HeadsUp Push/Fold Nash equilibrium - pros and cons

[Rickie Belfield]

I know that the whole concept of this strategy is straight forward but I'm wondering if anybody could be nice enough to highlight it's pros and cons, preferably in detail.

Thanks.

[outragous76]

Pro It's inexploitable

Con: never giving the opportunity for opponent to spazz

[Rickie Belfield]

Pro It's inexploitable

Con: never giving the opportunity for opponent to spazz

Care to elaborate?

[Longy]

Pro's- It is a reasonable guide against players who have good push/fold fundamentals
     
Cons- 15+bbs effective deep, there is nearly always going to be better option than push/fold.

      - Playing nash against someone who doesn't have a clue is incorrect. Especially calling too light as most inexperienced players push too tight and much tighter than nash.

      - Nash is based around two players playing close to "perfect" poker and that is rarely the case.


So yeah nothing wrong with looking into it, especially in hands against decent regulars. As with a lot of things in poker is about adapting that knowledge to individual circumstances.

[jgcblack]

I'm not the best person in the world with this but I'll try.

Like said above its a way to play that will mean you never make a mistake expected value (EV) wise.

However the problem is you'll never capitalise on your opponents mistakes as much as you could with an evolving and adjustable strategy.  Using a Nash equilibrium would be a pure strategy but in a game like poker you require a mixed strategy in order to realise the true value of any play or player.

The easiest example is that after tilting an opponent or being tilted yourself you will often want to adjust your ranges in order to put more pressure on them or to make your decisions easier while you recover your mental strength.  Anyone who says they don't tilt is lying, the difference is that some people are able to handle it much better.

You're talking about push/ fold, but a better example would be in deep stacked play, when not playing game theory optimal (GTO) becomes more profitable would be to do with bet sizing and how you will often find an opponent that has inelastic calling ranges irrespective of your sizing within a specified range -
I.e.
Op may call a river bet of 1x-4x with range Y
Op may call a river bet of 5x-15x with range X..

Playing GTO may be that we bet 4x all the time and guarantee a certain return n% of the time, however in this spot vs this particular opponent we might deviate from GTO in order to be more profitable by betting 15x all the time.


I don't know if this explains what you want, the way you want but hopefully it helps.

[jgcblack]

Pro's- It is a reasonable guide against players who have good push/fold fundamentals
     
Cons- 15+bbs effective deep, there is nearly always going to be better option than push/fold.

      - Playing nash against someone who doesn't have a clue is incorrect. Especially calling too light as most inexperienced players push too tight and much tighter than nash.

      - Nash is based around two players playing close to "perfect" poker and that is rarely the case.


So yeah nothing wrong with looking into it, especially in hands against decent regulars. As with a lot of things in poker is about adapting that knowledge to individual circumstances.

 Good post IMO, it's tough to explain it all without either a background in pure maths or a lot of explanation..

[Pugwashed]

Its basically the same as taking a GTO approach to any situation, it's a good place to start but as soon as you have a good reason to then adjusting away from GTO is fine (i.e. he's calling too tight so you shove wider or he's shoving too tight so you call tighter)

[CHIPPYMAN]

I'm not the best person in the world with this but I'll try.

Like said above its a way to play that will mean you never make a mistake expected value (EV) wise.

However the problem is you'll never capitalise on your opponents mistakes as much as you could with an evolving and adjustable strategy.  Using a Nash equilibrium would be a pure strategy but in a game like poker you require a mixed strategy in order to realise the true value of any play or player.

The easiest example is that after tilting an opponent or being tilted yourself you will often want to adjust your ranges in order to put more pressure on them or to make your decisions easier while you recover your mental strength.  Anyone who says they don't tilt is lying, the difference is that some people are able to handle it much better.

You're talking about push/ fold, but a better example would be in deep stacked play, when not playing game theory optimal (GTO) becomes more profitable would be to do with bet sizing and how you will often find an opponent that has inelastic calling ranges irrespective of your sizing within a specified range -
I.e.
Op may call a river bet of 1x-4x with range Y
Op may call a river bet of 5x-15x with range X..

Playing GTO may be that we bet 4x all the time and guarantee a certain return n% of the time, however in this spot vs this particular opponent we might deviate from GTO in order to be more profitable by betting 15x all the time.


I don't know if this explains what you want, the way you want but hopefully it helps.

IF UR GAME WERE AS GOOD AS WHAT U CAN TALK DUDE!!!!