[oreogod]

[ QUOTE ]


I think the basic theoretical reason it is effective is that you reduce the amount of information your opponent has and play for smaller pots when you're out of position. You are therefore counteracting his basic position advantage.

IMO, 3-betting HU OOP from the BB is an exploitative play--not "optimal" as in unexploitable--both in HU matches and in ring games. Same for donkbetting into the pfr HU.

[/ QUOTE ]

(I typed this in a different order, then reformatted my thoughts, so while these are all off the top of my head as Im typing, hopefully they tie together. So if this seems disjointed, sorry.)


I wonder really if its a strategy to get an aggressive player to literally play and raise every hand, even absolute junk that would be trashed if u played back at them, while then using their momentum against them postflop and forcing them into mistakes.

On one hand u have a strategy that allows your opponent to raise any two in position and postflop allow them to check behind and see turn or bet when there is a flop they like, while also mixing it up of course. Instead of getting 3bet preflop say 30-50 percent of the time, they know they are getting c/r'ed on the flop 50-60 percent. I think that allows them much more postflop manuever abilitiy.

Where as say u start playing back and u 3bet say 30-50 percent of the time w/ a wide range of hands. Now unless they want to put an extra bet in preflop w/ a worse hand (if they are really raising a ton) they have less postflop manueverability. They will muck absolute trash and there will also be bigger pots of course so they have a little more reason to peel.

It really seems the whole point of Dreamclowns strategy is to use the SB/Button's movement/momentum against them, but there has to be a point where that 'advantage' can then be turned around and used against the Big Blind.

You could say that by playing back more OOP, 3betting a wide range of hands, that sb might start tossing or throwing hands away...I usually dont see that happen, except maybe w/ absolute trash hands. So is it worth the value to get the sb to really raise "any two" and giving them a little more postflop "choice" verse playing back at them preflop. Honestly even w/ this strategy a good number of players are still binning absolute junk into the muck, but u never know, they may start playing more junk which could be valueable. This might also be valuable to your opponent who is in position as well. He spends 1.5sbs and can get to the turn almost always with any hand. I mean at worst he's a 2-1 or 3-1 dog to all your best hands most of the time (unless u have a good pair). Yet can bet or check w/ impunity postflop knowing u c/r with air (A-high, overs, etc) and all pairs. If he knows u bluff bet the turn alot he can then raise a decent amount w/ made or unmade hands

As far as exploitable, every or almost every strategy has a weakness somewhere, you just have to find it (usually why, depending on your opponent u have to change frequently or not at all). Against an aggressive postflop player Dreamclowns strategy works, Im sure against more passive players he changes it up...but against a good aggressive player I wonder how this would work. Im pretty sure they'd start checking more w/ weak hands, find other uses for greater postflop flexibility...which could also be bad for them as well as it allows Dreamclown to bet/bluff the turn often, they also might start playing back a lot more which could be good/bad.

Dunno, this post kind of rambles. I have to really think more on this concept though.