43o in the BB. Defend in a heads up game?

[Saharah]

For a long time I have been defending BB with 43o in heads up games (30/60 up to 200/400).

The way I used to figure was something like this: "43o has enough implied value in a HU situation since it is connected, and will be fairly easy to play on the flop, since it will often either miss completely or connect fairly well".

Looking at my PT stats however, I see that 43o has been losing an average of 0.26BB per hand which is in the same neighbourhood as hands I always fold. (72o: -0.32 and 73o: -0.18 ;they do better than -0.5 since sb folds some too).

Admittedly, I only have a small sample size (103 trials) but could there be something to what Stoxtrader says in his book: that hands with less than 35% vs. a given range is not worth playing in the BB?

43o only has 35.1% against a random range. Against a 75% range it is down to 33.6%

Thoughts?

[Saharah]

Ps. In the SB I am always raising with 43o heads up and am doing fine (+0.02, 74 trials).
yes I know the variance is huge.

[stoxtrader]

we dont touch on full HU play at all in WTH, we do speak extensively about HU confrontations at a shorthanded or full table.

[whodaman]

if your playing hu with the sb as the button, defending 34o is most likely marginally wrong.

[Saharah]

I know Stox, but I think it would be interesting to test if the 35% guideline works within the dynamics of a HU table as well.

Great book btw! only thing I missed was some theory about HU sessions. I think its more complex and interesting than SH. But then again, Im an HU addict.

[Saharah]

[ QUOTE ]
if your playing hu with the sb as the button, defending 34o is most likely marginally wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would it be more wrong to defend 34o if BB is the button? (tighter steal range vs. position)

[DeathDonkey]

I think with position it would be a much better defense. I've heard the argument to defend 100% from the BB on the button and don't really disagree with it.

-DeathDonkey

[gehrig]

[ QUOTE ]

The way I used to figure was something like this: "43o has enough implied value in a HU situation since it is connected, and will be fairly easy to play on the flop, since it will often either miss completely or connect fairly well".

[/ QUOTE ]
43o is a reverse implied odds hand unless ur opponent plays really bad. there are a lot more k93 type flops than 652 ones.

[Saharah]

[ QUOTE ]
I think with position it would be a much better defense. I've heard the argument to defend 100% from the BB on the button and don't really disagree with it.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be very range dependent, though I dont think I defend 72o, even with position and against a player that raises every hand (random range).

What really matters is empirical results, I think.

[Saharah]

43o is a reverse implied odds hand unless ur opponent plays really bad. there are a lot more k93 type flops than 652 ones.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. 43o does worse in actual play than the 33%+ it has against most ranges heads up.

Just to clarify what we mean here: reverse implied odds for a hand means that it does worse in actual play (later betting rounds) than its present equity (i.e. the value it would have if both players checked it down).

Thus most hands consisting of two small cards are reverse implied odds hands HU, even when suited probably.

I guess the only hands HU with a clearly positive implied value are the premium hands right?