NL HU shortstacked

[barongreenback]

I posted this in Poker Theory first but there wasn't much interest there. I think you guys are more familiar with push decisions anyway.

You're playing NL texas holdem heads up. You're the sb and have the button. Your opponent is a good player without any obvious big exploitable weaknesses. He has you covered.

If your stack is only 3 or 4 times the big blind there is no point doing limping or raising less than all-in. It's push or fold. The same strategy at 20*BB stacks will be easily defeated.

My question is how big do stacks have to be before you consider an alternative to push or fold? I'm looking at this question as an overall strategy for most of your playable hands rather than a tactical one off or unusual hand.

I think limping becomes a viable option before making a non all-in raise.

Thanks for any help.

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
If your stack is only 3 or 4 times the big blind there is no point doing limping or raising less than all-in. It's push or fold. The same strategy at 20*BB stacks will be easily defeated.



[/ QUOTE ]

I'm going to have to disagree with this. I think choosing only between push and fold will not be "easily defeated" by opponents when the stacks are only 20 BB's deep.

Im not really sure I understand your question though, I think the answer is it depends on how your opponents view and react to different bet sizes.

To give an extreme example lets say an opponent was too tight but would only come over the top of min raises with strong values, then you should min raise all the time. (see what i mean?)

[barongreenback]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If your stack is only 3 or 4 times the big blind there is no point doing limping or raising less than all-in. It's push or fold. The same strategy at 20*BB stacks will be easily defeated.



[/ QUOTE ]

I'm going to have to disagree with this. I think choosing only between push and fold will not be "easily defeated" by opponents when the stacks are only 20 BB's deep.

Im not really sure I understand your question though, I think the answer is it depends on how your opponents view and react to different bet sizes.

To give an extreme example lets say an opponent was too tight but would only come over the top of min raises with strong values, then you should min raise all the time. (see what i mean?)

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree that against the right opponent any move can be right but I was trying to look at it more generally (vs a good opponent). I said push/fold was easily defeated with deeper money because just by playing fairly tight your opponent can beat you. You're risking a lot of money to win a little.

[SuitedSixes]

I believe the party line around here is once you get to the 10-13BB vicinity you're in push/fold mode.

[Slim Pickens]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe the party line around here is once you get to the 10-13BB vicinity you're in push/fold mode.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah. I like the 10BB number since (from the AM/ben franklin 10+1 guide):
a) If you're going to raise, it should be to at least 3BB.
b) If a bet will be more than about 35% of your stack, you might as well push.

Slim

[barongreenback]

[ QUOTE ]

Yeah. I like the 10BB number since (from the AM/ben franklin 10+1 guide):
a) If you're going to raise, it should be to at least 3BB.
b) If a bet will be more than about 35% of your stack, you might as well push.

[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed. Once you raise the pot at this stack you're effectively committing against decent opponents. Is limping viable though? You have position on the flop which counts for something and at 10BB your opponent can't push preflop with impunity.