HU Theory - outplay vs. force coinflip?

I've been thinking about the HU strategy discussed here, of pushing almost any two cards (when the blinds are > X% of your stack). W/o getting into all the details of whether or not the strategy really is optimal, here's what I've been wondering:

If I understand it correctly, and as stated by some posters on this board, there is really no couter-measure that can reduce this strategy to anything less than neutral eV. And that counter is obviously just to do the same thing. So heads-up we have achieved a Nash equilibrium-type optimal strategy that cannot be countered. Again, if I understand the assertion correctly, then let's just assume the conclusion is correct. I'm not bringing this up to debate the actual theory.

So here is the question. If you are playing against a passive, weak-tight player who you know you can chip away at with min or 3xBB raises, and won't fight back unless he has a premium hand, would you really want to employ this strategy? Why reduce yourself to 60% eV when you can get almost 90% by outplaying the person? I really can't see an argument for the "all-in" HU strategy against a mouse. Seems to me like this cannot possibly be the best strategy if you know you have a decent edge in HU skill.

So let's take it one step further. Phil Helmuth and Mike Matusow are HU for the WSOP title. Even though our all-in strategy is the absolute optimal (again assuming) strategy, if either one of these guys starts playing this way, he basically admits that he doesn't think he has a skill edge over the other. Of course if one of them does adopt this strategy, the other one absolutely has to adopt it as as well or lose (and they both know this being the poker geniuses are)--thus forcing it to a coinflip.

So I may not be getting the clunky words out of me so good-like, but do you see what I'm getting at? Basically either guy has the option of forcing it to a coinflip, or laying back and trying to outplay the other. Very interesting conundrum, sort of a two-way Spanish Prisoner kind of thing. Or not.

(Forgive me if this topic has already been discussed ad-infinitum. I searched but couldn't find anything, or figure out which keywords I should even be looking for. If it has can someone please point me to the thread?)

thx,
Matt

[BradleyT]

I think you meant to post in the 1TT forum.

I thought it was a theory type thing, but ok I will.

[soko]

You're not considering the blinds. In HOH v2 he explains early in tbe book how critical your stacks are in relation to the blinds.

If you are both short stacked in comparison to the blinds, then almost any face card is worth pushing because you don't have enough chips to even attempt any postflop play.

If you have stacks that greater than 8 or 9 times the blinds that gives you some room to work with and of course you would try to beat sombody you have an edge over, but even here there is such a great level of luck involved that it's going to be pretty close to push or fold postflop.

When your blinds are around 20 times the big blind, then post flop play becomes critical, you are in a comfortable spot and should play real poker. You can't simply push all in before the flop every time becaues your opponent has enough chips to fold until he has a hand worth calling.

If you really feel outskilled and don't want to play real poker with big stacks heads up, why not just cut a deal?

[b33nz]

This is actually a very interesting topic. I usually play the 16 turbos on stars and for the first 200 sngs, I would push constantly with any playable hand everytime I was heads up when blinds were 200/400 or higher.

But now I've actually started to limp more from the button heads up and try to outplay my opponents and it's been working like a charm. I can't say for sure because I've only been doing this for 50 tournies, but my 1st place % has gone up from 14% to 16%... This might not look like much, it's only a 2% increase, but when you look 2% of 14% is 1/7 of the total 1st place percentage. So my first place has actually increased by 14.29%. I'm placing first place 14.29% more than I was when I was just pushing all in.

Remember that this might just be a coincidence since it's only 50 tournies, but I genuinely feel like it is better to try to limp in and outplay somebody if they are passive. If they do pop you back after you limp in, then I suggest not limping in again unless you are trying to trap them... which might be a good strategy also.

Also when the blinds are like 300/600, you should limp in with hands that you have the intention of calling an all in preflop. This is because some people will try to take advantage of your passiveness.

This whole opinion is assuming you have at least 8-10 BBs.. if you have 6 or less BBs, then you have to resort to pushing or folding.

[WhiteWolf]

I think the key part is this:
[ QUOTE ]
(when the blinds are > X% of your stack)

[/ QUOTE ]
Once your stack shrinks so a significant part of it goes in just to see a flop, your ability to outplay someone post flop goes way down. You won't be able to get that 90% edge.

It's amazing how many times someone posts a question that I also wondered about. Thanks guys.

[soko]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the key part is this:
[ QUOTE ]
(when the blinds are > X% of your stack)

[/ QUOTE ]
Once your stack shrinks so a significant part of it goes in just to see a flop, your ability to outplay someone post flop goes way down. You won't be able to get that 90% edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

A 90% edge? Is he disconnected or something?

[winky51]

I don't like pushing all in preflop. Changing your style constantly makes sense and outplaying your player heads up. When I get HU with someone at a 9-30 man mini tournament I win 90% of the time. Bascially the only times I lose is when I just happen to run into the bigger pair like AA vs JJ or the fool calls on a long shot and hits.

But I like to play stack and position altering my game. Limping 2/3 of the time with great hands to trap the other player. Raising 1/3 the time with premium. Mixing it up with suited connecting cards by raising on the button. limping and/or raising with crap when I feel my opponent has become uncomfortable playing me, which eventually happens because I start to see mistakes.

Of all the mini tournaments I played only 3 players were so good it was a real challenge, 2 TAGs, and 1 LAG. I split wiht the TAGs and the LAG played pretty well but I found his rythum and nailed him on a bluff.

I agree about raising the good old 2.5-4x the amount and outplaying post flop. Adjust to your HU opponent and their style. If he folds a lot raise more, if he tends to dump all in a lot trap with the better hands for example.

Also I used to always feel when someone pushes all in B vs B the 1st thing that goes through my mind was anger. "This POS is probably trying to bluff I'm calling him". Of course since my early days I take a different approach. But if I instinctively did this I know others do to, weaker players that is. So I mix my raises suspiciously. I take my time.

Like blinds are 250/500 for example.

I would mix raises like, 1400, 1550, 1700, 1250, 1600 constantly. I see players going crazy trying to figure out why I am constantly changing raises.

Well to the point, I prefer to outplay the player and not rely on sheer threat of PUUUUUUSH IT!.

Even AA can be cracked when the opponent gets 5 cards to see to the end.

One very sneaky thing I notice in the live tournaments I play is that I follow Ivey's philosophy of raise less when up front. I play in $65 to $200 tournaments in Florida. The players are always pushing 3-4x the BB UTG with bets. Then someone calls and they feel commited to the pot after making a POT sized raise with AK no pair after the flop.

I make 2.5x the BB raise UTG. Then depending on callers and the board 40%-60% flop bet (more if I hit and tons of callers sometimes). I notice that players are always looking at me suspiciously like I am being sneaky and they fold a lot more often vs me than other players. I do this online too and get similar results.

Unlike before where I raised more and got called more. Just an observation.

Anyways thats my 2 cents. Take it or leave it.

[b33nz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the key part is this:
[ QUOTE ]
(when the blinds are > X% of your stack)

[/ QUOTE ]
Once your stack shrinks so a significant part of it goes in just to see a flop, your ability to outplay someone post flop goes way down. You won't be able to get that 90% edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

A 90% edge? Is he disconnected or something?

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, yea i agree with soko, even if you are way better than your opponent, your edge isn't that high. At best it can be at like 60-75% in the long run.