Let's say you are in SB and there's X limpers in front and you have a hand in a certain range (let's define it in %). I'm wondering what minimum number of limpers and what minimum strength hand do you need to profitably complete the small blind? (of course this assumes BB won't raise).

Example: You have Q7o in SB. 5 limpers in front. Do you complete??????

I'm trying to come up with some sort of a guideline.

It depends.

But no really, it depends.

How good are you post flop? Do you feel comfortable hand reading?
How face up are your villains?
How many of them are set mining? How many of them are fit or fold? Or many of them are aggressive tags who will give you trouble later on?
How many of them will turn their hands into bluffs and make you feel icky inside when you flop bottom two pair?

It's going to be hard to give a completing range from the SB because there are just so many factors that we can't really quantify ITT.

But in general, play hands that can make the nuts. Play hands that have good potential to cooler someone else. Play hands that are not likely to be ROI against the limping ranges of the people that limping in front of you.

Profit.

Generally I think completing the sb at a high% is a leak.

Premiums we are bringing in for a raise without question.

With small PPs and SC im completing but anything else is getting ditched.

With your Q7o your like 22-1 to flop 2p+

Just dump the hand, what are you really accomplishing?

Agreed with the "it depends" reply, but I can absolutely say that Q7 is a fold. With a bunch of limpers, I may toss in the extra 3 with something like 7-8 or better just to see if you can hit your miracle flop, but in general, the "eh its 3 more dollars why not" mindset is going to lose you a lot of money in the long run

How much of a leak is it really? Assuming 3 SB's per hour, there's a raise 50% of the time, you should complete the SB with at least 20% of hands (? seems reasonable estimate to me)...someone who always completes the SB is putting in an extra 3*.5 - 3*.5*.2 = $1.2/hr at 1/2. And that's not gonna be entirely -$1.2 in EV, assuming your postflop play is +EV.

Besides the obvious hands, anything suited or connected is a candidate for me to limp if stacks are deep enough and the right opponents (maybe that's a leak?? idk). One of my favorite situations is limping with a trash suited hand, leading a flopped FD and getting raised. No one plays their draws this aggressively at LLSNL, your trash hand is now a monster. I'm sure there are other examples, but my point is in certain situations, opponents ranges can become so narrow that trash hands become monsters

Live can get pretty boring, so you probably shouldn't fold any small blind outside of the paint/rag offsuit variety.

It depends...

I think it's a leak too. Going to a bloated flop with as good as AQo is a disaster oop.

The only thing it depends on is how much you hate money. As a general rule, VP$IP from SB is -ev. Don't think of folding as giving up half equity in the pot, think of it as money gained by not contributing to a spot where you'll almost always whiff and check/fold, or worse, flop some marginal hand and check/chase oop. So if you've got to ask yourself if there's some justification for completing, the answer is almost always "just fold". Or should be. Unless you hate money.

with hands that play well in multiway pots , anything connected/suited i'll call

but really what are you hoping to have happen if you complete with hands like Q2o , J4o , etc.. i dont care if everyone limped and you are getting 20:1, hands with no connectivity that are unsuited , you basically have to flop a freaking boat to feel good about getting money in , so what is the point? Not to mention you are in the worst position and you have to donk into several people if you flop top pair, your hand is faceup, and you can get manipulated to no end.

example that just happened to me tonight --

i complete in SB in limped multiway pot with 32o ... flop 9 3 2 r.. oh crap, i flopped 2 pair. I donk into 5 people aroun 2/3 pot, and i get min raised. I almost fold 2 pair here.. how can i fold? basically 1 hand beats me. I call the min raise, everyone else folded its hu.

turn comes 2.. i *check* .. i have a freaking boat and i dont even want to continue here. villain checks behind.

river 8 ... i bet out here for like 20bb , and get min raised again.. now, i shouldve probably folded the river min raise here.. i couldve even folded the flop .. i call and she has 99 and i lose a pretty good size pot. This all leads back to completing in the SB..

Get flopzilla. Google it up. It gives you an idea of how often you flop top pair, flush draw, straight draw, etc.

You might be surprised for example how infrequently you flop a flush draw when you start with suited cards.

Iirc there's about a 1% likelihood of flopping a flush. So if you are in SB with Ac6c, it's ok to complete if you are sure villain will call your $300 cbet.

You are about 4% to get a flush draw. Now, your preflop pot odds mean nothing, because you have now put yourself in the unenviable position of check/calling from out of position. That $3 you saved a minute ago isn't going to help you much when you're facing a 2/3-psb for your draw.

Here's the problem with being a showdown monkey: we are all playing with the same deck of cards. Over time, I'm going to flop the nut flush just as often as you are. Given that fact, how on earth do you plan to get all my money?

Interesting discussion. Some people will complete any suited cards and any connectors and some think it's a leak. Can we settle this somehow?

Settle the debate? Here, in this forum?

No.

Can we look at huge hand history databases from winning players, at full ring games, where they have an edge, and look and see that even they are losing players from the blinds, and see that it's pretty likely that most hands we play are going to be -EV from the blinds?

Yes.

It's a good question to ask, as it means that we are taking an objective look at our game. We are looking for situations where we can make more money or loss less money. (The same result on our win rate.) But it doesn't mean that we can prove with a certainty what will be profitable to play from the SB completing.

Like most everyone said, it depends. There is no guideline.

These are key variables to consider:

- Table dynamics: Are there targets at the table? Are there loose/passive calling stations paying off light and playing straight forward? Is there a maniac who will do the betting for you with a very wide range? In a 6+ way mutli-way pot in this game, you'll almost 100% be playing for value, so it's important to consider how much value you can get vs. villains.

- Pot odds: In the OP hand, pot is effectively $32 (assuming BB checks), and it costs you $3 to call. You're getting > 10:1. In general, I'm basically calling with ATC getting > 10:1. The odds are probably the main variable when completing from the SB. Generally, it's very true that you do NOT want to play many hands from the SB. You should be folding a ton. But as the odds get better and better, you should have a growing willingness to stick around with a wider and wider range of hands.

- Stack sizes: Starting with the direct odds calculations above, the deeper people are, the more you want to call. The direct odds of > 10:1 in this hand tell part of the story, and deeper stacks suggest better implied odds, allowing you to call with worse direct odds on average. They also suggest reverse implied odds, so obviously you can't blindly stack off. Of course, in general, as a skilled player, you will benefit more from the promise of IO and lose less from the threat of RIO than your opponents. The more straight forward the villains (e.g. loose/passive), the easier that will be for you, but either way, people tend to play straight forward in large multi-way pots.

- Image: If you're folding from the SB getting > 10:1, even the least observant player will think you are a world class nit. In a game where value betting predominates, this isn't the best image to cultivate. People will also generally be less likely to give you action.

- BB: Is he extremely aggressive, maniac-like, and raising a significant % of limped pots? Then you might want to limp to induce with a narrow value range and fold everything else. Whether he's aggressive or not, when you look left, can you get a read if he might plan a raise? Watch his hands, watch his body language, etc. If you pick up a tell he's raising, only get involved with your value range. The point is you don't close action, so think about that.

Again, there is no guideline - only variables to consider.

What variables did I miss?

I think this is very wrong for this live 2/5 game.

You're a better player. You're going to value bet more effectively with more optimal sizing, you will make better folds, you will have better reads on your opponents, you will have a better estimate of your fold equity and pot equity vs. ranges and make far more profitable decisions especially on later streets, you will value bet and raise more effectively especially on the river, which many villains cannot, and you will do so more thinly (which, at this game, tends to be pretty fat), you will put opponents on ranges, you will consider your opponents' likely actions with those ranges, you will consider how or more likely IF opponents view you and your range, etc., etc., etc.

I mean, yes, everyone gets dealt the same cards in the same positions with the same frequencies. That's the math behind a shuffled deck of cards. But you're the better player and will play at a higher level than your opponents. The question you're posing totally dismisses your edges.

I mean, the logic underlying your question suggests a wholesale rejection of the entirety of all the time and energy you have invested in reading, discussing, posting and thinking about poker strategy. Of course you're not going to play just like the worse players you're targeting!

In fact, here's a good illustration. Compare and contrast these situations:

YOU playing from SB with a speculative hand:
You're in SB, it's 5 way limped pot, and you have a good reads/sense both visual and player specific that BB is very likely to check behind. UTG+1 is a total calling station who literally calls down with every piece of the board, and you cover him. Against him, you can bet/bet/shove with second pair.

MP is a nit, and if sticks around, you need to slow down with middling value hands, but if the turn and river come out very scary for a good % of V's likely range, he can fold to aggression, so that's an option available to you some %.

CO is a total maniac, and very aggressive when he senses weakness. If you flop much of a hand at all, you're going to give him tons of rope and he will take it.

All the other players are fit or fold types with mostly passive tendencies, and you expect people to play very straightforward in multi-way pots. You can value bet/fold fairly wide against the field and get folds on certain run-outs in certain situations.

AVERAGE VILLAIN playing from SB with a speculative hand:
Oooo, cards!

Did I answer your question?

Willyoman did a good job of touching in on this, but I think it deserves repeating.

I'll give a real life example from just yesterday!

I raise from UG with KQs to $13 I get two callers.

Flop ($35) Q73
Hero bets $25
Both villains call

Turn ($110) K
Hero checks
Both villains check

River ($110) 3
Hero bets $50
Both villains call

Hero shows top two pair.
V1 says, 'I've got that beat.' and shows AJ
V2 says 'Thank god, I thought you had pocket kings when you bet the river and shows QQ!
V1 then says something to the effect of 'Thanks for taking it easy on me, I would have called all in.' (For another $250 - $300, and I believe him.)

Can you image a world in which you are playing this hand, with either of their hands when somehow more money doesn't go into the pot?

V1 turns the nut flush, and a royal draw, and he just checks the turn. He puts every penny of his money in when he's losing. Never puts a penny in when he actually has the best hand. Gotta slow play the nuts there boys!
V2 flops top set on a draw heavy board and just calls the flop, and flats the river with the second nuts! (Checking behind on the turn is debateable, but I'd never find my self in his shoes, so I don't know what I'd do.)

So, yes, we all get dealt the same random distribution of cards. Yes we all hit nut flushes at the same rate. We all flop sets at the same rate. But how much money do we get in when we are winning? And how much money do we stop our self from losing when we are behind. This what separates us from people who do not crush the game.

You win all of a players money by getting an extra $1, or $5, or $50 out of hand that someone else wouldn't. By only losing half your stack set over set, or raising the river with the second nuts because you understand that the way the hand played out, the villain never has the nuts. Or anything else where you are playing each iteration of that specific hand better than your villain.

Know that you can raise to $30 in a 1/2 game because the whale station at the table will call anything you bet. Where as your opponents might only raise to $10, because that's what they always do.

why isn't hero betting the turn?

I was pretty sure that I wasn't winning when two people called?
Figured one of them had a flush draw.

interesting. i wouldn't have assumed that. of course its a possibility, but id assume lots of pair hands. lots of draw hands. would rather get value from single flush cards. etc.

i would have bet for value. still working on hand reading skills.

Oh I agree completely. (Plus I know you guys are smarter than I am!).

Here's how I look at it.

There are a number of opportunities for asymmetry:
1. Careful observation of opponents range and tendencies.
2. More skillful bet sizing
3. Better understanding of game dynamics (math, psychology)
4. Better use of position
5. Perhaps most important, information asymmetry.

Playing speculative hands out of the small blind in the hope if flopping a monster isn't consistent with most of these, with the exception of bet sizing skill, which is very important.

My thing is, I think it's the wrong question. The modest discount is insignificant compared with the penalty associated with playing speculative hands out of position.

I think the simple answer should be, "You should actually play way tighter in the SB."

Not to belabor the point but... Oh heck, I'll belabor it.

I see three questions.

1. There is a common perception that the small blind should be played frequently because of the discount. I disagree because I feel the discount is insufficient to compensate for the cost of playing out of position.
2. Next question is, when if ever is is good to limp speculative hands from early position. I have no idea but I greatly appreciate the discussion.
3. Third question is, what about implied odds? Even if I'm right that you need 100:1 odds, surely it will be easier to collect $300 if we flop a monster from the small blind, than to collect $500 if we hit from UTG.

The only problem I have with the third is the lack of asymmetry. That's precisely what the fish are doing.

i treat sb and bb the same as utg in llsnl. you have the worst position and so i either fold or come in guns blazing with the top 10% of hands

But, at any rate:

Starting with A7s, you need 111:1 if you're looking for a flush or better. If you're content to flop trips, you only need 28:1.

Starting with 67s, you need 53:1 if you're looking for a straight or better. If you're cool with trips, 22:1.

Those are break-even values, with no allowance for coolers or for people not paying you off.

LOL

Yeah but they're saying you're not going to flop the best hand even 9% of the time with Q7o and definitely not with worse.

True, lol. Has happened to me often. Now and then some fish would even give me an all-meaningful look and say: "THAT bad, eh?"

How are you getting these numbers?