Heads up Strategy

[tewall]

Say you're playing a very aggressive player, a bully, who will habitually bet and raise. He'll mix it up on any round. He will call any sized bet with top pair. He might call with a lot less if he thinks you're on a draw.

The stacks are about 85x the blinds.

What would your strategy be?

[ThingDo]

I'm very interested to hear some responses on this one. Bump. I'd love to have something to add, but I suck.

[tewall]

Thank you, ThingDo.

Since no one else has responded, I'll put something out there.

I was thinking tightening up considerably and trapping might work well. Play big cards, so that any top pairs have decent kickers. Go all-in with top pair or better. If the top pair is not very vulnerable, just call the flop and wait for the turn to make the move. If vulnerable, move in on the flop.

This seems like a reasonable strategy, but I don't know if it's too conservative.

[PlayerA]

There was a thread on this topic a few weeks ago titled:

"How to play against someone who bets at every pot?"

I would link to it but I don't know how.

Anyhow, I love playing against someone with your strategy (tighter the better - although it can get tedious winning one BB at a time). It will sometimes work out for you. However, if you keep waiting for top pair, then it's easy for me to fold when you hit. I don't think that you will make top pair often enough to make up for all of the stolen pots. Moreover, if you just move in like that then I may show you a set or 2 pair.

Unless your opponent is a total maniac (which I usually try to avoid being one - although it does happen), I think that playing back is the better strategy.

[tewall]

Thanks for the response A.

Given the escalating value of bets, if you wait until the turn to play back, you don't need to win nearly as many pots. If the opponent keeps the game small, then you have to be as aggressive as he is, or else he can win just by stealing more blinds than you do.

I understand this, but my question is relating to someone who more full throttle than this.

But taking your approach, with what hands would you play back with, and when? Also realize if you play back, you have to be willing to go all the way.

You said if you know I'll go all-in against you with top pair you'll just wait for 2 pair or a set. That strategy would work with smaller blinds, but not here. By the time the turn comes I'm eating up 20% of your stack, and 2 pair and sets just don't come around that often. I'm more worried about your having top pair with a better kicker. Also if I know you won't call me unless you have something like 2 pair or a set, I can go all-in with anything as you won't have a hand that can call me anywhere near often enough.

[PlayerA]

Actually, if he's going "full throttle", then I like your original approach. Moreover, you may have to occasionally play back with nothing if you're not hitting. You will be read as weak and you won't have to make a play very often to keep treading if your opponent is committing too much each time.

What do you mean by full throttle? Pre-flop, how many BBs? Post flop how big is the bet in relation to pot? Etc? I am just wondering if our ideas of "full throttle" are the same.

[tewall]

I think our ideas of full throttle is the same in terms of amount. What's different is the lack adjustment to a show of strength.

In other words, if I were trying an aggressive strategy, I would take the approach you outlined. I would try to win by stealing more blinds than my opponent and would be very cautious when he got involved. Since he's playing tighter than I am, he's likely to have a better hand, and I don't need to get involved. If I don't get involved, I'll eventually win, because I'm stealing more of his blinds than he is of mine.

I'm describing a player who doesn't have this in mind. What he has in mind is bullying you out of just about every pot, unless you go all-in, in which case he'll call with top pair.

Bet sizes are pot sized bet, and pre-flop raise to about 3x big blind. (that is, 5 or 6x big blind is what would wind up being in the pot as the flop comes out).

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
Bet sizes are pot sized bet, and pre-flop raise to about 3x big blind. (that is, 5 or 6x big blind is what would wind up being in the pot as the flop comes out).

[/ QUOTE ]
Until I read this I wasn't sure if you were talking about limit or no-limit. At limit holdem, if you tighten up playing heads-up against a bully, you'll be toast. In limit, if your opponent always raises preflop on the button, you have to call most of the time.

But in no-limit, if your opponent is constantly making 3xBB raises preflop on the button, you can afford to fold more than half the time. If you make some simplifying assumptions you could work it out exactly. The "simplifying assumptions" I'm thinking of are along the lines that preflop you'd either fold or move all-in. Then you can do a precise calculation, it's just a math problem. But I guess a big part of your question assumes that you're going to play on.

[tewall]

Sorry about the confusion. I should have been clearer. Of course in limit you have to be more aggressive in defending your blinds.

Doing the pre-flop thing would basically make it a coin flip (that is, going all-in with certain hands). Playing "full throttle" is a -EV way of playing, no doubt. The question is how to best take advantage of it.

I'm assuming he will always bet and raise the pot (or all-in) given the opportunity, until you raise him back, in which case he will call with top pair (assuming you raised him all-in) or also call you if he thinks you're on a draw.

The strategy I thought of was playing any two cards 9 or higher and pairs. On the flop, raise all-in if you have top pair or better and the hand is vulnerable or it's a drawing hand. With less vulnerable hands, like top pair = Q or better, raggy flop, wait until the turn to go all-in.

Playing this way means you're playing about 1/4 of hands pre-flop and playing about 1/4 of those after the flop. This is a small number of hands to play, of course, but because of the opps willlingness to go all-in without top pair makes it O.K. to play this way.

The reason for playing two cards better than 9 is to have a decent kicker when the top pair is called by another top pair. The reason to raise all-in with drawing flops is it's more likely the all-in bet will be called (because he's thinking you're on a draw).

I tried this by myself and it worked quite well. I'm interested in any possible improvements.

It's interesting that if the blinds are either higher or lower you would play more hands. If higher, you wouldn't need as much to go all in (e.g. any top pair would be good enough, or any 2nd pair, or any pair, as the blinds get higher) and if lower, it would make sense to play suited and connected cards (although you might throw away some of the high unconnected high cards).

[M.B.E.]

Yes, makes sense to me, but I wonder if you wouldn't be folding too much. For example, you have AT, the flop comes Q-T-4, and your opponent bets the flop. Does your strategy have you folding here? You are very likely to have the best hand.