Poker Articles

Take the Blind or Post Behind?

by Tommy Angelo

I wrote a book called "Elements of Poker." In it are 144 numbered elements with names such as Quitting, Anticipation, Sitting, Fears, Moving Up, Entitlement, Self-Perpetuating Tiltlessness, and How to Play No-Limit Hold'em with Ruthless Efficiency. Some of the elements are short, some are long, some are general, some are specific. This is one of the long specific ones:

 

97. Take the Blind of Post Behind?

You are about to enter a game in which the rule is that you must post a big blind to get a hand. If you want to get as many hands as you can for your money, you have two choices. You can play your first hand from the natural big blind position. Or you can play your first hand from behind the button, after posting a big blind from there. Which way is better?

At limit poker, my policy is to never post behind the button. At no-limit, I occasionally post behind. Here are my thoughts and history on this topic:

Let's say the blinds are $10/20. If you start on the big blind, you pay $30 to play one full round, no matter how many handed it is. If you post from the cutoff (which means the same as post behind the button), you pay one big blind of $20. For your $20, you get a partial round, from your cutoff hand to your under-the-gun hand.

Let's compare the cost-per-hand of the two options.

Cost-Per-Hand Comparison of Starting on the Big Blind versus Posting Behind Blinds: $10/20

T a k e t h e B l i n d

P o s t B e h i n d

	$30 buys:	At a Cost Per Hand of:	$20 buys:	At a Cost Per Hand of:
10 players	10 hands	$3.00	7 hands	$2.85
9 players	9 hands	3.33	6 hands	3.33
8 players	8 hands	3.75	5 hands	4.00
7 players	7 hands	4.28	4 hands	5.00
6 players	6 hands	5.00	3 hands	6.66
5 players	5 hands	6.00	2 hands	10.00
4 players	4 hands	7.50	1 hand	20.00

Like a million others, I approximated the above calculations while sitting at a poker table and concluded that:

• In full games, the difference in cost-per-hand between posting behind and starting on the big blind is small.
• In short-handed games, barring metagame considerations, it's a no-brainer to enter on the big blind.

In that case, let's zoom in on full games only. Heck, let's look precisely at nine-handed games with $10/20 blinds. In that specific case, it's an exact tie: $3.33 per hand. What does that mean? That it doesn't matter what I do? It was unfathomable to me that the story could end there. Taking the blind and posting behind seemed too different to be the same. The seeker in me needed to know that a good reason exists for favoring one over the other. The scientist in me needed to know what it was.

How about the position parameter? Is that a scale tipper? Well, let's see. I can post $20 in the big blind, which is the second worst position, or I can post $20 in the cutoff, which is the second best position. Having my $20 working for me in the second best position has to be better than posting my $20 from the second worst position, right? Plus, when I take my first hand in the big blind, my second hand is my small blind, which is the worst position of all. I had found the reason I was seeking. Because of the difference in positional value between the blinds and the cutoff, I decided my policy would be to post in the cutoff.

This was in the early 90's when I was exploring this issue. Almost every poker game in every casino in the USA was some form of limit poker, mostly hold'em. After I came to the conclusion that I should always post behind because of position, I started paying closer attention to the professionals I played against on the road, to see what they did. I noticed that some of the sharpies always posted behind when they entered a game, some always started on the big blind, and others did whichever came first. Curious. I was forced to conclude, despite the position thing, that there was no discernable difference in expectation between taking the big blind and posting behind. It was officially too close to call. So I changed my ways again. For the next eight years, when I entered a game, I employed the "I came to play" policy. I chose the option that had me saying "Deal me in" fastest.

In 1997, I moved to the San Francisco Bay Area, where a beachhead of no-limit hold'em had formed ten years earlier when California legalized hold'em. From 1997 to now (2007), my table time has been about 2/3 limit and 1/3 no-limit. (Which do I prefer? Whichever one I'm playing! I love them equally.) Around 1999, I stopped posting behind at limit hold'em, which I am about to explain. But I still post behind sometimes at no-limit, depending on who has how much and where, in other words, depending on my opponents' stack sizes, betting tendencies, and positions. At limit, none of those variables weigh into my take-the-blind-or-post-behind decision. For the rest of the way, I am going to talk only about why I do not post behind at limit. The reasoning also applies to no-limit, in a limited way.

Raising and betting are the aggressive betting options. Checking and folding are the passive ones. Raising and betting cause fluctuation. Checking and folding don't. Therefore, aggressive play causes fluctuation, and passive play doesn't. From the cutoff and hijack, I am aggressive. From the blinds, I am passive. The result is that the difference in fluctuation I experience between taking my first two hands in the cutoff and hijack, and taking my first two hands in the blinds, is huge.

When I post in the cutoff, I often give some fast action on the first hand. For example, if everyone folds to me, I might raise no matter what my cards are. Or let's say someone raises in front of me. Because it only costs me one bet to call, and because I have good position, it could be correct to stay in with a hand that I would no-doubt fold if I was facing two bets cold. And if I am committed to not folding, then in my world I should raise, in order to:

• Put the maximum pressure on the button to fold.
• Attempt to create a bread and butter situation. (E116)
• Say hello.

So here I am reraising before the flop right out of the gate with some hand that I would have mucked without a memory had I not posted behind the button. It's hand number one, and already I'm inviting instability. When instead, I could have been sitting there in the blinds, comfortably cultivating a snug image that I would exploit later.

And that was the wake-up call. When those thoughts entered my mind, I realized that the difference between starting on the big blind and posting behind was so big that I couldn't even see it. It's the difference between passive and aggressive. It's the difference between tight and loose. It's the difference between jumping in and settling in. It's the difference between being afraid and being feared.

I stopped posting behind at limit poker. Now I enter each game on the big blind as a willful act of aggression reduction, and therefore fluctuation reduction, and therefore tilt reduction. Plus, I get the button on my third hand. I can say hello then.

Questions or comments on this article? Click here to send a letter to the editors

Previous Article | Article Listing | Next Article

---

About the Author:

Tommy Angelo has written a book called "Elements of Poker" in which he shares hundreds of his very best ideas in a manner intended to amuse, inform, inspire, and enlighten. You can read many excerpts from EOP at Tommy's website: www.tommyangelo.com. And you can order personally inscribed copies there. Elements of Poker is also available at amazon.com.