|
|
|
|
#1
08-27-2005, 08:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Theory: optimal blind defense?
It's funny b/c blind defense is so stupid sometimes. There are some really good blind defenders and then there are some really retarded defenders that think they're good because they cracked aces on the button. BUT...If I were to defend the blinds with optimal frequency I would choose hands that have a mathematical advantage vis-a-vis the range of hands my opponent could have. And this only works if I have reliable knowledge against who I'm defending the blinds.
~stephen 
|
|
#2
08-27-2005, 12:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Theory: optimal blind defense?
[ QUOTE ]
It's funny b/c blind defense is so stupid sometimes. There are some really good blind defenders and then there are some really retarded defenders that think they're good because they cracked aces on the button. BUT...If I were to defend the blinds with optimal frequency I would choose hands that have a mathematical advantage vis-a-vis the range of hands my opponent could have. And this only works if I have reliable knowledge against who I'm defending the blinds. ~stephen [/ QUOTE ]well this strategy is not nearly good enough, as having pot odds against an opponents range is not enough if they are very aggro and good postflop, conversely ill open my standards up against weaker players who will only be opening with better hands as they easy to read, give free cards etc.
|
|
#3
08-27-2005, 01:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Theory: optimal blind defense?
[ QUOTE ]
as having pot odds against an opponents range is not enough if they are very aggro and good postflop, conversely ill open my standards up against weaker players who will only be opening with better hands as they easy to read, give free cards etc. [/ QUOTE ] Isn't that what I said? You're saying you'd choose a range of hands vs a certain opponent. I'm saying the same thing but I have a mathematical foundation for what hands I choose. I'm not about to make a regular habit of defending with 82o just because I think my opponent is weaker. I'm not sure any one particular player who plays well postflop can get the best of me EVERY time I decide to pick a hand to defend with, regardless of their aggressiveness. Conversely, I'm not saying I'm a professional HU player but I like my chances vs anyone. I ain't skeert. ~stephen
|
|
#4
08-27-2005, 02:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Theory: optimal blind defense?
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not about to make a regular habit of defending with 82o just because I think my opponent is weaker. [/ QUOTE ] Maybe you should. There are some really bad headsup players out there. I have a guy at my game whose raising standards are fairly tight, will always follow through on any flop, but will fold to a check-raise every time he misses. For instance, if the flop is K 7 5, he'll fold AQ, JJ, etc. to any kind of playback. You're telling me you're not going to defend 95% of the time vs. this guy?
|
|
#5
08-27-2005, 07:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Theory: optimal blind defense?
Legend, what do you do with JJ, AQ on K-7-5 board to a BB checkraise?
|
|
#6
08-28-2005, 12:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Theory: optimal blind defense?
[ QUOTE ]
Legend, what do you do with JJ, AQ on K-7-5 board to a BB checkraise? [/ QUOTE ] Im clearly not legend, but I would generally call down with JJ, letting them bet a worse hand the whole way, and betting if checked to. for AQ it depends on their aggression level. I eiher peal one off and fold the turn UI, or 3 bet if they are real aggro. Betting turn, check behind river.
|
|
#7
08-28-2005, 01:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Theory: optimal blind defense?
[ QUOTE ]
Legend, what do you do with JJ, AQ on K-7-5 board to a BB checkraise? [/ QUOTE ] It depends on the opponent of course, but I'd need to have a good read to lay down on the flop, and it certainly wouldn't be my default play every time after someone has been consistently check-raising me from the blind. My point was that with this opponent, it always pays to see a flop, no matter what your cards.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
