In this episode, danzasmack finally makes it around the table in part 1 of his "blind play" introduction. With a strong focus on preflop, this video can help "open your eyes" a little to play in the "blinds". (note: bad puns may be a plenty).
"Well, I'm getting 15 to 1." danzasmack provides a comprehensive introduction to Shorthanded Limit Hold'em for those new to the game. Basics will include things like starting hands, hand reading, and developing table reads. More advanced topics include adjusting to table dynamics and preparing yourself to move up in limits.
Premium Subscribers can download high-quality, DRM-free videos in multiple formats.
While this episode is packed with solid info, it is structured very dry compared to the first two episodes.
What I loved about the first couple of episode was that each episode were spilt into a half hour of basic theory, followed by a half hour of exsamples with a bit of postflop play thrown in. It really helped with the understanding of the concepts.
I know we will see those exsamples next week, so I will definitly be looking forward to that. Just thought it would have been better to spilt this differently.
I do have a question about defending with lower suited connectors. You don't include hands like 87s. I find that in slightly higher games, like 2/4 against people that are capeable of throwing away unimproved overcards, calling with 87s is profitable, even from an EP raiser.
Often you flop a good draw, and can checkraise flop if you are HU, bet out turn and pick up a nice sized pot.
Thanks for the feedback storm. I agree. I thought about chopping it up - 1 ep with just "defending your BB" and then some hands where I do that, but this whole thing just flowed better. Next episode will have a ton of hands so that should be more up your alley. From there i'll be playing for a few episodes, so the boring stuff is out of the way.
As far as you 87s hand example - given the right situation, like the one described, you can clearly profitably call preflop. The thing about play in the BB, like i say a lot in this episode, is that it's pretty subjective. In the situation you described you certainly want to defend a hand like 87s because of how you can play it postflop (profitably). Of course, I do say 9Ts is legit, so we go do to 89 and 78 from there. The lower you go obviously the more you're pushing it.
Really an excellent video. You are clear,easy to understand and explain well.
I bet you don't tilt much. you have patience.
I realize this is a "default" starting hands chart. I have a question that may be a little out of place here, but its something I am thinking about a lot lately.
we use the position of the player who is raising etc, to help define his range. So that we can make the proper play vs that range.
We can use the read of the player(lagg,tagg) to override the position of the player in determining his range.
we can then tighten or loosen our range of hand vs that player type.
1) My`question is....is there any formula or standard for deciding how to adjust to villains range?
ex: A 50/25 raises UG, what percent of hands can we 3 bet from the btn? or blinds...17%? or 25%?
2)you did not mention calling in the SB....can I assume we either raise or fold here?
or are there some players we can call against?
I have a question here. On the subject of blind denfense, you mentioned that you could defend BB with hands like K7o etc. I was wondering, if a solid player who hardly tries to steal blinds raises on the button. Would you call with that type hands? In the this situation, I would tend to call him with hands like 87s, 9Ts etc. What are your thoughts?
Great series. I'm enjoying going through the vids.
But the only think I was a little disappointed in was defending in the SB. What hands should we be 3-betting with in the SB vs LP and EP players, like you did from the BB (as I general rule I'd imagine we should never be CC-defending from the SB... or at least it wouldn't be much of a mistake to never do it). Or did I miss it? hmmm....
Whoah sorry I missed these guys.
As far as SB vs. EP raiser i'd be a little tighter than my button 3-betting range. Granted we're getting a discount on the pf 3-bet but of course we are OOP in that spot which eats up some of our equity.
When a 50/25 opens UTG - well, if we stove that we see
Now i don't quite buy this as the guys range for UTG opening. Why? Most people don't know that T8s is a "better hand" than A2o.
So let's say he's opening A2s+, A5o+, K9o+, all pairs, all broadways, and all aces.
So for my 3-betting range? Well we don't care about what it is. We care about how we get it. And how do I get it? TBH it's more dependent on his postflop play.
If the guy is going to be showing down any ace or any pair, peeling 2 streets on the regular I really like to stay relatively tight here, KTs+, 55+, A9o+ (maybe A8), A5s+.
Now, the more he is terrible postflop the more I'll be opening.
The thing about a guy like this is that you'll have a lot of chances to isolate him. The worse hand showdown wise you play, the better it should play postflop (like a T9s type hand).
The weird thing is, if you open 25% from the CO and I 3-bet the top 30% of my range, my equity according to stove is just over 48%. That 2% is 100%+ made up for image 1st off, and certainly made up for in position.
I'll be touching on this spot a bit more in my next episode of shouldn't fold.
As far as vs. a guy who doesn't try and steal the blinds a lot - sure you can fold a bit more. Not sure I fodl K7o but again that depends on his postflop play as well as how wide he is opening OTB.
Will he call me down semi-light if I make a hand?
Can I get rid of my hand postlfop if he shows aggression?
If both of those are true you SHOULD be calling because you can play much closer to perfect poker postflop and you can also extract decent value.
I know I'm a little late here. But I just watched the first 3 episodes of this series. I do have a little bit of LHE 6max background and from that experience, I am kinda surprised how tight these recommendations are. However, I had never considered the impact that the high rake should have on your starting hand selection and that is a point that Chuck mentions multiple times.
Anyway, I am off to the .02/.04 tables to play the Price Is Right style of poker. Wish me luck.
I am a new member and have started working my way through the the above series in order to retool my game for the smaller stakes. Before asking my questions can I first just say that danzasmack, I am really enjoying everything you have presented and your style and method is brilliant. Keep up the good work.
My question is just something that I don't think was addressed in the blind ranges as thoroughly as I would have liked. I realize that you were running out of time and that covering every possibility for pre flop blind play was impractical. I also note your discussion on multi way hands. However, could you please provide me with some good starting ranges for the following situations:
1) SB First in. Raise/(Call?)
2) BB v SB, SB limps - what does BB raise?
3) SB def against early pos. raise and late pos. raise. (with limpers?)
Hijack, Cutoff, Button and SB limping v raising hands when facing 1 or 2+ limpers.
Sorry if this is hassle. I have already spent some time making my own ranges using the Stox book and Boror/Mak texts - however even these do not address these issues fully.
I also understand the general theory on when to play ie 67s in a multiway. However, spots of interest to me are for example Q9 suited in late position (or SB) against 1 limper. Or A4o in the cutoff v 1 limper. Some of these spots I find a bit trickier. So it would be great to hear some more of what you think good ranges are in these spots.
Although having said that I do understand the general subjectivity of these decisons in terms of the limpers strength and/or the blinds strength.
Quick question about blind defence. I play 0.25/0.5 on stars and the playing ability varies greatly (from bad to absolutely terrible myself included), anyway...my question is, if i see from poker tracker that a guy isn't playing positionally how do i adjust to him when defending blinds? This defence technique in the video is based on ranges in various positions, if we lose the positional "read" doesnt it make the blind defence harder? Do we default to an EP or a CO defence range against such a player?