Villain has been raising preflop 10% of the time, VP$IP 25%, both about average for the table.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $5.00+$0.50 Tournament, 100/200 Blinds 25 Ante (7 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com



CO (t7780)
Button (t5830)
SB (t3270)
Hero (BB) (t6315)
UTG (t3065)
MP1 (t6720)
MP2 (t7520)

Hero's M: 13.29

Preflop: Hero is BB with 9, Q
1 fold, MP1 raises to t600, 4 folds, Hero calls t400

Flop: (t1475) 3, 9, 7 (2 players)
Hero...?

This is a call I wouldn't have made until this summer. I read Gus Hansen's book, and he is a big believer in defending HU in the BB when you have 2-1 "unless you are sure you are dominated". It has worked out pretty well overall, I'd say; and this is the kind of hand you look for when playing this sort of style (well, you look to flop even bigger if possible, but hitting top pair with a decent kicker is as well as you usually do). Problem here is I'm against someone who outchips me (Gus was the big stack throughout most of his book); and of course we're near the bubble and I have a good chance of finishing in the money if I play it conservatively.

That said, here we are and we have top pair, so what now?

Checking the flop is dangerous because of the potential for him to check behind.

Leading out 2/3 is pretty solid. Check-raising is also solid, but that would be player dependent on how much i have observed him CBing. If he's fired pretty consistently, I may check to build the pot and induce a bet from a hand worse than mine.

As a side note, I read Gus's book too, and he wasn't doing a lot of his defending with an M of 13. He was also ramping up by stealing so many blinds once the antes kicked in that he didn't even bother defending his blind in most instances.

I'd fold pf, as played bet about 975 then re-eval. Can be some tough re-evaulations though - such as if he reraises here - which is why I fold preflop.

That's something I was thinking about, that I may be at times applying the pot odds blind defending idea where it is not appropriate (in shorter stacked situations). HoH actually has something on this too--I just saw it the other day though I can't find it now. Harrington talks about a situation where you have something trashy like J5o in the BB with Ms getting lowish, and someone minraises. He writes something like "Seen purely as a pot odds problem, this is a reasonable call" but goes on to point out that speculative plays like that are not as wise when you need to conserve your chips for a big move.

The hand you are talking about is from HOH2, and he uses Q6 as the example. Although he doesnt go into details, there is a lot of reverse implied odds with a hand that weak (hitting a queen is hard, and doesnt guarantee you the hand.. what if you hit bottom pair, etc..) Your calling off an extra BB without a clear idea of what the hand will entail: do you need to hit your hand? If you hit your hand will he have anything to pay you off with?

Online, a min-raise is especially troublesome cuz anyone stealing usually puts in at least 2.5x BB, especially from late positions like CO/BTN/SB... You are pretty dead against higher eschelon hands, and a re-steal is far better against the SB in those scenarios. The Stop and Go more effective vs. CO and BTN.. But re-steal and stop and gos are both semi-bluffs or bluffs.. And as we know, the key element to bluffing/semi-bluffing is to have outs in case you get called.. With a hand Like Q6 or Q9, that's really isn't the case.

If you play a lot of limit poker (god knows i do), the importance of aggression and having control of a hand is paramount to success and profitable situations. While no limit is a much more slippery slope, the more realistic the chance of you winning without showdown/resistance, the better your results will be.

And above all, if you call with Q9 and hit top pair, you're going the distance, end of story. That's another aspect of reverse implied odds. If you hit your hand: you are married to the pot.. Your opponent isn't. Winning the minimum or losing the maximum in most instances. And you gotta hit your hand for that privalege

Very wise. I assume you mean "with these stacks, if you hit top pair..." right? If I hit top pair when stacks are deeper, and villain wants to play for a big pot, I can still get away.

Anyway, that makes me feel more questionable about the preflop call (would it be better if villain were in a more obvious stealing seat?), but more sanguine about the fact that I did pretty much stay married to the pot. As you say, or imply, what was I calling preflop for if I hit top pair and then go away? So, that said, I'll just skip ahead a little faster than I ordinarily might and finish off the hand. I was fairly positive villain was going to c-bet, so I went for the check-raise, which (sigh) really pot-committed me (though as you say, I was kind of married to the pot, and figured a villain might well do the same thing with a lot of hands that I had beat):

*** FLOP *** [3s 9s 7c]
SlackerInc1: checks
mickbesac: bets 1200
SlackerInc1: raises 1600 to 2800
mickbesac: raises 3295 to 6095 and is all-in
SlackerInc1: calls 2890 and is all-in
Uncalled bet (405) returned to mickbesac
*** TURN *** [3s 9s 7c] [Ts]
*** RIVER *** [3s 9s 7c Ts] [Ks]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
SlackerInc1: shows [9c Qh] (a pair of Nines)
mickbesac: shows [Ad As] (a flush, Ace high)
mickbesac collected 12855 from pot

OTOH...

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $10+$1 Tournament, 25/50 Blinds (7 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com



UTG (t2155)
MP1 (t3510)
MP2 (t1355)
CO (t1200)
Button (t1290)
SB (t2750)
Hero (BB) (t1240)

Hero's M: 16.53

Preflop: Hero is BB with Q, 9
1 fold, MP1 raises to t150, 4 folds, Hero calls t100

Flop: (t325) 9, 5, 4 (2 players)
Hero checks, MP1 bets t250, Hero calls t250

Turn: (t825) 4 (2 players)
Hero checks, MP1 checks

River: (t825) 8 (2 players)
Hero bets t250, 1 fold

Total pot: t825

Results in white below:
Hero had Q, 9 (two pair, nines and fours).
Outcome: Hero won t825