I had originally posted this here, but then moved it when someone suggested to. Basically my point is not what size of blinds to start doing this or whether you can outplay your opponent to the tune of 90% (although when I get heads-up against a mega-weaktight player it sure feels like it). I just use those as examples, and right now I'm assuming the theories to be valid. So my point is more philosophical than practical:

<snip from STT forum>
let's say Hellmuth and Matusow are both aware of this optimal strategy, but they also both know that if either one starts using it, the game becomes a coinflip. And further, if one of them starts using it, the other one has to. However with both of their egos, they wouldn't ever be able to accept that their opponent was playing "optimally" (IE - as well as them) and therefore wouldn't want to push it to a coinflip, as each would still think he has an obvious skill edge over the other. You see what I'm saying? I think it makes an interesting decision in either player's mind.

Again, I'm just reiterating what's been asserted here: that there is an "optimal" strategy which when pursued by both sides turns the game into a coinflip, and a "better" strategy which will give you a better chance to win if you're opponent is not playing "optimally". I'm not debating whether either of those is true for this post. I'm just saying that if they are, I think it creates an interesting conundrum.
</snip>