NL CASH GAMES defence in the SB, your opinins welcome/needed

[SHAKE]

So for most players in FR NL resonable stakes lets say game quality of typical 2-5NL (live or 100NL online. Where do we draw the line in the sb when dealing with "stealish" type raises from otherwise solid players.

By solid i mean average, not a rock not a maniac.

Lets say this player Will attempt to steal 1 in 3.5 times.

When he does decide to steal his range is 69s+ 57s/o+ 45s/o+ 22+
Basicly anything but total trash like 4 gappers or offsuit 3 gaps.

Agisnt this type player what is your bottom calling/raising range in

A. Folded to raiser

B. 1 MP limper

c. 1 UTG limper

d. 2+ limpers

Consider bb will call if you call and fold if you raise..heres mine, please post your so we can compare.

A. R-22+,TJ+QT+,K9+\ C-nothing (basicly if this player is folded down to the button or c/o and its just his raise and me im eaither isolating or folding, anyone disagree, and why?



B. R-88+,KT+,QT+ /C-22-77,T9s-JTs,A7s+.

Here ill call with smaller pairs or suited aces along with larger conectors, i like to check in the dark in this spot (when i call) as it almost takes away position from the raiser (almost) also im assuming with a call the bb comes along so i have sufficiant implied ods to flop a set with smaller pairs and flushes or 2pair with the suited aces. Of cource ill mix it up a bit but consider this the foundation.

C. R-JJ+ AQs+/C-22+,TJ+QT+T9s-JTs,A7s+.

with an UTG limper i tighten up my 3 bet range alot as a strong 4 bet could shut me right out even with a hand like 1010 or AJs. Utg limp 4-bet or 3 bet means power (most of the time, in live games) I still keep may calling range pretty open because if utg 3 bets i can easily fold or if he is slowplaying a big hand my TJs might just be the sauce his KK need to make me a tasty balla sandwich you know what i mean, implied odds.

D.R-JJ+ AQs+ , /CFold
heres where im the tightest, i guess because if theres two limpers its not so much a steal as a squeeze. Here i figure someone has a hand if we see a flop and the raiser probly has somthing 1/2 decent to raise with 2 limpers and 2 blinds waiting. Not like they have to have AA but they could. I just look at it as im OOP, tons of action after the raise behind me, i need a hand and i want to raise. If im in the sb and theres alot of limpers and lp raises i fold unless i have the goods, in wich case i reraise. Anyone dissagree?

ok this is in no way a how to or anything of the sort. Also i know we need to vary play and not stick to much to a pattern but this is just a guidline.

Most importantly its just my opinion im not claiming its right. Iwould just like some comments and Add-ons to futher the disscution.



PS-if your going to critisize my logic here, plese back it up with a why. I dont mind being told im wrong, i kno im not always right. Just please help me and others who read this learnsomthing. If im wrong explaine why. And if i dissagree ill explaine why also.

Ty

[Chopper]

sorry to be so short, but i dont concern myself with the blinds all that much. defending, not stealing. i like to steal them.

i will typically defend any button "steal raise" with any A and pp. by defend, i mean 3bet. i dont call when trying to defend against a steal. when my A hits i check raise. when my set hits, i play for a stack. when my pp gets cbet into, it gets about 50/50 whether or not i play the hand farther.

but, i dont do it enough to get good at it. at my stakes, its better to play more straightforward than to concern myself with my blinds. so, i dont have a lot of experience with the concept.

[SHAKE]

yeah this is more for 2-5 or 5-10 live, where you actually get squeezer vig and 3 bets make people fold.

[sejje]

yeah this is more for 2-5 live... where 3 bets make people fold.

HAHAHAHA. HAAAAAAH!

I would not be defending my small blind. If and when I decided to, it would be because I was pretty sure it was a steal and I would put in a third bet. At that point I don't believe the cards are very important.

To say it another way: if I play against a stealer in the SB, I will be three betting. Usually it will be a big hand, which I am three betting for value. The rest of the time it's for other reasons, and the cards don't matter (I'm going to have to flop hard if he decides to play with me).

Also, if a player brings it in for a raise after 2 limpers, is that considered a blind steal? I don't think so, and I REALLY don't think we're "defending" our small blind at that point.

[SHAKE]

yeah this is more for 2-5 live... where 3 bets make people fold.

HAHAHAHA. HAAAAAAH!

I would not be defending my small blind. If and when I decided to, it would be because I was pretty sure it was a steal and I would put in a third bet. At that point I don't believe the cards are very important.

To say it another way: if I play against a stealer in the SB, I will be three betting. Usually it will be a big hand, which I am three betting for value. The rest of the time it's for other reasons, and the cards don't matter (I'm going to have to flop hard if he decides to play with me).

Also, if a player brings it in for a raise after 2 limpers, is that considered a blind steal? I don't think so, and I REALLY don't think we're "defending" our small blind at that point.

did you even read my post or just the first few words and the proceed to just spew completly irrelevant babble in my pos?


dumbshit

[SHAKE]

heres where im the tightest, i guess because if theres two limpers its not so much a steal as a squeeze. Here i figure someone has a hand



god what a retard you are, READ the freakin post

[SHAKE]

heres where im the tightest, i guess because if theres two limpers its not so much a steal as a squeeze. Here i figure someone has a hand



god what a retard you are, READ the freakin post

[jyms]

Blinds are worth stealing in NL but not worth defending.

[SHAKE]

Blinds are worth stealing in NL but not worth defending.

We're talking playable hands here though, you mean you fold ducks in the SB if its folded to the button and he raises?

[jyms]

Blinds are worth stealing in NL but not worth defending.

We're talking playable hands here though, you mean you fold ducks in the SB if its folded to the button and he raises?

Playable hands are playable hands, not blind defenses. I don't see where you got that from what I wrote. When you have a playable hand, your thinking about pots and odds not defending a stinking 1/2BB

[SHAKE]

I guess im using the term defending wrong. i just mean playing from the blinds when theres a raise.

my bad.

[bigspenda73]

defending is a much bigger part of limit, you know this. It's a mistake a lot of ppl make whose main game is limit.

[sejje]

did you even read my post or just the first few words and the proceed to just spew completly irrelevant babble in my pos?

dumbshit

I read your post and laughed at the ridiculous notion that people fold to three bets more frequently in 2/5 live than small online games. Then I gave a general response to your question about blind defense.

Now a few posts later, you admit you weren't really asking about blind defense in the first place, and that you have no idea what blind defense even means.

Now, maybe you can see that my post was relevant to blind defense. I didn't go into the detailed part of your question because I don't think it's relevant in blind defense.

As for this:

heres where im the tightest, i guess because if theres two limpers its not so much a steal as a squeeze. Here i figure someone has a hand



god what a retard you are, READ the freakin post

Are you even talking to me? Are you quoting me? I don't understand. But the squeeze is not the same as blind defense, and I hoped to make that point clear. I don't think you should be calling me a retard when you don't even understand the term you're posting about.

[SHAKE]

did you even read my post or just the first few words and the proceed to just spew completly irrelevant babble in my pos?

dumbshit

I read your post and laughed at the ridiculous notion that people fold to three bets more frequently in 2/5 live than small online games. Then I gave a general response to your question about blind defense.

Now a few posts later, you admit you weren't really asking about blind defense in the first place, and that you have no idea what blind defense even means.

Now, maybe you can see that my post was relevant to blind defense. I didn't go into the detailed part of your question because I don't think it's relevant in blind defense.

As for this:

heres where im the tightest, i guess because if theres two limpers its not so much a steal as a squeeze. Here i figure someone has a hand



god what a retard you are, READ the freakin post

Are you even talking to me? Are you quoting me? I don't understand. But the squeeze is not the same as blind defense, and I hoped to make that point clear. I don't think you should be calling me a retard when you don't even understand the term you're posting about.

I use retard pretty liberally so dont take it the wrong way. And it seemed you diddnt read my post because i mentiond that when there are 2 limpers its not really a steal. Then you basicky just reitterate trying to make me look like i diddnt say the same thing. As far as the term defending i posted what i ment when i said it, playing in the blinds when theres a raise. To me thats defending.


Spenda-Yes, you know my main game is limit. Im trying to get better at NL so when i get enough money i can sit at your table and stack you.

[bigspenda73]

Hard not to take retard the wrong way SHAKE. Uncalled for in general.

Also, come stack me baby.

[SHAKE]

Hard not to take retard the wrong way SHAKE. Uncalled for in general.

Also, come stack me baby.

I understand that and it was out of line givin the context. Sorry.

You play 1-2 NL right?

[bigspenda73]

Hard not to take retard the wrong way SHAKE. Uncalled for in general.

Also, come stack me baby.

I understand that and it was out of line givin the context. Sorry.

You play 1-2 NL right?

200-400nl with sbrugby, ivey, etc...

[SHAKE]

Hard not to take retard the wrong way SHAKE. Uncalled for in general.

Also, come stack me baby.

I understand that and it was out of line givin the context. Sorry.

You play 1-2 NL right?

200-400nl with sbrugby, ivey, etc...

those donks?, well ivey is ok i guess.

Well might take me a little more time, i was thinking 2 weeks but im gona need at LEAST 3 now.

[Knytestorme]

The correct answer to this question is to just think



What would small-ball poker say?

[sejje]

I use retard pretty liberally so dont take it the wrong way.

Did I take "dumbshit" the wrong way too? I tend to read between the lines, I know.

[Fnord]

Re-raise your better hands and the odd sc unless you're really deep.

[IowaSkinsFan]

lol at this thread.