Which statement is false? Old posts about blind defense/stealing

[aflaba temp]

Both statements come from a very good and respected poster. To the best of my knowledge though, both statements can't be true.

(1): Everyone has folded to small Luke in SB. Big John in BB adapts his prelfop play perfectly to small Luke's preflop play. Both players are equally good post flop.
= Hero should play about 86% of his hands from SB.

(2): Small Luke open raises from SB.
= Big John should play all of his suited hands and all offsuit cards as good as or better than non-connected hands that have at least one card that is higher than a card in Small Luke's hand about 35-45%.

Which one is false?

Neither.

These are two different situations, one in which Luke has not raised, and another in which Luke has raised. Poker is situational.

[aflaba temp]

I think I found out (with help) why both can be true.

Both posts are by Peter_rus (2) I think he talks about HUP where SB is in position, opposed to (1) where BB is in position.

That explaines why SB should steal with as many hands according to (1) as the number of hands BB should defend with according to (2).

(1): SB is in position
(2): BB is in position

what I think it means is that SB should complete with some hands. in those instances that he DOES raise, BB should defend with...

SB is out of position both times

[timprov]

I don't immediately see a conflict here, though it took me a while to figure out what he was saying in #2.

[aflaba temp]

About (1) here

About (2) here

Very good posts

[aflaba temp]

From the post linked to:

"...I made some counts and i really find that 86% of hands need to be raised (in 1/2 blind structure) ..."

[aflaba temp]

[ QUOTE ]
SB is out of position both times

[/ QUOTE ]

True! I was midinformed. Now to the best of my knowledge both statements can't be true again...

[aflaba temp]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't immediately see a conflict here, though it took me a while to figure out what he was saying in #2.

[/ QUOTE ]


SB raises every time he plays. He gets worse than 3:5 (worse because of the risk of 3-bet) on his raise. He still should play 86% of his hands.


BB get's 2:6 on his call. Against SB's raise with 86% of his hands BB... oops, just realized I had made an error. I think BB should play like 5-high (40% of the time SB will have 4,3 or 2 in his hand)??? Or rather... any hand (exept for maybe 42o)... So that is 100%. Now it makes sense...

(more sense than before. Before I though it came to less than 86%, which would be strange when SB raises 86%. If 100% is correct, then there is no contradiction anymore)

I really don't know where this is heading.

EDIT: If I'm getting this correctly. Then if both blinds adopt perfectly to each others play... then they will end up at... SB raising 86% of his hands and BB defending 100%...