For those who advocate folding K3o

I suspect that you are closed off to the idea that calling with K3o from the BB (in a 2/3 SB blind structure) when the Button Open raises because you're used to playing full ring games where you see top hands taking down the pot most of the time. In short handed or heads up play you have to change gears. I know that there is a discussion of this in HFAP, I have the book as I suspect 99% of the readers here do as well.


If you go to paradise poker and watch the 10-20 heads up holdem you can start to get a sense of who the winning players are. It is clear that some of these players are consistent winners at heads up play. watch for a while and look at the hands they are playing. I'd bet that those who think it is "clearly wrong" to call K3o will think that these players are making a lot of mistakes with hands they are playing pre-flop. I urge you to try and exploit these mistakes by taking on these players. It may prove enlightening.


Rob

Interesting post Rob

I think the long debate was about play from the blinds in a 10 handed $30 - 60 game - at least that's what Jim Brier wrote about in Card Player.

$10 - 20 heads up on Paraduse poker is a long way away from a $30 - 60 ring game - a million miles away.

To say you disagree with calling with K3off in one game really has no bearing on what you would do in the other -IMO.

I think there is little - if no connection between the 2 situations personally.

I totally agree with Payoff. It is a completely different situation.

1) you are comparing apples and oranges.

2) I played a fair bit of lower stakes heads up he and stud, and would fold hands like this against most players' raises

3) the players who are best at heads up play are not making their money defending with hands like this. They are making it on the later streets, and there's little reason to believe playing this and similar hands in the given situation is making up any of their edge, or at least any significant part of it.


Dan Z.

I agree with you Dan. Good point about them making there money on the later streets that its not because they call with K3. Its because they play better on all streets.

Are you trying to suggest in headsup play (a two player game) to fold K3o? I don't see how you can possibly beat the game. Your

giving up way to much before the flop. If you routinely fold these type of hands you would never play a hand and be blinded

to death.


Bruce

Though the situations differ, there is a connection IMO. If it is correct to defend your BB with K3o in a head-up match against an opponent with a particular known set of raising standards, then it would seem even more correct to defend with K3o in the 30-60 ring game against an opponent with similar raising standards due to the higher pot odds.


-Mike

Rob,


Your example is excellent. And correct.


It demonstrates elegantly the conceptual idea.


In the headsup game, the blinds are reversed. The Button acts first before the flop and is the small blind.


If the button raises, the big blind gets precisely 3-1 on his call, out of postion.


This is almost exactly the same as the below problem with one exception: the situation I described is actually better for the big blind. Yes, better.


In the 2/3 blind structure, in a button vs blind , the big blind gets 60+20+30=110/30 odds, which is 3 and 2/3rds to one.


Also, and this comes into play in borderline situations, the rake is important.


Lets say the EV is 6 bucks on a given hand at 30-60.


If the average rake is $1 (keep in mind it needs to be average to equity), then this represents a drop from 6 to 5 dollars. The 10-20 hand would have EV $2 (a bit less due to the bigger small blind when that applies) would drop it down from 2 to 1.


So, as Mr. Sykes points out, against the known hand range fulcrum presented, if a call is a call headsup against the same opponent at Paradise 10-20, its actually a little better in the 30-60 case.


This doesn't prove that k3 is a call.


But it DOES PROVE that the calls are equivalent. If you would call the button raiser with the same hand ranges described, than you must call at least with the same hand (a bit looser actually) in the 30-60 game.


Regards.

No, I said against most players, you should fold this for a raise HTH or 3 way if you are out of position .


Dan Z.

This is not exactly true. Thr reason is the raiser on the button in a ring game is raising 2 players, not 1. There is also a tiny "card counting effect" suggesting bigger cards for the button in this case.


But the primary difference is the raise in the full game implies greater strength - it is not just the BB's responsibility to defend.


Dan Z.

I disagree. What a surpise. Lol. In the 30-60 ring game the button stands to have a better hand for 2 reasons. 1) He is facing 2 opponents instead of one. So his raising standards could and should be lessened when facing one opponent. 2) In a full ring game if there are no hands out in front of you, the blinds stand to have a better chance of holding a good hand which will force the button to raise with less hands then he would head up. As the average starting hand would be beter in a full game then headup.

But the primary difference is the raise in the full game implies greater strength - it is not just the BB's responsibility to defend.


Dan Z.


Thats why the hand range was specified. They have the same hand, they are the same players, under the same conditions once the small blind folds.


The hand range that I gave was very important and that's why I specified it so strongly.


Yes, the button normally has a stonger hand. But my posts about K3 were when he is a loose raiser. I was very specific about that. If someone wants to challenge the the hand range, thats fine. But I tried to ask them if it would be correct, in isolation, to call against a button, theoretically, who always raised. No answer.


The card bunching effect is not and issue.(I believe its been shown to be negible as well..but i am not certain.) We know the card range the button raiser has and we know what the big blind holds. We can calculate with Bayes the rough percentages (depending on his hand range) that he holds.


Regards.