Let's talk about HU play

[Apathy]

Heads up play, though rarely discussed in this forum is in my mind the second most important part of sng play.

Do people never post HU hands because they appear to be simple?

My thinking is that people make decisions in the HU game that they think are right and don't worry much about the results because they have always heard how much luck there is in late game that they must just be unlucky or on a bad streak

I would like to start discussion about the importance of proper playing HU in both the 8000 and 10000 chip party structures (I think they play a little differently.)

Things like, pf raise sizes at levels 6, 7, 8, and 9.

Hand selection

Image consideration

Reads on your opponent

Flop play

etc.

I have my own opinions on all of these topics and would love to get some conversation going on them. I consider myself one of the better HU players in the 50s but I make mistakes still (at least im noticing!).

Im making it my goal to start posting more HU hands on this forum for comment, maybe I will make a HU hand quiz when I have more time on my hands.

Thoughts? Comments?

[maldini]

dont you think the hard part about posting/discussing HU is that it is so dependant on the opponent?

my biggest leaks HU are getting too aggressive against bad players when the blinds dont dictate it as well as getting too tricky against good players.

what do you do when you limp with AJ or AQ looking to repop and he checks and you miss the board? if he leads out do you laydown?

[TruFloridaGator]

You can't make the same play on every hand. If it's someone who has been raising you out of blinds, then yeah, slow play AQ, but when the blinds get so high, you can't afford to slow play a non made hand. You waste an opportunity to take the blinds which are usually extremely crucial if you call he checks & you miss.

[maldini]

i hear you. i'm setting up a scenario though. if one limps looking to repop, what are folks inclinded to do if they miss and the opponent bets out?

[TruFloridaGator]

Well, if you haven't made him call a raise, you really have no read on his hand, so if he bets out, you fold. If checks then you could bet at.

[Phil Van Sexton]

With blinds so high, the answer to every HU question is "push". This doesn't really lead to a lot good discussion.

Even the best players only get heads-up 30% of the time, and then it's usually over in a few hands. Occasionally, you'll get into a drawn out battle with someone, in which case it's pretty player dependent. So calling it the "2nd most important" skill in SnGs seems a bit much to me.

A while back, I played about 100 heads-up tournaments at Stars to get my heads-up play up to par. I got more heads up practice doing this than I would have in 10000 SnGs.

[wiggs73]

Heads up from the small blind, I usually am in push-fold mode. From the big blind, I fold or check junk hands and push my fare share from there as well. I posted about this a while back and one of the few responses I got was that pretty much all the forum members do this.

Lately though I've been finishing 2nd about twice as much as first, so I've been considering trying to see a few more flops heads up. Looking at the actual hands though, I usually do start with the best hand, so I figure this trend should correct itself soon enough. Usually the blinds are so significant that if can push and win the BB several times you give yourself quite a chip lead anyway. And once you have a significant chip lead, the short stack's calling range has to widen, so you will often find yourself getting called with inferior hands.

Another advantage about this maniac mode is that you can push with great hands too and often the opponent will be sick of your pushes and call you with junk. Seems to me that this is the best way to play heads up with SNG structures. I'd be interested to hear others argue otherwise though.

[Apathy]

ok how about this.

I think with some (actually most) opponents its better to make all your raises a standard size that is not all in if you have more then 5 BBs, planning to *always* call the reraise.

[TheAmp]

I noticed that HU play on step 5 has much less all-ins, and much more 3BB raises than I would expect.

What are the advantages of each raise?

I think its important to understand the impications of these plays, and to know how and when to use them.

I have no idea, and would be happy to hear thoughts about this.

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
I noticed that HU play on step 5 has much less all-ins, and much more 3BB raises than I would expect.

What are the advantages of each raise?

I think its important to understand the impications of these plays, and to know how and when to use them.

I have no idea, and would be happy to hear thoughts about this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here are my thoughts on this topic:

When you raise less then all in you are left with more options on the hand but more importantly you loosen the playing standards of your opponent and put them to a tougher decision.

Now more then call or fold, your opponent now has 4 choices instead of two. (call, fold, raise, (how much to raise))

Heads up the blinds are high so you should take any edge you are given. This means against typical opponents you should work to get the money in even if you will only be a small favourite, you are more likely to do this by just raising small rather then all in.

Also against calling stations, raising small then pushing any flop will help you grind them down without much of a fight, they are underdogs to hit the flop.

It also introduces some flop play into the HU game which is another benefit to the better player who knows proper heads up flop play.

[TheAmp]

Thanks.

The downside of raising less than all-in is reduced folding equity.

Did you experiment each strategy on a large sample of SnG's?

[dfscott]

[ QUOTE ]
With blinds so high, the answer to every HU question is "push". This doesn't really lead to a lot good discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, shoot. I was hoping that this was my leak, because this is the way I play. But I suck at HU play -- only 9% of my ITM's are firsts.

[skipperbob]

HU in a Step 5 w/ roughly even chip count: My opponent says "Can we just play some poker?", I say "Sure"; so I min-raise at every opportunity & fold to all his re-raises. That is until he comes back at me when I have AK...BoinK

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
But I suck at HU play -- only 9% of my ITM's are firsts.

[/ QUOTE ]

The best way to win heads up is to start with a big chip lead. Once you get ITM, you need to be aggressive right away: "Shoot for 1st, settle for 3rd."

Before you start making crazy HU changes, look at how you play 3 handed.

[dfscott]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But I suck at HU play -- only 9% of my ITM's are firsts.

[/ QUOTE ]

The best way to win heads up is to start with a big chip lead. Once you get ITM, you need to be aggressive right away: "Shoot for 1st, settle for 3rd."

Before you start making crazy HU changes, look at how you play 3 handed.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's ironic that you're saying that since I just figured that in my last SnG. For the first time, I had a chip lead going onto the bubble and the rest of the tourney, I had a little party for myself. By the time I got heads up, I had a 7:1 chip lead and could pick my spots.

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But I suck at HU play -- only 9% of my ITM's are firsts.

[/ QUOTE ]

The best way to win heads up is to start with a big chip lead. Once you get ITM, you need to be aggressive right away: "Shoot for 1st, settle for 3rd."

Before you start making crazy HU changes, look at how you play 3 handed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this comment, and I am aware that this is the sentiments of much of the forum.

I do think that it is correct to push hard while in the money but i think making gambling calls is a bad idea, especially when my opponents are weaker then me.

I feel that I have a large edge on Heads up play, obviously not to such an extreme that I allow myself to become very shortstacked just to get heads up, but my biggest leak used to be being too aggresive while ITM andI have found that playing a tad tighter here has greatly improved my bottom line.

Maybe I'm just on some super lucky streak but I am frequently able to come back from down chips HU. I was serious when I said that heads up is the second most important part of SNGs (not requiring the second most skill as someone else said), other then the bubble its where the most money in won and lost, and I think there are some good sng players who could be way better if they were better heads up.

[ChrisV]

Suppose you get heads up with a guy. You both have 5000 chips and blinds are 300/600. This guy's gameplan is to go allin every hand without fail. If you play optimally, what percentage of the time will you win this heads up match?

The answer is less than 55% of the time. This is not my opinion - it's mathematical fact (http://www.bol.ucla.edu/~sharnett/poker/headsup.html).

Changing the scenario to 250/500 blinds and again to 200/400 blinds gives you a little more edge, but not much more. Making the stacks more uneven, or decreasing number of chips to 8000, makes things even worse.

It is not possible to have a "large edge on heads up play" unless it's because your opponent is too tight, or you're starting heads up play when the blinds are still quite small.

This is why nobody much discusses heads up.

[Apathy]

If opponents played optimally at other levels of sngs we wouldnt have much edge their either, but they don't. At least not at the 50s. Its important to know how to capitilize on the poor play of opponents at all stages, especially heads up.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
If opponents played optimally at other levels of sngs we wouldnt have much edge their either, but they don't. At least not at the 50s. Its important to know how to capitilize on the poor play of opponents at all stages, especially heads up.

[/ QUOTE ]

We all agree with that. The issue is that the only way to play poorly HU is to be too tight, and the way to exploit that is obvious and boring: run over them.

eastbay

[Apathy]

How about opponents that will play alot of flops with you?

Beating players like this takes skill, and a lot of the time these players are NOT tight.

[Elektrik]

I have to admit, I know HU play is generally pushed aside with the "you'll never be more than 55% against an all in player" argument, but most players don't go all in all of the time. Your correct strategy against such a player is to just push back.

But what if our opponent doesn't understand proper HU strategy? What if he is willing to call down a lot of all in bets, and is incredibly weak post flop? Seems like seeing more flops with him is a +EV move versus constantly pushing.

I'm interested at least.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
How about opponents that will play alot of flops with you?

Beating players like this takes skill, and a lot of the time these players are NOT tight.

[/ QUOTE ]

I test the waters for the kind of guy who has balls of steel preflop but wilts when a flop comes out. But I generally know this is the case before it goes HU. Then the strategy to beat him is easy: run over him on the flop. Not a huge adjustment.

I don't know, maybe this is glossing over it, but what kind of discussion are you looking for? When your opponent is bad enough to play like that, it's not too hard to pick him apart anyway. He's generally in way over his head at $109-ish limits in the first place.

eastbay

[Apathy]

I agree, but many players probably don't know the proper way to do that. If you have the time why not respond to my other post where I post a HH of a recent HU match and tell me what you think.

[ChrisV]

You mean, guys who will check if you limp in, but call if you raise allin?

Good lord, I don't know. I don't play guys like that - they get eaten alive earlier in the SNG. I would raise good hands and limp in everything else. After that it's really no different than playing pots with people at any other point of the SNG.

[Apathy]

NO i mean players that call smaller pf raises HU who force you to play a flop with them. Never said anything about call all ins, but some players do have that problem too i suppose.

The spirit of my message is the importance of playing on the flop and pf in such a way that you can dominate opponents by a larger margin then just picking hands to either push all in with or call all in with, which is the way many 2+2ers play HU.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
NO i mean players that call smaller pf raises HU who force you to play a flop with them. Never said anything about call all ins, but some players do have that problem too i suppose.

The spirit of my message is the importance of playing on the flop and pf in such a way that you can dominate opponents by a larger margin then just picking hands to either push all in with or call all in with, which is the way many 2+2ers play HU.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with this line (small raises) is that it is highly exploitable by anyone with a clue.

Most opponents at $55+ will quickly exploit the frequent minraise and start putting you all-in. If your opponents don't do that, then they're terrible and it can't be too much of an art to beat them postflop anyway.

If you're raising any bigger than min, then you're probably putting yourself in a terrible spot to fold to a re-raise.

eastbay

[Apathy]

Excellent, finally I'm getting to talk about what I set out to.

The raise isn't a min raise its a little bigger then 3x the BB, and you NEVER fold to a reraise. Do you see the effect this has on many players?

[bball904]

[ QUOTE ]
How about opponents that will play alot of flops with you?

Beating players like this takes skill, and a lot of the time these players are NOT tight.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this completely. There is so much talk about bubble play, but the fact is that winning a heads up match returns the same as making it into the money from the bubble. (Of course, there is additional opportunity once in the money.)

I think the question should be more about how to play heads up when you get there at the 150/300 or 200/400 levels. Above these levels, I agree with the consensus that push/fold should prevail. But getting heads up with lower blinds does allow for outplaying these types of opponents. I typically will raise 2.5x to 3x bb at those levels as opposed to pushing all the time. You can get away from those marginal raises and still steal blinds with solid frequency depending on the opponent.

Also, for those playing at Stars, UB, Poker Room, etc. where the chips often represent much more than 10x bb for both players heads up, this discussion would be very valuable.

[maldini]

exactly. i play at PS and HU contests are frequently 20 hands or more. pushing every hand will not win against halfway decent opponents.

does anyone have an early strategy for trying to test an opponent? i typically like to raise/reraise or fold every hand for the first few to test how they react. kinda like an NFL team scripting its first 15 offensive plays i guess. often hard to get a good feel though b/c it is so card dependent. i'll then adjust depending on their reactions and the blind/chip ratios.

i also like to renforce patterns that have been going on. for instance, if i'm forced to fold alot early, i'll often limp with bigger hands b/c the opponent will often see me as weak and try to run me over.

anyone else have a set gameplan going in?

[poboys]

Great topic.

If I have a nice chiplead, or if I am outchipped significantly, then I come out swinging. Nothing fancy, just go for the kill or try to get back in he game.

If it's 1:1, then I think some gamesmanship works well. Of course, you should know something about your opponent after spending the last 30 minutes observing his play. If your opponent wants to play the all-in game, then you are resigned to doing so.

So, I guess the point is if the HU match gets to be 1:1 and it's a slugfest, then I like to mix it up a little to put my opponent off balance. My goal heads up is to make him uncomfortable and make me look unpredictable. Now 80% of HU matches end in less than 10 hands, so this is not possible.

Some low buying players (and I generally play $10-$30 buy ins) are not comfortable playing heads up where the opponent does not go all in or nothing. You have observed that you face this type of player, than exploit it. With these players, believe it or not, you have more fold equity when you don't go all in, but raise pre-flop.

[Runner Runner]

[ QUOTE ]
It is not possible to have a "large edge on heads up play" unless it's because your opponent is too tight, or you're starting heads up play when the blinds are still quite small.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly right and why it is so important to try and induce your opponent into playing too tightly. I find that I can be successful in doing this by mixing up what I do on my sb. If I cannot raise allin, I often look to just limp and take a shot at any flop whether I hit it or not. I find that a lot of opponents play too tightly headsup on the flop in unraised pots even though the blinds alone represent a significant portion of their stack.

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
Great topic.

If I have a nice chiplead, or if I am outchipped significantly, then I come out swinging. Nothing fancy, just go for the kill or try to get back in he game.

If it's 1:1, then I think some gamesmanship works well. Of course, you should know something about your opponent after spending the last 30 minutes observing his play. If your opponent wants to play the all-in game, then you are resigned to doing so.

So, I guess the point is if the HU match gets to be 1:1 and it's a slugfest, then I like to mix it up a little to put my opponent off balance. My goal heads up is to make him uncomfortable and make me look unpredictable. Now 80% of HU matches end in less than 10 hands, so this is not possible.

Some low buying players (and I generally play $10-$30 buy ins) are not comfortable playing heads up where the opponent does not go all in or nothing. You have observed that you face this type of player, than exploit it. With these players, believe it or not, you have more fold equity when you don't go all in, but raise pre-flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

You make some good points here, and what you mention in this last paragraph is completly true imo.

What do other people think about the smelling blood and attacking principle when you have a big lead. My experience has taught me that its good to be ultra aggressive when you have a big chip disadvantage, but to play a little tighter even with a big chip lead (unless its REALLY big). I think this idea applies more to the 10000 chip structure though.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Excellent, finally I'm getting to talk about what I set out to.

The raise isn't a min raise its a little bigger then 3x the BB, and you NEVER fold to a reraise. Do you see the effect this has on many players?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really, no. Are you trying to induce raises or are you trying to scare them by making it look like you're trying to induce a raise?

eastbay

[dfscott]

[ QUOTE ]
Suppose you get heads up with a guy. You both have 5000 chips and blinds are 300/600. This guy's gameplan is to go allin every hand without fail. If you play optimally, what percentage of the time will you win this heads up match?

The answer is less than 55% of the time. This is not my opinion - it's mathematical fact (http://www.bol.ucla.edu/~sharnett/poker/headsup.html).

Changing the scenario to 250/500 blinds and again to 200/400 blinds gives you a little more edge, but not much more. Making the stacks more uneven, or decreasing number of chips to 8000, makes things even worse.

It is not possible to have a "large edge on heads up play" unless it's because your opponent is too tight, or you're starting heads up play when the blinds are still quite small.

This is why nobody much discusses heads up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand this, but as a noob, I'm with Apathy here. Even if there are some standard rules and once you learn them, it's pretty straightforward, I think a lot of people don't know what they are.

Even on the website you linked in your post, it says,

[ QUOTE ]
Note that this doesn't mean you should always play .65/.58. Your opponent will likely make mistakes that you should try to exploit.

[/ QUOTE ]

My question is: how?