Player's Stories

Short Handed Poker: The Scary Small Blind (Part I)
By Jason Pohl

In this article, we will begin to tackle the dangerous decisions one has to make in the small blind, specifically when facing a habitual blind stealer. Playing a small blind combines all the critical factors of big blind play: frequency of the opposing player's raises, pot odds offered, skill of the opposing player, value of position, and need for aggression preflop. The small blind also faces one unique obstacle: the precarious arrangement between the button and big blind.

Frequency of Raises and Skill of Opponent (Button)
In all our past examples, we have assumed the button raises 100% of the time. We will continue that assumption in this article for the sake of simplicity. In addition, we will assume an equal and average opponent on the button. The main interests of this article will be pot odds and the effect of being squeezed between the button and big blind.

Pot Odds
Of course, a dramatic and critical difference between small and big blind defense surrounds the amount required to call.

3-handed $3/6 game. Blinds $1/$3
Big Blind: $10 in pot. $3 to call. 10:3 odds = 3.33:1
Small Blind: $10 in pot. $5 to call. 10:5 odds = 2:1

3-handed $5/10 game. Blinds $2/5
Big Blind: $17 in pot. $5 to call. 17:5 odds = 3.4:1
Small Blind $17 in pot. $8 to call. 17:8 odds = 2.125:1

3-handed $10/20 game. Blinds $5/10
Big Blind: $35 in pot. $10 to call. 35:10 odds = 3.5:1
Small Blind: $35 in pot. $15 to call. 35:15 odds = 2.33:1

If pot odds were our only consideration, we could look at these numbers alone to determine what fraction of hands to play in the small blind. For example, we showed in the past article that ~45% of hands could be called in the big blind after the small blind folded if the button was a habitual blind stealer raising 100% of the time. By comparing the ratios, we could determine the correct number of calling hands in the small blind. Here's one way of crunching the numbers.

Small Blind Pot Odds/Big Blind Pot Odds
$3/6-- 2:1 odds / 3.33:1 odds = 60%
$5/10-- 2.125:1 odds/ 3.4:1 odds = 62.5%
$10/20-- 2.33:1 odds/ 3.5:1 odds = 66.6%

In other words, if playing a $3/6 game, assuming all other things equal, the pot odds indicate calling only 60% what you would normally call in the big blind. If you would call or reraise with 45% of your hands in the big blind against a given opponent, you should call or reraise only the best 27% of hands from the small blind.

Fearing the Unknown: The Live Big Blind
If we knew the big blind would fold, the play of the small blind would not be all that complicated after all. We could calculate pot odds and come up with a simple list of the best hands to play. However, the looming big blind complicates matters. First, the big blind may reraise, affecting the odds for a marginal small blind hand. Second, if the big blind plays, the game shifts from heads-up on the flop to multiway, forcing the small blind to hold stronger hands to continue on the flop.

The disadvantage of multiway action for an out-of-position player is increased for all scenarios. To really examine the small blind effectively, we must compare heads-up to multiway games in three separate circumstances: when the small blind is leading after the flop, when the small blind has a drawing hand after the flop, and when the small blind has a bluffing hand.

It is easiest to begin with bluffs, since the math is straightforward. Let's compare heads-up and 3-handed games on the flop.

Scenario 1: Bluffing
Example 1.
$10/20 game. Button raises and Small Blind calls. Big Blind folds.
$50 in pot. Bluff of $10 on flop.

With $50 in the pot, the small blind very often has sufficient odds to bluff or semibluff. It will be hard for the big blind to call with no pair/no draw. Even a checkraise bluff against a flop bettor would only need to be successful one in four times. Therefore, the bluff is a strong and valuable play against one opponent.

A. Button calls 33% of time.
(1 in 3 bluffs failed = -$10) (2 in 3 bluffs successful = +$50);
+$90/3 hands; EV = +$30/bluff

B. Button calls 50% of time.
(1 in 2 bluffs failed = -$10) (1 in 2 bluffs successful = +$50);
+$40/2 hands; EV = +$20/bluff

C. Button call 75% of time.
(3 in 4 bluffs failed = -$10) (1 in 4 bluffs successful = +$50);
+$20/4 hands; EV = +$5/bluff

D. Button calls 90% of time.
(9 in 10 bluffs failed = -$10) (1 in 10 bluffs successful = +$50);
-$40/10 hands; EV = -$4/bluff

Example 2.
$10/20 game. Button raises and Small Blind calls. Big Blind calls.
$60 in pot. Bluff of $10 on flop.

It might seem that the extra money in the pot would be good for the small blind's bluff potential, but this is not the case. The problem is that a bluff must knock out both players to earn an immediate profit. The odds of stealing a pot against two opponents is significantly decreased, reducing the overall EV of a bluff play. The odds of each player calling is not quite cumulative. For example, if each opponent called 1 out of 2 times, that does not mean there would be a call 100% of the time with two opponents. Instead, 25% of the time both opponents will call, 25% of the time neither opponents will call, and 50% of the time only one opponent would call.

A. Each player calls 33% of time.
(5 in 9 bluffs failed = -$10) (4 in 9 bluffs successful = +$60);
+$190/9 hands; EV = +$21.11/bluff

B. Each player calls 50% of time.
(3 in 4 bluffs failed = -$10) (1 in 4 bluffs successful = +$60);
+$30/4 hands; EV = +$7.5/bluff

C. Each player call 75% of time.
(15 in 16 bluffs failed = -$10) (1 in 16 bluffs successful = +$60);
-$90/16 hands; EV = -$5.62/bluff

D. Each player calls 90% of time.
(99 in 100 bluffs failed = -$10) (1 in 100 bluffs successful = +$60);
-$930/100 hands; EV = -$9.30/bluff

Without the ability to bluff profitably, the small blind has lost an important weapon.

Scenario 2: Drawing Hand/Semibluffing
Semibluffing faces similar concerns. In each example above, we assumed that the small blind had no chance of winning if called. If that bluff was converted to a semibluff with a 20% chance of winning even if called, the EV would be considerably increased, but the heads-up scenario will still be superior to a multiway contest. (In the calculations below, I have assumed a 2 BB earn on the turn/river if a suckout is successful.)

Example 3.
$10/20 game. Button raises and Small Blind calls. Big Blind folds.
$50 in pot. Semibluff of $10 on flop with 10% chance of suckout.
Button calls 50% of time.
(9 in 20 failed = -$10) (10 in 20 successful = +$50) (1 in 20 suckout = +90);
+$500/20 hands; EV = +$25/semibluff (compared to EV of $20/pure bluff)

Example 4.
$10/20 game. Button raises and Small Blind calls. Big Blind calls.
$60 in pot. Semibluff of $10 on flop with 20% chance of suckout.
B. Each player calls 50% of time.
(27 in 40 failed = -$10) (10 in 40 successful = +$60); (3 in 40 suckout = +$100)
+$630/40 hands; EV = +$15.75/bluff (compared to EV of $7.5/pure bluff)

Conclusion
In conclusion, it is clear that bluffs and semibluffs are far more successful against only one opponent. In fact, the increased EV from bluffs and semibluffs is worth as much as the cost of a reraise preflop if the opponent is relatively tight post-flop. So far, the evidence seems to suggest reraising rather than calling in the small blind. But, there is more information to consider.

Ultimately, the question we must examine is: "Will the increase in success be worth the $10 increase before seeing the flop?" In the next article, we'll try to answer this question by reviewing the advantage/disadvantage of heads-up/multiway action when the small blind holds a strong hand. Then, we can simply compare the scenarios (bluffs, drawing hands, and made hands) to try to calculate the best play.

Hopefully, it'll all come together neatly. Until next article, if you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email me at jason@pokerpages.com.