|
|
#1
11-11-2005, 10:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Ultra-conservative in the Small Blind
Yahoo.
It's time for me to start playing some 5/10 6-max. (Thanks, Evan and Blair.) I plan on having no idea how to play in the blinds. So...until I figure out how to play this game, I plan on playing virtually nothing when HU in the SB against the BB. What is "virtually nothing"? Please keep in mind that I am NOT looking for an optimal HU-in-the-SB starting strategy. I'm looking for a way to make my small blind play really fricking easy until I learn the basics of this game. Here's what I have so far: I plan on raising or folding in the small blind. I'm getting 3:1 to play. So I shouldn't be playing fewer than 25% of hands. But SB has crappy position. So I'll just play the top 20% of hands because I'm being ultra-tight and choosing to take a small loss in the small blind right now. There are 169 unique hands. If I play only the top 20%, my postflop play should be easy and my losses from the SB shouldn't be staggering. So, the Top 20% (34 unique hands) AA-55 (10 hands) AKs-A8s (6 hands) AK-A9 (5 hands) KQs-K9s (4 hands) KQ-KT (3 hands) QJs-Q9s (3 hands) QJ (1 hand) JTs (1 hand) JT (1 hand) Is this too tight even for a rank newbie? 
|
|
#2
11-11-2005, 10:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultra-conservative in the Small Blind
[ QUOTE ]
I'm getting 3:1 to play. So I shouldn't be playing fewer than 25% of hands [/ QUOTE ] You should play 75% when getting 3:1 in an allin situation, not 25..
|
|
#4
11-11-2005, 10:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultra-conservative in the Small Blind
[ QUOTE ]
So if it folds around to you in the sb with 22-44 or T9s you are going to fold? I think even a newbie can play these and a few others profitably HU from the sb. [/ QUOTE ] I just don't think 22 is very easy to play in this situation. T9s might be okay. I'll toss 55. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#5
11-11-2005, 10:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultra-conservative in the Small Blind
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I'm getting 3:1 to play. So I shouldn't be playing fewer than 25% of hands [/ QUOTE ] You should play 75% when getting 3:1 in an allin situation, not 25.. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, you're right. My 25% logic doesn't actually follow from anything. I sort of arbitrarily picked a low percentage so I wouldn't have to include hands like 87s in my list of must-play hands.
|
|
#6
11-11-2005, 10:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultra-conservative in the Small Blind
[ QUOTE ]
So, the Top 20% (34 unique hands) AA-55 (10 hands) AKs-A8s (6 hands) AK-A9 (5 hands) KQs-K9s (4 hands) KQ-KT (3 hands) QJs-Q9s (3 hands) QJ (1 hand) JTs (1 hand) JT (1 hand) [/ QUOTE ] The top 20% of hands shouldn't be weighted for uniqueness, as you get some types of hands far more often than others. AKs has 4 combos, while JT has 16. According to Poker Stove the top 20% of hands are: 66+,A4s+,K8s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T9s,A9o+,KTo+,QTo+,JTo Poker Stove doesn't use a weighting for heads up situations, but I think it is a fairly good estimate anyways. As for your plan, I think you should broaden your standards a bit, and try to work on how to actually play well, rather then limiting your play in attempts of not losing money.
|
|
#8
11-11-2005, 10:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultra-conservative in the Small Blind
[ QUOTE ]
As for your plan, I think you should broaden your standards a bit, and try to work on how to actually play well, rather then limiting your play in attempts of not losing money. [/ QUOTE ] I'm interested in playing well everywhere but HU in the SB against the BB. For now. There's SO MUCH to learn right now that I'd rather wait until I've logged a few thousand hands before I even consider what to do HU in the SB. It's not about losing money -- it's about avoiding situations where I know I'm going to play like a fish. I'm simply choosing to lose money in the small blind while I learn how to play in the other five seats.
|
|
#9
11-11-2005, 12:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultra-conservative in the Small Blind
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I'm getting 3:1 to play. So I shouldn't be playing fewer than 25% of hands [/ QUOTE ] You should play 75% when getting 3:1 in an allin situation, not 25.. [/ QUOTE ] You're both wrong. Two undercards against two overcards (e.g., 78 vs AK) is only a 2:1 dog, so with 3:1 odds all-in, he should play 100% of the time. Of course, you're not getting all-in odds, so you fold the SB more often because of the reverse implied odds you're laying.
|
|
#10
11-11-2005, 12:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultra-conservative in the Small Blind
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I'm getting 3:1 to play. So I shouldn't be playing fewer than 25% of hands [/ QUOTE ] You should play 75% when getting 3:1 in an allin situation, not 25.. [/ QUOTE ] You're both wrong. Two undercards against two overcards (e.g., 78 vs AK) is only a 2:1 dog, so with 3:1 odds all-in, he should play 100% of the time. [/ QUOTE ] Hilarious, all 3 of you are wrong. You can't assume opponent has two overcards. Sometimes he has an overpair and your undercards are crushed with those odds.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
