this month\'s heads up magazin article NLCASH
 

Opinions?

Too much math for me.

I think that the main premise is that I should always call a pot-sized 3-bet when I raise out of the SB.

I do, in fact, make these folds (surprised?): am I wrong?

Or is this discounting HUSNGs? Is cash really this different?

Please post thoughts and reviews here.

Re: this month\'s heads up magazin article
 

Link to article?

Re: this month\'s heads up magazin article
 

Re: this month\'s heads up magazin article
 

Don't have time to read it right now, but there are definitely some differences between HUcash and HUsngs.

Just briefly looking at this article he is saying that minraising is a mistake preflop out of the sb. This is not true in husng's, but would definitely be a mistake in most HUcash situations.

There are numerous situations that minraising preflop from the sb is fine in husng's given certain stack sizes and blind levels. I almost always minraise in the 3rd blind (25/50) level until me or opponent has 12 bb or less. You are still accomplishing your goal of making opponent play raised pots oop, while leaving yourself some room to work postflop. Sure, you are giving him good odds to see the flop, but your cbet will take it down often enough on the flop to be profitable. Most people play horrible oop.

Re: this month\'s heads up magazin article
 

Meh,

It reminds a lot of "Theorycrafting" back in the days of World of Warcraft. People would spend endless days calculating the best gear for their characters, only to see that their calculations didn't work the way they thought they would in practice.

One thing that I did find eerie is that 59% raise from SB is the magic number and I'm surprisingly close at 57.55%.

I don't really believe that the dynamics of HU make it so the BB should be folding LESS than 5/8ths of their hands (as suggested by the article). Being OOP is such a huge huge huge disadvantage, that despite the proper EV math, you simply aren't going to be able to play profitably by playing that much OOP.

The single biggest factor in all of poker are your opponent's tendencies. I'd say this is problem the biggest factor in HU. There's some people I limp nearly ever button (and I believe it's correct) and others that I only 3bet with premium hands (if they are calling nearly all of your 3bets, why play so much OOP when you can wait for large hands?).

Re: this month\'s heads up magazin article
 

[ QUOTE ]

I don't really believe that the dynamics of HU make it so the BB should be folding LESS than 5/8ths of their hands (as suggested by the article). Being OOP is such a huge huge huge disadvantage, that despite the proper EV math, you simply aren't going to be able to play profitably by playing that much OOP.


[/ QUOTE ]

While in general I agree with this sentiment, I should point out that if your opponent is folding more than 5/8 of the time, then, mathematically, you are better off raising 100% of the time than you are folding your small blind.

Even if you turbomuck every time you get called preflop, you end up doing better than folding.

I do make the point in the article that you're forced to defend with what look like -EV hands to get to 3/8 defense. As a result I think a "correct in theory" game with two strong players would feature 100% button raises, a lot of big blind folds, and a substantial amount of preflop 3-betting.

However, most strong players seem to enter into a "gentleman's agreement" with their opponents to muck a lot of hands preflop from the button, so that this situation rarely comes up.

Re: this month\'s heads up magazin article
 

[ QUOTE ]
Opinions?

Too much math for me.

I think that the main premise is that I should always call a pot-sized 3-bet when I raise out of the SB.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, you only need to call more than 1/3 of the time, and of course if your opponent is only reraising top hands then you can fold to his 3bets almost every time and still do fine. I think vs. a very frequent reraiser, you'd want to call ~half the time or so.

The real point of that part of the discussion was that hammering someone with preflop reraises, if they fold frequently, can be a powerful move.

Re: this month\'s heads up magazin article
 

[ QUOTE ]
Or is this discounting HUSNGs? Is cash really this different?

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't have time to read the article right now, but I can answer yes to this. In cash, effective stacks are usually 100+ bbs deep. In husngs, it's never more than 75 or 50bbs, depending on whether it's a turbo or not. Also, throw in the concept of tourney life and rising blinds, and calling every 3bet is definitely wrong.

Re: this month\'s heads up magazin article
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I don't really believe that the dynamics of HU make it so the BB should be folding LESS than 5/8ths of their hands (as suggested by the article). Being OOP is such a huge huge huge disadvantage, that despite the proper EV math, you simply aren't going to be able to play profitably by playing that much OOP.


[/ QUOTE ]

While in general I agree with this sentiment, I should point out that if your opponent is folding more than 5/8 of the time, then, mathematically, you are better off raising 100% of the time than you are folding your small blind.

Even if you turbomuck every time you get called preflop, you end up doing better than folding.

I do make the point in the article that you're forced to defend with what look like -EV hands to get to 3/8 defense. As a result I think a "correct in theory" game with two strong players would feature 100% button raises, a lot of big blind folds, and a substantial amount of preflop 3-betting.

However, most strong players seem to enter into a "gentleman's agreement" with their opponents to muck a lot of hands preflop from the button, so that this situation rarely comes up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't read it word for word, but I can agree to what you're saying above. Yeah, when two good players go at it you get dynamics exactly like you stated (lots of 3betting, raising every button [which I definitely do against passive donks]). After a long journey of curbing my ego, I really believe the absolute best advice for those learning HU is to game select, game select, game select. That being said, against most of the people I choose to play I really don't 3bet much because I don't have to.

I hate the fact that you've posted 2 well thought out articles and here I am tearing this new one apart. Don't get me wrong, they are both awesome... I've simply come to realize that 2+2 is hurtful to the average player in that once you get past the basics it's VERY hard to know where the next step is. A great example would be hearing things like "LOL at folding TPTK for 1 buyin" from high stakes guys. This is super true for their stakes, but certainly not for low stakes. In fact, I think there are spots where it's correct to fold a set even on the flop (as I experienced live recently and didn't fold because I was hearing 2+2 voices saying "NEVER FOLD A SET ON THE FLOP for 1 buyin!!", and another time in which I rivered a set which completed the straight for AQ... the hand was 3bet preflop, the flop (K high) went check check, turn was a J, went check check, river was a T, in which I potted and was pushed on... I really think I'm good there 25% at absolute best but was compelled to call do to that dangerous mentality.

EDIT: Btw, by the end of my trip in Vegas I actually correctly folded KK pre-flop in a cash game for 1 buy-in. I ignored the words from 2+2ers and realized that NO ONE was 3betting in this game and even less were 4betting, coupled with the fact that the hand just prior I had shown down with AA where I had 3-bet, and the very next hand I 3bet my KK and got shoved on. The gentlemen was kind enough to show me the AA, but I didn't need to see it.

So yeah, you aren't a mind reader, I'm just voicing my opinion that if I were to teach people the basics of HU I'd start with game selection and stay away from what to do against competent players. Simply my opinion.

Another well done article though and I'm sorry if I come off as obnoxious.

Re: this month\'s heads up magazin article
 

Game selection was the last article :-)

I agree that live nits are an entirely different matter from aggro online players.