Blind Defence with Dominated Hands (II) - Button vs. Small Blind

» COLUMN

Blind defence with dominated hands (II)– button vs. small blind

by Miiwiin

The column Blind Defence with Dominated Hands – Button vs. Big Blind dealt with the important factors needed when considering an active or passive defence whilst at the same time thinking about possible postflop lines.

Many of the points mentioned in it are generally applicable, making that column a prerequisite for this one, as we don't want to necessarily repeat everything.

This column deals with defending in the small blind, which brings small but significant differences. Why this is the case and how you can react to it is explained in this column.

Test your knowledge in the quiz: Quiz - NL: Blind Defence with Dominated Hands

The problem – specific changes in the small blind

As already mentioned, the advantages and disadvantages of dominated hands as well as the difference between active and passive defence apply here as well. If you feel the need, try re-reading the column Blind Defence with Dominated Hands – Button vs. Big Blind.

The postflop plan will also be addressed: which line can you strive for against certain opponents. Postflop play remains fairly unaffected here.

What are the specifics in the small blind after a blind steal attempt?

In the examples where you sat in the big blind, you had a big advantage. You were last to act, which means you can forget the preflop action. Clearly, a 3-bet will bring the original open raiser back into the game, however with a call, you knew exactly what you had to expect postflop: a heads-up pot where you have to act out of position.

However, sitting in the small blind, you can't take advantage of this advantage anymore. One thing is clear: the big blind still has to act behind you and he can still raise.

As a basic example, it's still a blind attack on the button. It's not enough to get involved with the button and make a decision based on this opponens as well as the history and your image. You also need to watch out for the big blind behind you.

Which variants are possible?

Active defence

Just take a look at two possible scenarios. How do things look if the big blind is active?

Button raises, you 3-bet, BB 4-bets…

You've decided on an active blind defence and would ideally like to take down the pot with a 3-bet. However, the BB pulls out a 4-bet. What does that mean?

Is he so tight that he just looks at his hand here anyway and really only raises strong hands? Or, is he clever and knows that the button steals and defends very lightly? So he throws in a bluff 4-bet and wants to take the pot directly.

Ultimately, this doesn't change anything, as you continue to assume dominated hands from AJ/KQ. Without more precise reads you'll rarely go broke with this and unforutnately, you'll have to give up the hand.

Button raises, you 3-bet, BB calls…

Certainly a rare variant, but it won't make you happy either. Your goal is to make both opponents fold. There are some candidates who are too eager to see the flop and even cold call a 3-bet.

You need to decide before the 3-bet whether you're ready to take a cold call from the big blind into account, even before the 3-bet. Because the next problem is also clear: button gets very good odds on one hand, and could also cold call, in this case you need to be very cautious with the top pair you may have hit. 

A light 4-bet from the button is also possible, as he assesses you to be a light restealer and doesn't give credit to the big blind who's always calling. Ultimately, neither option is the right one for you.

Passive defence

Here are two variants of the passive defence.

Button raises, you call, BB squeezes…

A better option, there's hardly a better spot you can give an active squeezer a spot in which he can fully express himself. Button raises quite lightly, your call out of position doesn't exactly scream strength. The big blind knows that he can take down the pot straight away with a 4-bet. Here you also have no opportunity to put up a fight, you have to give up the pot in most cases.

You won't only be giving aggressive squeezers a dream spot, tighter comerades could also see their chance to take down the pot straight away.

Button raises, you call, BB calls…

With a passive defence, there isn't only the possibility that an aggressive player squeezes, but it's also possible that a loose opponent calls.

If the BB calls, you'll have the following situation: a 3-handed flop, you act out of position against both and generally can't hope for more than a top pair.

By calling in the small blind, you gibe the big blind excellent odds for a call, he doesn't need to be particularly loose for this.

Comparison

If you now compare all the possibilities, you'll see that there's no ideal solution and that each option has pros and cons. At the end, you'll be on your own again and you'll just have to trust that your reads on your two opponents are sufficient to find the best solution for this spot.

PartyPoker $100 NL Hold'em (6-handed) HandRecorder v0.9b

Stacks & Stats
CO ($100)
MP ($100)
UTG ($100)
BB ($100) (40/5/1.4/19/32/691) [VPIP/PFR/AF/ATS/WTS/hands]
Hero ($100)
BU ($100) (16/13/3.1/38/25/1200) [VPIP/PFR/AF/ATS/WTS/hands]

Preflop: Hero is SB with K , Q
3 folds, BU raises to $4.00, Hero...

Now you find yourself in the situation mentioned. The button raises, he can be considered a very reserved TAG, who however appears to know when it's worth attacking the blinds.

He will steal quite loosely, however the relatively high ATS (attempt to steal) is in opposition to his tighter overall game, as well as the assumption that he too sees a looser player sitting in the big blind, who may also often find a call out of position here.

This means he will have (weak) brodways in his range more frequently, whereas he'll fold some weak drawing hands more frequently.

Call option:

You're ahead against button's open raising range. With a call, you could survive in some circumstances going heads-up with a call, but you know that the big blind can only rarely give up the pot preflop to a call on your part.

On the other hand, a squeeze from the big blind is pretty much out of the question, he's generally just too passive for that.

You can assume you'll be playing a 3-handed pot completely out of position.

3-bet option:

You'll generate fold equity with a 3-bet. The only question is: will it be enough? The button will find a fold quite often, but will the big blind as well? Would it bother you to play against this opponent out of position with KQs? A 4-bet from the big blind is out of the question. If he should call your 3-bet, then Villain isn't necessarily an opponent who'll go for a light 4-bet.

You'll win the pot quite often, occasionally you'll have to play a 3-bet pot out of position against the big blind and very occasionally get bluffed out.

If you now compare both options, you could easily tend towards a 3-bet, that is, an active defend. The advantages are clear. You'll certainly be ahead of the big blind postflop, depending on the board texture, you can consider different lines there, but betting through on a hit, you'll rarely make a mistake against this calling station. Moreover, the hand could give you a couple of draws.

Precisely this option, that is hittihg strong draws, makes a call interesting again. You keep the pot small and play an acceptable hand against a tight player, as you might still get something out of the pot with a bluff and a loose player, who could join the pot with a very wide range here and could possibly pay out to you postflop.

As in most spots, there's no wrong or right here. Further reads you were able to gather here are decisive, hands played up to now (possibly against the two players mentioned) and your own image (if you were more passive up to now, a 3-bet here would be appropriate, if you were a maniac at the table up to now, you can change down a gear here).

If you don't have anything else to show, the tendency is just slightly towards 3-bet/fold, as you'll take down the pot regularly enough, the button may bluff quite rarely if the big blind stays in the pot and you don't have any worries having to act against the loose big blind out of position.

PartyPoker $100 NL Hold'em (6-handed) HandRecorder v0.9b

Stacks & Stats
CO ($100)
MP ($100)
UTG ($100)
BB ($100) (14/12/2.8/27/23/800) [VPIP/PFR/AF/ATS/WTS/hands]
Hero ($100)
BU ($100) (29/12/1.9/23/33/1033) [VPIP/PFR/AF/ATS/WTS/hands]

Preflop: Hero is SB with A , J
3 folds, BU raises to $4.00, Hero...

A similar situation to example 1, however, the player open raising here is a little harder to assess and there's no calling station in the big blind, but rather a very tight player.

Call option:

A call hides similar dangers as in example 1. However, the big blind is so tight, he'll rarely squeeze as a pure bluff. If he squeezes, he'll generally have a better hand than yours, thus a fold won't be particularly painful here.

The button doesn't look particularly solid, with your hand you can also readily imagine playing out of position without initiative against him.

3-bet option:

A 3-bet is also possible here, as ever. However, the question is: can you make them both fold?

As mentioned, the big blind will call it a day from your 3-bet alone and only play on with good hands. However, according to his stats, button is in the position to call your 3-bet. Thus, there's less leeway as to whether you have a 3-bet for value and Villain is in a position to call weaker hands postflop, or whether you isolate against a better range. This consideration is especially important for whether you should make a continuation bet at all. 

You can't go wrong with an active 3-bet here, although the call option becomes more attractive. You won't win a the pot preflop very often with a 3-bet. however, you hardly need to pay any attention to the big blind.  If this player makes action, you can always easily give up your hand.

You can see a possible play here if you should decide on a call.

PartyPoker $100 NL Hold'em (6-handed) HandRecorder v0.9b

Stacks & Stats
CO ($100)
MP ($100)
UTG ($100)
BB ($100) (14/12/2.8/32/26/800) [VPIP/PFR/AF/ATS/WTS/hands]
Hero ($100)
BU ($100) (29/12/1.9/27/32/1033) [VPIP/PFR/AF/ATS/WTS/hands]

Preflop: Hero is SB with A , J
3 folds, BU raises to $4.00, Hero calls $4.00, BB folds

Flop: ($8.50) 3, J, T (2 players)
Hero checks, BU bets $6.00, Hero calls $6.00

Turn: ($20.50) 8 (2 players)
Hero checks, BU checks

River: ($20.50) K (2 players)
Hero...

The board doesn't offer a lot a of draws, that's why a line along the lines of way ahead/way behind is quite plausible here.

Let your opponent go ahead and bluff, you're not exactly in an ideal situation. However, consider that the alternative would be a 3-bet pot. It would run out to a bet/call flop and your entire stack would potentially be inveseted on the flop.

Thus, a passive line is highly plausible for you. You could also play check/call on the flop, as long as you don't have further reads on your opponents.

The river is also relatively poor. Kx is quite comfortably in Villain's range. You can certainly check/fold here, or alternatively check/call should you believe Villain tends to bluff. A blokc bet makes most sense against weaker opponents here.

River: ($20.50) K (2 players)
Hero bets $7.00, BU raises to $26.00, Hero folds

If there's nothing on the turn, that is, if no further overcard appears, the lines bet/fold or check/call can be seen as equally good. In addition to the stats, you also need to develop a feel for the opponent: does he seem more likely to makea  loose call as he may see you as a somewhate more aggressive bluffer, or does he see you as tighter and could he bluff here himself? You should vary your lines here depending on the assessment.

PartyPoker $100 NL Hold'em (6-handed) HandRecorder v0.9b

Stacks & Stats
CO ($100)
MP ($100)
UTG ($100)
BB ($100) (29/25/3.5/39/23/2499) [VPIP/PFR/AF/ATS/WTS/hands]
Hero ($100)
BU ($100) (26/23/4.1/44/24/544) [VPIP/PFR/AF/ATS/WTS/hands]

Preflop: Hero is SB with K , Q
3 folds, BU raises to $4.00, Hero...

This time, you're dealing with two fairly loose players. Some call them aggressive TAGs, others use the term LAG here. It's clear that this description doesn't actually change anything.

The button is on the offensive with an ATS of 44 and so will steal your blinds for a while until you combat this appropriately. The only question is, how?

Call option:

You can also very aggressive stealers with a call. You should rebluff more often on suitable flops, or float out of position, play draws aggressively and of course, go broke quite lightly.

Whether you call and so counter his aggression or actively defend, you'll upset the stealer.

The advantage of calling is that you can save the play for the postflop game. If you 3-bet, you give Villain the possibility to 4-bet fold and thus to bluff against you again.

The big blind is a problem. He goes the extra mile where aggression is concerned and will often bring out a squeeze, as the button does steal very loosely and interprets your call out of position as weak. If you don't intend to trap with a very strong hand, you need to fold all your hands.

3-bet option:

With a 3-bet, you demonstrate you won't just stand for things. The button will probably call quite rarely, you'll often take the pot directly, although you'll also be punished now and then with a 4-bet bluff.

On the other hand, you'll generally push out the big blind. With all the aggression, he needs to think carefully after a raise and 3-bet, whether he really wants to raise again with a potentially weak hand.

The problem now is that, if decide on a 3-bet and the button 4-bets, do you have an easy fold? No.

It isn't an easy fold as the button will bring out a 4-bet bluff very regularly. On the other hand however, he'll call very rarely (if at all). You need to carefully consider here whether a 3-bet/fold makes sense or if you should perhaps even consider a 3-bet/push.

The line isn't overplayed. If Villain rarely calls your 3-bet, what alternatives does he have? Weak hands/drawing hands/bluffs will 4-bet often enough. He will have to fold a lot to your push, however he will go broke against you with hands such as ATo or JJ/TT/ for example. You're not in a particularly bad position against this.

What's more, an all-in preflop with KQ says: "Not with me you don't!"

Button's steals will visibly reduce.

If you now compare both variants, you should certainly join in this circle and always answer with 3-bets. If the big blind were very tight, a call would certainly be in order to isolate you against weaker hands.

As the big blind himself is a player who knows when he senses weakness and what a perfect spot is for a squeeze, you shouldn't serve up this option to him as well.

Nonetheless, you need to consider beforehand whether it makes sense to 3-bet/fold or whether in this steal situation it's wise to go broke preflop. With these opponents, the ranges they're prepared to go all in with preflop, drop considerably. 

The last example includes a risky variant.

You're up against the following situation:

• The button appears to want to steal against you every time
• The big blind has squeezed 5 times in the last 100 hands
• Du warst bislang eher tight und hast passiv defendet
• Du möchtest dich wehren gegen diese beiden Gegner, da der Tisch ansonsten recht gut ist
• Du glaubst, out of Position keine sonderlich große Edge zu haben
• Du hättest dennoch kein Problem damit, gegen den Button mit KQ out of Position zu agieren

PartyPoker $100 NL Hold'em (6-handed) HandRecorder v0.9b

Stacks & Stats
CO ($100)
MP  ($100)
UTG ($100)
BB ($100) (22/18/3.2/36/24/987) [VPIP/PFR/AF/ATS/WTS/hands]
Hero ($100)
BU ($100) (17/15/2.9/36/25/544) [VPIP/PFR/AF/ATS/WTS/hands]

Preflop: Hero is SB with K , Q
3 folds, BU raises to $4.00, Hero calls $4.00, BB raises to $17.00, BU folds, Hero raises to $40.00,...

Under the conditions mentioned above, you can make a move like this. This will unnerve your opponent, as each time you deviate from a straightforward play, your opponents find it harder to assess you and so are no longer in a position to reduce the number of mistakes they make against you.

Be careful not to think that the big blind will fold everything except AA/KK here. He'll go broke quite loosely against you and you'll be in quite a good position. Of course, you would prefer a hand such as AA in this situation, but now is the time to take a stand and make it clear to people that you aren't their plaything.

(For the sake of completeness we've mentioned that you will, of course, commit yourself with a 4-bet and play 4-bet/call.)

This isn't meant to be a standard problem solution but think for yourself whether you might be able to save yourself some trouble in the next round with a play like this one.

LINKS
Related articles: Blind Defence with Dominated Hands (I) – Button vs. Big Blind Blind Defense with Dominated Hands (III) – Small Blind vs. Big Blind Discussion forum: Discuss this article