I am in the big blind with 54s and probably playing awkwardly tight.

Tight player UTG + 1 limps, A very aggressive player raises button and I call in BB with 5s4s

flop comes Ac 5c 6s

I check, EP check, Button bets ...

I need help in general on BB defense. I have a strong suspicion that I don't defend enough hands and don't really play correctly postflop when i do. After the session I pieced together more information about our button villian. While he was above average as far as aggression and well above average in raising pre-flop he would not continue far into the had if he completely missed the flop. He'd often raise preflop but "silently step off the stage" if others showed aggression post flop. I'm sure this read changes our flop decision but since I do need help defending blinds advice with and without the read is greatly appreciated.

Well, in this situation, there are actually arguments for calling or x/raising. But you have to start by putting your opponents on a range and formulating a hypothesis as to whether you have fold equity in this situation.

c/c always in this spot vs these players

Ya ... Calling is the way to go. I woulda called hoping he wouldve checked back the turn or that we improve enough to peel one more and that he checks back the river with his KJ high and take her down.

That's all the rope I need to ramble. Here I think you have a weak bluffcatcher. I don't give an 8/16 player credit for having a balanced checking range. If I did then I'd consider this hand a draw and I'd probably be check folding a lot of turns after calling the flop. Since I don't give him this credit, I'd check raise Q6+ without a better read on ep. If ep likes to check raise I'd tighten up to A7.

If the action goes ep check raise, button 3 bet I fold. If it's just one back to me I call. If ep just calls I check call turn blanks and cards that improve my draw with a gutshot or better. Check raise improvement but don't go crazy with weak trips.

On the river If I'm sitting there with an unimproved pair then I probably check fold unless the turn and river were something like 66, or A6(but then it wouldn't be unimproved, meh).

These spots are very player dependent. If the aggressive player is raising a wide range here then I like a c/r. Figure the tight limper has a smaller pocket pair that we want him to fold, and the aggro player may lay down a hand that beats you on the turn - or lays down a hand that could catch a river on you if you call/check turn.

Even HU I like a c/r. Aggro players typically bet HU when checked to, and if you just call the flop what do you do on the turn?

If you defended with an Ace in the same situation I prefer a check/call as you're often ahead and better to let him barrel.

garden city young guy with a giants hat?

hes folding that hand anwyay if we c/c. the only better hands a tight player has in this spot that we can incorrectly force folds is something like 67s which is a really small part of his range.

It's hard to give a few pointers for this. You are effectively asking how to play well in wide range spots. Chapters and entire books are written on this.

It's the skill least depeloped of live low limit players because of the nature of those games but a critical one online, as you start to move up live or face tough opposition. I'd recommend searching through the DC library for online short games or HU videos.

IMO, this part of the game is tough but a lot of fun. A tough 2/4 or 3/6 limit online game provides a great opportunity to practice this.

start out by counting the pot and figuring out what price you're getting and roughly how many outs you have to improve

Sorry - not ignoring my own thread and all your kind responses. Just trying to get some calculations of my own done before replying and that always takes more time than expected. I do appreciate your responses because I read descriptions like "blinds play soft", "blinds under defend", etc and I get the feeling that means c/r here. But our hand plays poorly so raising also feels like spew and how i feel after hands like this is always results orientated.

Yeah, i guess it always starts there. So we have 3 (two pair) + 2 (set) + 2 backdoor draws. Pot is, what, 8-1, 9-1 or 12-2 depending on what ep does. I should not hide the fact that I never thought about how EP changes our decision here.

Ahh, that fun exercise. I played around with ranges a little bit and the first thing you see is that against a range of all pairs, Ax & suited/unsuited broadway type hands we don't have 50% equity. ( again, its a mistake but i'm really only concentrating on villian). But the part that i find difficult about this hand is that hot/cold equity seems a little misdirected. I also thought that maybe while we are <50% equity we might still be better than 50% of his hands but that's not true either

Giving him ~30% (him 22+, A2o+, A2s+, K9s+, QTs+, JTs+)
Aces, higher pairs & sets is ~20 % so his air is only 1/3 of his range? Wow - powerful ace.

In the end, I guess despite possibly giving him a free card


...

That's a very good description.


No - not GC. Villain wasn't wearing hat either.

IMO, you are probably playing better than you think you are out of the blinds. I question why you felt this was a good spot to defend your blind given that a "tight player" has made an early position raise? I mean, this tells you to muck.

As far as blind defense goes, I'd much rather take 3 to the face with small suited connectors against more players than call a raise from a tight EP player with only one other person along for the ride. This is a spot to fold your blind.

What are you hoping to accomplish by defending here? I would make a list of all the reasons to defend your blind (e.g., to win a big pot where I have a great deal of deception value, to prevent aggro's from running over me, to play more large multi-way pots, etc.), and then define what your own ranges are for each scenario. Are you calling with K-5 suited in this spot? (If no, you definitely need to be mucking the 4-5 suited!) What about when there are 3 callers ahead of you? 4 callers? 5? These are the scenarios to work out, IMO...

A lot of the results should be dependent on game conditions and, therefore will change session-to-session, game-to-game, hand-to-hand; but, generally, the correct percentage of time to defend your blind should correlate to your style of play (i.e., LAG or TAG). Don't be a good TAG and then spew from the blinds--this is terrible! But a successful LAG also can't fold too many hands out of the blinds, either. So generate your own balance based on your list of reasons to defend, the scenarios which trigger the reasons, along with game conditions and your own style of play. (So really, no one correct answer to your OP, IMO...)

I think this is a good point. Lags get paid off more so they can defend more hands for a profit, but tags have a tighter image and get paid off less. The implied odds out of the blinds are not enough to play many hands for a profit that would be profitable for a lag.

The correct percentage should correlate with the villain's style of play. If the villain is only raising 10% from the button, you shouldn't be defending a whole lot, even if you're a LAG.