to be offsuit). 6 are Qx, 5 Jx, 4 Tx, 3 9x, 2 are 8x and one is 7x (the dreaded 72o).

21 x 12 = 252, out of 51 x 52 / 2 = 1326 two-card combinations. 252/1326 = .19

So basically one-fifth of the 3 hands per hour where I'm the SB and don't fear a raise, I'll have crap that's not even worth a third of a bet (subject to my assumption of what's worth a third of a bet).

I can adopt a very simple (though ridiculous) strategy of check/folding on every flop to basically cost myself no more than the $5 completion every time i get that situation, so I'd upper bound the EV cost at .19*3*($5)

which is 3 dollars. Now if you're a good player, you're not going to fold every single flop. Flopping quads, fullhouses, trips, even two-pairs, nut flush draws like the Qx hands where AK comes out on your monotone flop, are all stuff you'd stay in with if they flopped.

So it's less than $3 an hour cost, if you do my strategy, I believe. Maybe $2, since those crappy hands hit so few flops well? thanks for posting the question.

-kelvin474

[mike l.]

"Reason being that players who are seen folding in this spot may create an image problem for themselves."

problem? no i dont think so. folding too much preflop is the hallmark of tight aggressive. folding too much postflop is the sign of weak tight. so this sb fold will only scare people in the same way folding a lot preflop always scares people, including folding that bb a lot to a raise, even obvious steal raises.

"My question is this. If you disregard the image factor, are an excellent player, and always call in the small blind when you don't fear a raise, how much EV would you cost yourself per hour in a 15-30 game (as opposed to folding some hands)?"

cents. not dollars. cents.

[Your Mom]

It seems if Mr. Sklansky wants his questions answered, he should be around to answer our questions like Mr. Malmuth, Mr. Schoonmaker, and Mr. Feeney are. Hell, even Mr. Jones is around and this isn't even his damn company.

[andyfox]

Where do your books talk about image? HPFAP says "it is just too cheqp to throw away your hand, no matter how bad it is." This indicates to me that it is mathematically correct without any consideration of image.

I agree with Mike L. that if you play all hands you'll be throwing away many post-flop and this is worse for one's image. A greater percentage of players I fear will throw their hand away in the small blind for one chip than the percentage of players I fear who don't.

[sam h]

"I'll estimate that 3 of those 4 times, you'll not fear a raise (including those times when it's already been raised)."

Put aside the fear factor. You won't call with garbage if there has been a raise. So this situation comes up far less than 3/4 of orbits or three times an hour. It might, depending on the game, come up twice an hour. But most mid limit games are going to have a preflop raise more than 50% of the time, especially if you're seeing 40 hands per hour in a live game. So I'd think you'd be talking about maybe 1-1.5 relevant hands per hour rather than three, which makes the potential EV loss much smaller.

[clovenhoof]

[ QUOTE ]
if Mr. Sklansky wants his questions answered, he should be around to answer our questions

[/ QUOTE ]

He writes great books that help us make money doing something we love. He operates this really great forum that benefits us all tremendously, with no cost to us other than these occasional posts.

He owes us nothing.

'hoof

[clovenhoof]

The question, I believe, contains the answer. We aren't told an essential variable -- the player's hourly rate, though we can infer from the info that it's more than one bet per hour, since the player can play crappy hands well. (We assume we're not talking about the poker equivalent of Trump Coup Tommy.)

The difference between the hypothetical play and the ignore the image play is we play the crappy hands, which we are told "have a bit better EV by folding against most opponents". That means, for the $5 you're putting in, your return on the investment is slightly less than $5. So, I'm guesstimating a 15 cent loss per occasion.

The table situation -- sitting underneath someone who never raises in the big blind -- sounds pretty rare to me, maybe one time in eight. The small blind comes up one time in about 9 in a ten handed game, and a non-raised pot when it comes back to the small blind is maybe 50%. So, before looking at the cards, we're at one hand in 144.

The terrible hands in my view are the offsuited 4 gappers or more from Q down -- Q7/6/5/4/3/2, J6/5/4/3/2, down to 72, which is 21 x 12, or 252/1326, which is 1/5.25 hands.

So, you're making this bad play once every 756 hands or so, which at 40 hands per hour is once every 19 hours or so.

So I say, toss the hand. Play correctly. The way you play over the other 755 hands or so should be good enough that your image can survive.

'hoof

[elysium]

hi mr.sklansky
i don't know. i would muck, but if i had to play it, i would expect to lose about 30% of its value or right around 5 dollars. that's 1/6 of a BB -ev per hour. no more than that.

i've erased how i arrived at that figure. believe me, i don't think you'd find any enlightenment out of that garbled stroodle. but i didn't pull the 30% out of thin air. i can feel the difference between a low grade 1 or 2% sting and a 30. and i can tell you that situation is a 30. i might not have the exact mathematical formula (but i will! that's next for study) but i do feel the arithmetic.

while i don't have the study time in yet on probability, i do quickly and carefully calculate odss and pot odds. i would like to know if there is some formula for factoring in opponent type into correct pot odds. i do that intuitively but also mathematically competantly when i have enough playing time in against a particular opponent. i'm more interested , though, in knowing if it's possible to make adjustments in our calculations based on limited playing experience against an unknown opponent.

by the way, as badly as i mangled the math in this one, i did learn from it and am very interested in studying probability. before i do, i will freshen up on my algebra.

[Lee Jones]

How much EV/hour are you throwing away in a 15-30 by routinely folding the SB?

Mike L. says:

cents. not dollars. cents

I agree that for your image, it's actually better to be throwing it away more frequently, and I often do fold it. But I fold it because I don't like playing trash out of position and I don't want to get trapped into a hand with second best trash.

But I'll say this - I don't think there's anybody (not mike l., not David Sklansky, not anybody) who can tell the difference between +$X and -$X EV/hr in a $15-30 for X<$1.00.

Regards, Lee

[Your Mom]

I disagree. I think if he wants answers to theoretical questions such as this one, he needs to be willing to participate on the forum. I don't think he owes us anything other than that. It is certainly his right to not post at all. I just think that if he is going to post quetions like this, he needs to be on the forum either answering our questions like Mason is or he needs to come back often enough to post the correct answer or give some sort of explanation. Otherwise, the whole exercise is rather pointless. Sure, it gets debate going which is good, but how does that improve our poker if we don't know which answer is correct?

[skp]

It's just common courtesy to get back and post responses to questions such as these and David often does not. I can understand Clark's frustration.

[Huh]

Sure, I know that for each player up have that many more opponents to beat, but this must matter. I always thought that calling for 1 chip was a no brainer against 4 or more opponents, the reason being you are already getting 11 to 1 odds, and you're implied odds in such a game are easily 30 to 1. So, you get one of those fun hands where you get to say "I really hope I flop two-pair or trips", and are correct to do so. Now, if a tight player limps UTG, and it's folded to me, I don't mind folding. But...I can't remember the last time this happened.

-Huh

[Your Mom]

exactly. its like a posting a hand and never posting the results. if i did this, would anyone ever answer my posts?

[bad beetz]

In the AJ's $15/$30, to throw away a hand before the flop for one chip is baffling to at least 7 out of 9 people at the table and will get comments.

Tommy probably gets less comments cause he does other wierd [censored] and people fear him.

I think this creates an image problem for me more than him because I am percieved as young and new and tight and scared. some guy called the other day on the flop with diddly so he could take a shot at me on the river if I checked the turn. I don't think people pull this [censored] against tommy and I know they don't against Ulysses.

[elysium]

hi mr. sklansky
i don't know. are we suppose to carry that amount over into the total ev in the game per hour, or just on that one hand. so its 30 % of $5 dollars divided into the total. i guess it is pennies. well, if it is pennies, i can tell you that when you come in from the blind with junk, it hurts as though you were stung by a five dollar bill. i muck every time.

[David Sklansky]

If you are playing in a game where the big blind rarely raises, the only hands that are almost certain theoretical folds for five more dollars in the small blind, are Qx thru 72 unsuited and no straight possibilities.

Thats 252 combinations out of the 1326 hands. About one in five.

Playing those hands is at most a $2 mistake, probably less.

Most games will have you facing a raise about three out of four times. Thus playing forty hands an hour you will have a chance to limp in the small blind one time. One fifth of those times you cost yourself less than two bucks with a call. Thats something under 40 cents an hour. This question wasn't hard.

Meanwhile those who say that it helps your image to fold in this spot are almost certainly wrong. I understand their arguments and agree that against certain types of players they might be right, especially if you play with them every day. But those arguments don't usually make up for the red flag you send to most players when they see you make this fold.

As for me posting a question without answering it, I usually have a reason but sometimes am just lazy. In any case those who would prefer an unposed questioned to an unanswered one aren't thinking straight.

[Ed S.]

I just want to get this straight so that I am clear. You say, ".....are Qx thru 72 unsuited and no straight possibilities". So with no raise in front of you and provided the BB doesn't re-raise often or at all, you can play the rest of the hands and you wouldn't be lossing much EV?


Ed S.

[adios]

Really though results shouldn't matter. It's the reasoning that goes into a play that should matter. One result doesn't determine whether or not a play was right. All of the above just my opinion. Now as to DS answering questions he poses, well I think he should but to be honest he has more or less answered questions like this before so his thought processes can be ascertained by reading his prior posts and his books I might add.

[droidboy]

Ok,

I think you're wrong. Care to show your work?

[Timer]

I have a tendency to fold more than call in these situations for the following reasons.

1. That $5 you throw in with garbage will either win you a small to decent pot or lose you a decent to large pot.

2. Most of the time you are just throwing away $5.

3. To play any two cards in that spot you have to be an excellent player, because you must posses the capability to get away from second best hands.

4. Another reason not to play is to cut down your variance. This is especially true if you are playing on a short bankroll.

5. When people see you continually fold in this situation they will in all likelhood try to run over you at another point in time. This is to your advantage.

There are even more reasons.

[mike l.]

"Playing those hands is at most a $2 mistake, probably less."

oh well there ya go guys, and especially mr. lee jones! i just wanted to say right here and now that i kick ass. i said it was cents, more generally meaning not enough to matter. damn im good!

[andyfox]

"When people see you continually fold in this situation they will in all likelhood try to run over you at another point in time. This is to your advantage."

I think David agrees with you here, but I don't. This will only be the case when you play weak-tight when you have position. Most of the players I know who are more apt to fold in the small blind for one chip, play pretty aggressively when they have position (and/or a hand).

And I think Mike L.'s point is crucial: since you're playing garbage out of position, you're going to be folding post-flop a lot. They notice this more than they notice you folding for one chip pre-flop.

[Philuva]

[ QUOTE ]
Now as to DS answering questions he poses, well I think he should but to be honest he has more or less answered questions like this before so his thought processes can be ascertained by reading his prior posts and his books I might add.

[/ QUOTE ]

In his book he said to always call? Now he says it costs you $2?

[FletchJr.]

[ QUOTE ]
Playing those hands is at most a $2 mistake, probably less.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously, how do you derive this figure?

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
Philua wrote:
In his book he said to always call? Now he says it costs you $2?

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
From DS original Post
That doesn't mean that our advice is wrong. Reason being that players who are seen folding in this spot may create an image problem for themselves. My question is this. If you disregard the image factor, are an excellent player, and always call in the small blind when you don't fear a raise, how much EV would you cost yourself per hour in a 15-30 game (as opposed to folding some hands)?

[/ QUOTE ]

He explains why the advice is correct. My take on what DS meant is:

You call because it's not good for your image if you fold.

When it's not good for your image it costs you money.

His question has the qualifier if you disregard the image factor. An image problem costs money, obviously more than it costs to play the -EV hands according to DS. Also in his answer he doesn't claim it costs $2 a hand to always play in the SB for 1/3 of a bet. Perhaps you might want to re-read his post and his answer. I agree with him about the image problem created by folding the -EV hands btw.

[MMMMMM]

Well I agree with the first 4 reasons but not the 5th.

"5. When people see you continually fold in this situation they will in all likelhood try to run over you at another point in time. This is to your advantage."

Generally speaking I think you don't want people playing aggressively against you in Hold'em. Constrast this to any form of Omaha where it is fairly easy to have a hand that can take a lot of pressure. In Hold'em it is a lot harder to make a hand.

Probably more so than in any other game, I like my opponents passive in Hold'em;-)

[haakee]

What do you muck in the SB? I've actually been playing close to Sklansky's theoretical correct play (slightly looser). I muck unsuited Tx and worse with no possibility of a straight. I don't think I've gotten many funny looks because I'm probably only mucking here one or two times a session.

[Pot-A]

One additional reason you might consider calling in this situation is to deny information to your opponents. If your opponents see you selectively folding for one chip they will be able to eliminate potential hands.

One example is a flop like T44r against a SB who never folds for the additional chip vs. one who selectively folds. In the second case you can confidently eliminate T4 from the possibilities; in the first case you can't.

Also, I never pass up a cheap chance to get my opponents talking to themselves. If I can crack AA with 83o it may be worth a considerable amount of money in the future.

[M.B.E.]

I agree. When I play 10-20 I never fold in the SB for $5 more when there are three or more limpers, and rarely when there are one or two limpers.

[Timer]

[ QUOTE ]
One additional reason you might consider calling in this situation is to deny information to your opponents. If your opponents see you selectively folding for one chip they will be able to eliminate potential hands.

One example is a flop like T44r against a SB who never folds for the additional chip vs. one who selectively folds. In the second case you can confidently eliminate T4 from the possibilities; in the first case you can't.



[/ QUOTE ]

What if his Ten/Four is suited?

[SoBeDude]

As for me posting a question without answering it, I usually have a reason but sometimes am just lazy. In any case those who would prefer an unposed questioned to an unanswered one aren't thinking straight.

So its better to post a good question, then allow us to blindly march on with an incorrect answer?

A good question is the best tool when used to derive the best answer.

-Scott

[Andy B]

I haven't read the whole thread and I'm not likely to. I play a lot of $15/30 and $30/60 in the only room in town, so I spend a lot of time playing against the same players. I see a significant number of players, good and bad, fold for one chip in the small blind. I don't think that these folds send up a huge red flag. FWIW, I almost always call, even with 72o.