The GameMaster's Poker
School
Lesson 12 - Small Blind MathI fully realize that
using the word "math" in the title of an article isn't
necessarily the best way to get a lot of people to read it, but
for the serious Hold 'em player, such articles are downright
crucial if you want to optimize your profits from the game. Uh,
oh..."mathematics" and "optimize" together in the same
sentence. Okay, I promise it's really very simple, as was my
premise for writing this lesson. I've already covered the basic
math of the Small Blind (SB) bet in Lesson 6 by showing you
which hands are worth playing from a profits point of view, but
that listing is based upon averages and, while averages are
fine for the "average" player (pun absolutely intended),
neither you nor I are average players. What sent me off on this
tangent was seeing so many players just calling the Big Blind
(BB) bet, so by the time the bet came around to me in the SB, I
might have to bet only another $5 (in a $10/$20 game) to see
the flop when the pot was $45 or more. (With me on this? The
Big Blind put up $10, I put up $5 in the Small Blind and if
three other players "limp" by betting $10 each, the pot would
be $45 when the bet got to me, assuming the BB limps also.) You
need to remember that my $5 SB bet is no longer mine; if I fold
it's gone. But if I do complete the bet, I'm getting 9 to 1
"pot odds", which is very healthy, but again, I'm assuming the
BB does not raise. If the BB does raise, the pot odds may not
be so favorable and folding may be the only proper
play.
Is a 9
to 1 return on investment healthy enough to play some of the
lousy hands we all seem to get when we're in the blinds? That
was the question I wanted to
answer. In
my Limit Hold 'em Basic Strategy Matrix (see Lesson 11),
I list the hands that should or should not be played from
the SB, depending upon whether or not there's been a
raise, etc. But, as I mentioned earlier, that's all based
upon averages - more of a situation where 3 players or
less limp into the pot, or someone raises ahead of you -
rather than a situation where 4 or 5 or even more players
just limp. Of course, just because a player limps into a
pot, that doesn't necessarily mean they're holding a
lousy hand. In fact, it's been my experience that many
players will limp with A-K or even A-A in limit games
because they don't want to scare out the other players
before the flop. (Those are also the same people who
moan, "I never win with Aces", after someone with 7-4o
draws out on them, something we want to do if the math
makes sense.)
So,
with all of this in mind, I began analyzing various scenarios.
Needless to say, I couldn't cover every possible combination of
hands one could be against with 4 or more players, but I could
make some "worst-case" calculations that seem to make
sense. For
example, 7-2 offsuit is frequently called "the worst hand in
poker", which isn't completely accurate. It may be the worst
hand pre-flop, but if the flop comes 7,2,2, you're in pretty
good shape, don't you think? True, that's not going to happen
very often, plus it's impossible to flop either a Straight or
Flush with 7-2o, so it's pretty fair to say 7-2o sucks as a
starting hand. But, we do know that 7-2o can win - sometimes -
so what kind of pot odds are needed to make betting on it
profitable? I'll spare you the suspense; it's much higher than
the 9 to 1 odds that I'm talking about here - more like 20 to 1
against four other hands that your opponents might limp with.
At least now you know.
The
calculations for this lesson were performed on a fantastic
piece of freeware called "Poker Stove", which I've written
about before. It's available at no cost or obligation (or ads
or spy-ware) here: http://www.pokerstove.com/
This program evaluates the "equity" a
hand has in the pot. You see, there are two ways to measure
the strength of a hand, preflop: pot equity and percentage
of wins. They're actually quite close to one another. For
example, A-A has a pot equity of 85.2% and a win percentage
of 84.9% when heads-up against a random starting hand. The
difference is explained by ties, where 50% of the pot is
gained when the hand is tied. For practical purposes, either
measurement will do, because ties don't hurt us. If you'd
like a listing of hands by equity and win percentage, go
here:
http://www.gocee.com/poker/he_ev_hand.html/
If you
watch the World Poker Tour series on the Travel Channel, you
might have heard Mike Sexton refer to Q-7 offsuit as the
"computer hand". That's because Q-7o is the average hand
one gets as their pocket cards. In this context, "average"
means that a Q-7 will win 50% of all the hands played heads up
versus any random hand your opponent may hold. Just to keep the
record straight, that's winning percentage; the hand that
produces a 50% pot equity return is J-5 suited. But I'm going
to use Q-7o as the "average" hand in my presentation to you
here, because if it's good enough for Mike Sexton, it's good
enough for me. I'll go into that more in a
bit.
The
primary information I want to convey to you is the probability
of various hands winning when they're playing against four
other hands - not random hands, but hands that players might
limp with. For
example, you might have 7-2o in the Small Blind, but it's not
likely that other player chose to limp in with that hand. Most
likely, you'll be up against hands like A-Ko, 3-3, Q-10s and so
forth. In the case of A-Ko, someone may be trying to get "cute"
by slow-playing it. In most cases, the other hands aren't worth
raising in early position, but people will limp in with them.
Now, 7-2o versus Q-10s is a loser, let's face it. But so is
drawing to an inside Straight a loser, unless you're getting
pot odds that make it a positive expectation play. As you saw
in Lesson 2, an inside Straight draw on the flop (with two
cards yet to come) converts to a Straight only 16.5% of the
time. So, unless the pot odds are giving you at least a 6x
return for your bet, you're in a negative expectation (-ev)
situation should you continue to play the hand. Naturally, you
might hit the inside Straight if you play it, regardless of the
pot odds, but over a long period of time it's costing you $$$
to make that call. And "long-term" is the only way to approach
this game.
That
being the case, there are some "long-term" situations that
should be called when you have huge pot odds available to your
SB bet. By "huge", I basically mean the 9 to 1 odds that you'll
get with 4 limpers into a pot. In the SB portion of my Limit Hold 'em
Basic Strategy Matrix, there's a category of hands called
"Complete Only". These are hands where you should invest only
the additional 50% of the SB bet; in other words, fold them to
a raise. In the case of an Ace hand, the minimum is A-8 offsuit
and the math behind it assumes an "average" pot. But what if
there's no raise and four limpers have entered the pot - which
is now above average - would it be worthwhile to complete with
a hand like A-6o, for example? If we are receiving 9 to 1 odds
on our bet, we need a 9 to 1 shot at winning the hand to break
even, which is a 10% probability.
Now
all we need to do is compare some of the hands that are lower
than the "Complete Only" category with a sampling of
limping-type hands to see if any of them have a 10% pot equity
on a pre-flop basis. Naturally we have to do this on a
pre-flop basis, because once the 3 flop cards hit the felt, our
percentages have changed and you might have to check and fold,
or you might want to raise; it all depends upon how hard the
flop hit you. However, on average (I hate to use that
expression here, but it applies), if your hand has an equity of
10% or more, it's worthwhile to complete the blind. To continue
with the example above, I compared the equity of A-6o against
A-Ko, A-7s, 3-3 and Q-10s, all fairly typical "limping" hands
your opponents might hold. The calculations produced by Poker
Stove show that an A-6o has equity of 9% in that
situation.
Just
so you know exactly what that means, if you were to go all-in
against the other four hands and they went all-in as well
(admittedly a very unlikely situation) and if all five hands
were played out to the river, you'd win 9% of the
time. Well, that's
not 10%, so my chart will show you that completing the SB bet
with A-6 is a bad bet. But, with the propensity of players to
call with Ace-anything in low-limit games, you also now know
that you'll be up against such hands fairly often when you're
hopefully holding one of the SB hands I do recommend you
complete with, as is shown in my Limit Hold 'em Basic Strategy
Matrix. As a verification, the lowest Complete Only
Ace-whatever offsuit hand is A-8o and Poker Stove shows that
with an equity of exactly 10%. Now, understand that rounding
and what cards of which suit are in the other hands can affect
the equity percentage, so what you'll see is really an
approximation, but it's close. If you want to tighten up your
play, then go with hands that have an equity of 11 or 12%. On
the other hand, playing hands with an equity of 8 or 9% might
be worthwhile, if you're really good at playing after the flop.
Very likely, you'll need to be a good bluffer in such
situations, but some people are, so go for it if it works for
you.
Before
we get into the chart, let me explain exactly what you'll see.
It's on an Excel worksheet, so if you have any problems reading
it here, email me and I'll send you a
copy. In the left
column, you'll see four hands that represent the holdings of
your opponents - the limpers. In the top row, I put in a series
of hands you might hold in the SB and they're hands that are
"outside" the Complete Only hands shown in my Limit Hold 'em
Basic Strategy Matrix. The percentage equity of the SB hand is
shown in the row labeled "%". The equity of the other hands is
shown below that and, of course, they add up to 100%. So, for
your hand of A-6o in the SB, the equity is 9%; the equity for
the player with A-Ko is 22%, it's 15% for A-7s, 21% for 3-3 and
33% for Q-10. Please remember that this is pre-flop equity, so
don't get confused when people talk about hands like A-Ko being
a "coin-flip" against a pair like 3-3, because that's only when
those two hands are heads up against each other. Also, don't
forget that you can toss this chart away once the flop comes,
because then a different set of equity percentages will
apply.
Here's the chart...
Small Blind
Percentages vs. 4 Limpers
Because of all the possible permutations of
starting hands for you in the SB and the possible hands your
opponents may hold, this chart is not an absolute chart, like
the others I've shown you. It's not really practical to use this
chart while playing, other than to alert you to the fact that
you might have a real loser, even though there were four
limpers into the pot. As an example, look at the calculations
for 7-2o, which we already agree is a terrible hand. Its equity
is just 5%, which would require 20 to 1 pot odds. That's not
going to happen with four limpers; hell, it won't happen if
everyone limps in! But at least now you'll have some sort of
guide for hands to play when there are a lot of limpers and,
even more importantly, what hands not to play, regardless of
the number of limpers. And, there's nothing to stop you from
making your own version of this chart, now that you understand
the thinking behind it.
Wow, this
is a long article; much longer than I ever intended, but I
think it might help all of us to squeeze a few extra $$$ out of
the game and what's wrong with that?
I'll see
you here next time.
|