Blind defense against good player - KJs

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
BTW, I'm not sure I like the flop call.

[/ QUOTE ]
Part-and-parcel of the just-call approach to BB defense is you have to at least call the flop autobet most of the time. Otherwise you actually do wind up in that weak-tight trap where you fold too many hands.

A large part of what 3-betting accomplishes for many players is it forces them to stay in with marginal hands until at least the turn and often longer. The key here is that when you are heads up with high cards you just have to stop folding. Unless the flop is a disaster call the stealer's flop bet. If you are the stealer and get 3-bet out of the blinds, call his flop autobet.

How do you feel when you take the initiative preflop, miss the flop, and your autobet is flatcalled? It's very uncomfortable. Do you give the free card or do you bluff again now that the bet size has doubled?

The funny thing is the bad players do this naturally. It's the (almost) good players who fold everytime they don't know where they stand.

You are basically right that calling the flop with KJ overcards and a backdoor flush draw is a small Sklansky mistake if he has an ace or a pair. But he can't see my cards and he may make a bigger mistake in a moment. Either he gives me a lot of undeserved free cards and my loose flop calls are more than justified or he loses a fortune in unsuccessful bluffs, losing value bets, and checkraises.

Think of it this way. I didn't put an extra bet in preflop at even money odds. That means I budgeted right then to use those saved chips to call the flop autobet no matter what the flop is. On average it's the same even-money proposition because the flop could be anything.

Of course that's an oversimplification. If the flop is really ugly I use my judgment to fold and save the bet. If the flop is good then I can further sting him with the checkraise. That's how I recover with interest the EV I lost by not 3-betting preflop. But most of the time I need to call and reassess after I see the turn. If you can't bear to do this then go back to the 3-bet crutch because you fold too much. Actually I also call most of my good hands to save them for the turn. There are so many hands that warrant slightly loose flop calls (including many low-card hands that no one would 3-bet preflop) that the pressure is really on not to give free cards on the turn and in practice most players rarely do. So I save as many strong hands as I can to cash in by checkraising the turn.

The need to make these loose calls is one of the biggest adjustments I had to make when I moved from 3/6 full to 5/10 6-max.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
How likely are you going to be in blind battles with this player? Is the table semi-tight and are you planning on playing for a while?

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually this heads-up confrontation is a freak of nature. SB never met a hand he didn't like until apparently just now. SB's postflop play has been visibly tightening in response to my vicious heads-up play against him. If he wants to think I'm a fruitcake because of this hand I'm in favor of it.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with everything you say, Sparky, yet let me try and play devil's advocate. You say that 3-betting is problematic because it doesn't really help deception. Yet, suppose our opponent is the type who doesn't take the 3-bet seriously, and suppose we also happen to have a hand that is CLEARLY better than most of the stealing hands. Since this particular opponent won't interpret the 3-bet for the strength that it is, why not 3-bet then? Perhaps the issue there is that, after a while, that opponent might interpret our hands correctly.

So maybe what all this means is that we simply have to continually change our approach with regard whether to call or 3-bet, at least against those opponents whom we play against for a sustained period?

[/ QUOTE ]
As usual most progress in the world happens when things are going wrong. I've been running poorly for a while and that motivated me to look harder at my game.

What I saw was a little stagnation in comparison to the enormous progress I made shortly after moving up to 5/10. Refinement of the same old techniques but not so many new ideas. That's OK because I really am just running a little bad and if I want to stay at 5/10 no problem. But that is not at all what I want out of poker so I need to take my game to the next level. The only way to do that is to try some new things even if maybe things get worse before they get better. These preflop changes are some of those new things.

What I'm doing is learning a whole new way of playing this aspect of the game. Once I master it, learning what it's good for and who it works against, I'll have a completely new weapon at my disposal. I'll be able to play both the new way and the old way. Naked preflop aggression against the weak-tight, rope-a-dope and traps for the bet-bot LAG bluffers, and maybe some of each to confuse the truly good players.

The point is you can't shift gears if you don't have any gears except the one you always use. The only way to learn a new style is to commit to using it and get some experience.

So yes you are right, the best approach does depend on your opponent and that's the goal.

[wuarhg]

This is some good stuff, nice posts Stellar.

[Wynton]

[ QUOTE ]

Part-and-parcel of the just-call approach to BB defense is you have to at least call the flop autobet most of the time. Otherwise you actually do wind up in that weak-tight trap where you fold too many hands.

A large part of what 3-betting accomplishes for many players is it forces them to stay in with marginal hands until at least the turn and often longer. The key here is that when you are heads up with high cards you just have to stop folding. Unless the flop is a disaster call the stealer's flop bet. If you are the stealer and get 3-bet out of the blinds, call his flop autobet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Alright, this advice is extremely important to me (if true). I've slowly progressed to the point of realizing I need to defend more, but I've never been sure what that implies about flop calls. In fact, I might have regressed by calling more pf, and then folding the flop without some particular help on the turn (or a particular belief that the villain was not helped by the flop).

Does everyone agree that, when you defend headsup - either by calling or 3-betting - you are basically committing yourself to see the turn in the vast majority of situations?

[Wynton]

[ QUOTE ]
Naked preflop aggression against the weak-tight, rope-a-dope and traps for the bet-bot LAG bluffers, and maybe some of each to confuse the truly good players.

The point is you can't shift gears if you don't have any gears except the one you always use. The only way to learn a new style is to commit to using it and get some experience.

So yes you are right, the best approach does depend on your opponent and that's the goal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would it be too onerous to try and list a few stereotypes and suggest a default action? For example,

1. Unthinking maniac who steals when you have a clear edge: 3-bet here because you have an equity edge AND he won't interpret the 3-bet as strength.
2. Tight/passive type who steals rarely, but happens to do so when you have a powerhouse: just call because you do not want to scare him away.
3. Competitive pf but cautious post-flop type, who reacts to the 3-bet by capping, while slowing down to aggression on flop and/or turn: I think that just calling here might be best with decent cards, but 3-betting superior with powerhouse cards.
4. Type who is unlikely to cap pf, but will try and punish your pf 3-bet by going to war on the flop or turn when his cards are strong. In other words, if he has AK, this player is content not to cap pf because he knows his edge and surprise factor is going to be great if the flop hits, and he's also content not to cap when his hand is mediocre. I'm not sure here at all. But because it seems like this opponent is going to react to the board, I tend to think that you should 3-bet a greater percentage of your hands, since aggression will help you win on nondescript boards and will pay off when you have very strong starters too.

5. Any decent player who you have been playing at for a while, and already had several steal/defend situations: whatever you've been doing, switch it around, regardless of the cards.

I'm sure I've just mentioned a few of the most obvious types, so I encourage others to add to the list. But the key I believe is to indicate an action based on both your cards AND the opponent-type. Indeed, I believe that the latter may well be more important than the former, in deciding whether to 3-bet pf.

[MAxx]

Turn looks like a good play to me.

I'm curious how, if at all, your adjustments in the BB afect your SB strategy.

[dave44]

Do you still peel the flop with nothing against a LAG who you know is not giving you a free card very often? I would think you'd have to hit him with some turn checkraises when you do have hands before you start peeling the flop so loosely.

[Surfbullet]

Hey Stellar,

I like your HU analysis. My game has been transitioning in this way for awhile, as I've noticed initiative is not worth quite as much as position, especially against the LAGy players who will continue to bluff/semibluff raise you despite a pf 3bet.

Critical, though, is your emphasis that you are calling his flop autobet unless the worst should come. As you said, many almost good players make a big mistake here by giving up when we miss...we should be defaulting to call, not fold, while raising our best(and some draws) and folding the absolute worst flops. It's a whole different ballgame in these HU situations, even more so at 10/20.

Great analysis.

RE: the turn.

I don't like it. This is a very small pot - we have a bluff-catcher with a strong draw...folding a 6-outer isn't exactly a coup in a 3bb pot...we'd much prefer him incorrectly bet his 6-outer ...and if we snap off a continuation-bluff on the river too we've profited significantly due to the small pot and the magnitude of his error.

Noone believes you have the Ace here, because many times it's more profitable to just call. I don't thnk you are folding out many (if any) hands that are ahead, and folding a hadn that is behind doesn't help us if there's a decent chance he would have bluffed at it.

Surf

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you still peel the flop with nothing against a LAG who you know is not giving you a free card very often? I would think you'd have to hit him with some turn checkraises when you do have hands before you start peeling the flop so loosely.

[/ QUOTE ]
Think about this. At the beginning of this thread people were demanding that I 3-bet preflop because I have the best hand. Now the flop is 776 and we are discussing whether I should fold because I'm doomed?