Helmuth - Ferguson Head Up Match Theory Question

[DrVanNostrin]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd make no adjustment to my play.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Megenoita]

In this scenario, being more aggressive seems like the best strategy. The reason that being uber-aggressive all the time isn't always wisest, in part, is because of variance. This scenario is essentially permitting us to have less variance while our opponent is under its normal duress-if he loses once, he's gone. But if we make a semi-bluff for all our chips and it doesn't work out, we're still in for another match. So the situations that arise, for instance, where we can either fold him out in a big pot, or get our money in as a 2:1 dog at worst, are to our advantage to pursue. Pursuing these situations via playing more hands pf, value betting big (betting everything big--semi-bluffs, bluffs, nuts, definite value, perhaps even marginal value) will create a very loose-aggressive image where our opponent will necessarily and correctly adjust and play more loosely himself. Creating a higher variance match up is our goal, since we have more chances to get lucky/trap him.

[guilt_trip]

I'd be willing to gamble alot more ie take more conflip situations and be willing to semibluff alot more. Since you need to win 1 out of 5, you can get it all in with hands with 30% equity or better.

So my main adjustment would be a more semi-bluffing and more "reckless" play. We can afford to take 2-1 shots without fear as we still have more attempts to win.

[Talmage]

The biggest adjustment is likely to come from the opponent who has to sweep the next 5 games to stay alive. He'd most likely tighten up, in which I'd try to steal more. But if he feels loose and desperate, I'd play a little tighter. But playing as well as possible to counter my opponents' style is how I'd always like to play (although sometimes I don't). So I'd say play like always, and make adjustments like always in response to the opposition. Optimal play is optimal play.

[uphigh_downlow]

___Early blind levels_______

Play tighter preflop
Make your value bets smaller
Bluff less
Semi-bluff less
Be less inclined to call very big bets or get involved with big pots

_____Higher Blind Levels___

Play looser preflop
Make your value bets smaller
Bluff more
Semi-bluff more
Be less inclined to call very big bets or get involved with big pots

[goofball]

Your assumption that our opponent will not adjust his play given the standings is not realistic.

[PantsOnFire]

I would tighten up somewhat and avoid large, costly mistakes. I would play in a way that might not maximize my win rate but would lower my variance.

So I generally disagree with those announcers.

[Spechel EDD]

I would definately be willing to put my opponent into more uncomfortable spots and trying to force them into making mistakes that I can profit from. Knowing that if I make a mistake I may still have chips and another chance to win the series is a big boost to my strategy allowing myself to play many more hands where I dont wait around for the nuts or second nuts to win. I'm not saying that this would allow me more to donk off chips with second pair or draws but it would allow me to recover more from mistakes and try to force my opponent into making mistakes himself.

[BobK]

No change in strategy.

[Shandrax]

If I got five bullets and my opponent has only one, I would move in with any ace and try to play every coinflip for the maximum amount of chips. My all-in calling requirements would be something like any pair and anything 17 or better (although that's just a wild guess for the first approximation).

Once I lost let's say the first two of these shootouts I would start to switch down gears one by one and if I manage to lose the first four, I would be back to my normal game for the last match although that's not easy to define, because we are talkin NL where everything is in a state of flux. Maybe back to my normal risk level would be the better expression.

In a nutshell: I'd play like Gus Hansen