Adaptation for 2/3 small blind

Advice on playing the small blind generally is based on the idea that you can play very cheap, and get in on half a small bet.


However, in say a 3/6 game, the small blind is likely to be $1, making calling more expensive.


I'm interested in people's schemes for coping with this. Any general rules on what calls to weed out, or just play it as if calling were a full bet?

Good question. The $5-$10 game poses a similiar problem. A player pays $2 for the small blind and $5 for the big blind.


I'm interested in people's schemes for coping with this. Any general rules on what calls to weed out, or just play it as if calling were a full bet?


I personally will not defend unless I have suited cards,suited connectors,or a pocket pair. How many people get involved in the hand also factors into the equation.


I doubt that helps, however its my personal guidelines.


MK

I think the difference between a 1/2 small blind and 2/3 small blind (or 1/3 small blind in your example) has been greatly exaggerated, including by Mason himself.

These very small blinds (i.e. in 9 - 18 games with a 1 chip SB) encourage very tight play from the SB. I'd go with the rule from Brier's book that basically says that you shouldn't call from the SB without anything that you'd call a raise with (or reraise) on the button. This limits you to very good hands. This is true in 1/2 blind games too, but not quite to this degree. I believe that Natedogg put it best awhile ago when he said that one of the keys to becoming a good hold em player is that you should look for an excuse to fold from the SB. This is good advice, indeed.


Also, with regards to stealing blinds, if people aren't folding from the SB, then forget stealing in these games (usually the case in 3/6 anyway). Ironically, if the SB is playing correctly, you should try to steal more, since you have a better chance of winning in a walk. However, the rake and the stakes usually mean that stealing has little chance of working.