20 replies to this topic

[rforman13]

Well...this is my first post here in this section...and I have a lot I should be able to contribute in this area. While this may seem a different approach...I'd like to hear your thoughts on how heads up limit holdem and boxing have some interestingly similar concepts in what it takes to win. I know this seems out there...but think about it a bit, throw out your thoughts...and I'll follow up tonight with some of my thoughts when I get back to Chicago.I'll throw out some words that will get you thinking.-Tempo/rhythm-Hitting-Missing-Control-Aggression-JabAgain...I know this all may sound silly...but think about it a bit...see what your thoughts are. Also...picture the boxing ring only being 5 feet x 5 feet....thats it. :Drforman13

[rforman13]

Or not...... Anything??? Echo Echo Echo....

[rforman13]

Well...I aint posting my thoughts till I get a few from you guys. Come on now...you prompted me to come to the strategy section...here I am...talk to me!!!!

[Petoria]

We'll start posting something constructive once you start discussing strategy.

[Swift_Psycho]

Post some hands. Then you'll get responses. That's what we do here.

[RISEorFall]

yeah, this seems too much like homework, and I just finished exams for the year. Post some hands or ask some questions...nobody's gonna write an essay about poker and boxing. post some thoughts on hands or something and you'll get more responses.

[rforman13]

What I was planning to post is strategy about heads up and SH play. It is my opinion that a lot of players do not understand some of the key concepts to this type of play...and I have come up with some analogies to boxing that really make an interesting comparison...and really get to the intricacies of the game. Sorry..I am not a big "hand history" posting guy....not being from the 2+2 mold. I just wanted to see if anyone saw where I was going with it before I posted my thoughts. Since when is learning more about poker like homework?? It may take some thought and work...but its not like homework...

[speedz99]

Dear Rforman13,

I really like your boxing analogy, and I agree that learning about poker is nothing like homework. I'll do my best to respond, and maybe we can get "ring the bell" for some real strong "sparring" between the theories of this forums "poker gladiators".

-Tempo/rhythm - just like a boxer, you have to be in a good rhythm to feel in control of a short-handed table. it's a ballet of calling, folding, and raising (but not necessarily in that order :wink: ) and you need to be on top of your game. if what you are doing isn't working, you have to go to your corner and adjust your game plan to beat down the competition.

-Hitting - you have to get in there and really lay the smack down when your opponent is on the ropes. hammer him with some big raises to force him to make a decision (hopefully the wrong one!!!!!!!!)

-Missing - i never miss...so i don't know about this one.

-Control - again, you have to be in control of a fight. mix up your array of punches....jab...jab...jab...uppercut...jab...body shot...groin shot...jab...roundhouse...ear bite...etc.

-Aggression - oh, you've got to be aggressive. you can't not avoid not being unaggressive in my opinion. if you want the other fighter to go down and give you all his chips you have to pound him mercilessly like a 19 year old ecuadorian vag-hole

-Jab - keep working that jab. bet, raise, bet, raise, call, call, bet, raise...and repeat.


I hope this helps. Good luck everyone, I look forward to responses.

[rforman13]

Yeah...um...we shoulda just let this one rest....

1.....2.....3....4.....5.....6.....7......8.....9.......10..KO!!!11

[speedz99]

weak

[rforman13]

Ok...fine....ACTUALLY.....my point was this:


In a higher level (several steps above ABC poker) heads up match...things can look a bit crazy from the outside. If you were to take two brand new players, who just learned about starting hands, etc....they would play 20% of the hands dealt...and would actually both be in the same hand barely once every 10 hands...if that.

Of course, with heads up...we know that is not optimal strategy...and this is typically dicated by the fact that the more advanced and aggressive players will keep raising that level of aggressiveness to overpower an opponent. In turn, if you have two solid players, the level of aggression is so high...that nearly ever hand sees a flop...and many go to the river.

Consider my analogy to boxing. Imagine a very strategic fight...very technical and the exact opposite of a slugfest. This would be like the poker player who sits back and waits for a big edge and opportunity to strike...typical of full ring play..or novice heads up play.

Higher level heads up poker is much more like a boxing slugfest...but not just the way you are probably thinking. Its not just about who can hit the other more times and/or harder....but is also about making an opponent miss. If you were to stand toe to toe and just slug back and forth...you would probably find that connecting a good shot is just as benificial to you as dodging a good shot.

Now think about this in terms of poker. Imagine that you win bets by a) landing more punches and by dodging punches.

With such a high level of aggression...bets and raises are going to fly back and forth. Ive seen some players go 3 bets almost every hand preflop and on the flop. If the opponent keeps up with this...then you pretty much have a clean slate as you get to the turn...and a large pot. What makes the difference in these matches are landing those few extra shots when you have a slight edge (a better hand) and dodging his shots when you dont. A lot of the success of this type of poker hinges on a players ability to save bets...rather than make bets.

So the strategy is more like pound pound pound...until your opponent goes away....and if he pushes back, to be gone before he does. This cuts to the heart of controlling the tempo of a match and keeping your opponent off balance.


OK....so....I just banged that out..didn't really proofread it....and its more freeflowing thought so some of it might not make complete sense...or maybe it does.

I was playing a lot of heads up poker when I started this thread (MONTHS AGO) and thought the similarities between the two were interesting. Now I realize that its all kinda funny and that I will be made fun of for this...but oh well...thats what happens to NWPers here anyway..

[speedz99]

So do you suggest any books for SH, hanging at the SH forum on 2+2, or just playing a shitload of hands?

[TJ_Eckleburg]

-Sigh-

Here's the problem: That you think of heads up LHE as boxing implies that your brain is waaaaaaay too succeptible to meaningless pattern recognition to be able to play as high-variance a game as HU LHE effectively, hence most people don't want to entertain your idea.

Happens with NWP'ers a lot too.

Not trying to be mean though. Ask more intelligent questions.

Here's a couple good ones: "What's the best way to play your BB if he raises any two from SB?"

"What should your 3-betting range be, and what should your OOP-calling range be?"

"How often should you check/raise top pair or better OOP against the raiser, and how often should you bet/3-bet them?

soooooo many tiny and unknowable edges, sooooooo many different ways to play, sooooooo many irrational and unpredictable ways to play.

[rforman13]

-Sigh-

Here's the problem: That you think of heads up LHE as boxing implies that your brain is waaaaaaay too succeptible to meaningless pattern recognition to be able to play as high-variance a game as HU LHE effectively, hence most people don't want to entertain your idea.

Before I tackle the rest...can you please explain this paragraph. I think I am reading this right...but not sure...so please explain.

Are you speaking generally...or are you making a generalization about my play based on my analogy. Serious question.

Thx.

[rforman13]

Here's a couple good ones: "What's the best way to play your BB if he raises any two from SB?"

"What should your 3-betting range be, and what should your OOP-calling range be?"

Need to know if the SB or BB has button for your question....as I think it varies from site to site.

[rforman13]

thx...glad we could clear all that up.

Now..back to flaming your fanboys..

[KDawgCometh]

BPD, are u generally advocating playing small pots in HU LHE matches, ie pots that are 6 BBs or lower. I can definetly see the boxing analogy, but I have very little experience playing purely HU poker and generally play 3 handed at the least. I am very interested in learning more in these areas as I do notice that sometimes I probably play a little too abc too often

[rforman13]

Not necessarily small pots at all. Really depends on what level of aggression that a) your opponent will let you get away with or you are comfortable with.

Some heads up players like to keep pots small and sit back a little..but it is pretty easy to get run over by an super aggressive player like this.

As long as both players are bankrolled...it doesnt really matter whether the pots are big or small. Ie...whether a lot of punches are thrown...or if its more of a strategic fight. It is important though to keep up with your opponent...or stay slightly ahead of him in terms of agression.

Three handed is similar...but the power of the button and position three handed is huge. Playing smart out of the SB becomes much more important as well.

[KDawgCometh]

one thing that I am also wondering, is what should be a typical aggressive VPIP in general when playing HU. Obviously position is downgraded a bit, and in some ways being OOP has more power because of the power of the CR. Namely, I'm thinking of the dreamclown team's theory of playing a near 100% VPIP when playing HU

[econ_tim]

one thing that I am also wondering, is what should be a typical aggressive VPIP in general when playing HU.

i'd say 100% is OK if you have can outplay your opponent postflop

against a good postflop player who raises 100% of the time, i think you can ditch some hands like 23o-28o when OOP. on pure equity terms, you're getting odds to call. but against a good player, being OOP will be too much of a disadvantage with the low card hands.