If you meant sufficient as opposed to necessary I apologise

I read your statement as meaning you need reads approaching donk all Ax, pairs and draws

Of course that is what I meant. I said that that limping under those conditions is much better. Thus there are less extreme conditions where it is a little better.

Since you obviously know your stuff (math and poker, not so much English) I will dispense with my usual method of not giving all the details in a post so that readers have to do a little thinking on their own, and explain my exact thought processes.

The bottom line is that I wanted to show inexperienced readers why the good players here were advocating non shoves against "passive" opponents. So I came up with an extreme example that would indicate a limp with two blank cards. An example that would require little knowledge about carda or math or post flop play.

If you limped and would always fold to a preflop raise or a donk bet, then a limp will always win the three small blinds in the pot or lose one, if the two blank card always bet if checked to on the flop and was never called. So I postulated a situation where it would find itself in that situation more than 25% of the time. Not because that situation would ever happen but rather to keep the math simple. If the big blind raised preflop 30% and bet out 40% of his preflop calls, then the blank cards steal 60% of 70% which is more than enough getting 3 to 1.

I was originally going to write my post that way but decided that some readers might not like blank cards analysis. So I decided to give the small blind 72 which obviously increased the EV further, given the same opponent proclivities. Thus I emphasized that limping is much better than folding.

If it is much better, than it must be a little better even if the opponent plays less badly. Such as preflop raising 40%, always checking on the flop and check raising 45%, in the example just given. In that case, two blank cards would lose one small blind 40%, lose three small blinds 27% and win three small blinds 33%. In that scenario the fact that the opponent checks all hands rather than betting out with his good ones means the limp becomes negative EV. With two blank cards. But maybe not with 72 since it can sometimes call the raise.

You thought it was possible that I wasn't fully aware of this stuff?

Some of you may be confused by this statement because you heard that Game Theory must at least break even. But that is only true if the game rules don't favor one player. In holdem that is usually the button and playing GTO on the button usually guarantees not only break even but actually a profit.

In this case though that need not be true. Not if the game is push or fold. Because the button acts first and is laying odds. The Nash strategy is indeed the best strategy if the opponent is using the Nash calling strategy. But as usual it can be improved upon if he isn't and you know what his strategy actually is. But even if the Nash strategy is the best it is a losing strategy as stacks get larger.

To see this imagine if stacks were $10,000 and blinds were $1 and $2. Even if your opponent waited for aces, a push with anything other than aces loses disastrously. If you wait for aces you lose a dollar 220 out of 221 and gain $3 slightly less than one in 221. And even though I don't think you often play 1-2 push fold with 10K too often, you will hopefully see that the logic of Nash pushes being a negative strategy on the button is perfectly logical.

three sentiments that are often expressed.

all three are false.

nash charts are useless when you have options other than shove / fold. and its a losing proposition for the SB above 5bb [iirc]. to see not following shove / fold charts being used as an example of Dnegs playing incorrectly is telling.

And yes, Mr Sklansky, players much better than you or i have not understood that limping KQs or 72o can be very standard at 12bb HU. i'm not familiar enough with either your work or play to say you are above being behind the times in HUNSG play at those depths.

Two deuces with 6BB has a better option?

6bb is about where Nash shove fold is a +EV strat overall. A really low bar for SB play heads up. But following them around 6bb and under is at least +EV from start of hand.

And many shoves in the Nash charts will be the best option in a mixed strat 22 included

But as you get deeper following the charts get much worse.

Playing exclusive shove fold at 12bb is simply horrible

People used to have the idea that if something was a profitable shove to shove it. I always limped on raised the bottom and top of my range. I don't play SNGs of any sort much anymore for various reasons. I guess they have gotten more sophisticated with it.

There were probably some errors in what I said, because I was taking too much of the shove preflop approach. Open shoving KQs for 11xBB may be wrong, but it doesn't lose you much. Similarly, open folding 72o doesn't lose much, even if you can take advantage of position to play a really wide range. Also, like 10 years ago, every almost every reg would open fold 72o, particularly with like 7xBB.

What Negreanu was doing (Hellmuth may have been playing a little better preflop) was making obvious mistakes that burned money, like open limping an ace with 7xBB.

I dont claim to be the best player so maybe what I am saying is wrong but I have worked hard to get to the point where I can make a living from online poker and have reached that point its not impressive and probably a joke to most but it beats my win wage job so its alright for me I hope to improve and do better.

anyway Shoving KQs instead of limping at 11 bb actually is costly in my opinion. your thinking of the hand in isolation however its your entire range that matters. by shoving premium hands like KQs more then you should what your doing is making your limping range weaker so now they can iso your limps more often which will cost you money when you have a hand like 107 off suit and they force you to fold.

Also what is this with limping 72o on the button none of my GTO charts say to limp 72 off they say to fold for all stack depths.

I am assuming this 72 off suit is exploitive play not GTO and GTO would say fold.

from experience I have noticed some opponents will attack mercilessly when you limp so limping 72 off is bad but some players do really play fit or fold and check back almost every bb in which case yeah limping 72 off is correct and folding it a mistake.

few questions for the better players more experienced at heads up short stacked etc.

I am learning GTO ranges and have started rounding eg the solver was giving me blind ranges eg 24-26bb and 21-24bb etc further I found the idea of min rasing say 1% of the time limping 37% of the time and shoving 62% of the time and memorising all these different details for different hands would be unrealistic without cheating eg reading charts during play. which one I dont cheat and 2. its not really practicle.

So I rounded hands to the nearest fraction out of 6 eg 1/6 2/6 etc and now have that but also 24-26bb etc.

Is this bad or a good way to go this wont be GTO but it should be close to GTO and is something I can learn and implement. where as trying to learn and implement exact GTO seems nion impossible.

is the way I am going a good way or a weakness that will be exploited later?

I am not that up on HUSNG theory. I guess the approach now is not to shove so much, and limp rather than raise usually when really short. So you would limp top 10% hands for balance. I have no idea if you would limp ATC with 7xBB, but I wouldn't do it.

I am not sure where to learn this. I think there are video sites oriented towards it, and of course coaches. I assume most of this has been developed in the last 5 to 10 years.

My point was Hellmuth and particularly Negreanu were making more basic short stack mistakes. They probably would benefit from expert HUSNG coaching, but there are certain things like shoving a weak ace when short stacked that should be automatic. There were 4 times in the last hour of play where Negreanu open limped or checked to a limp with Axo or Axs short stacked. I assume those are still considered standard shoves.

not sure if you mean suited or unsuited AT according to my GTO charts AT off suit is 100% shove at 7bb but AT suited is very close to 50/50 limp/shove.

I meant ATC for any two cards, like 72o.

Where do you get these GTO charts? I assume they are a lot better than the old Nash charts. I also wouldn't take anything in a chart as Gospel, as there will probably be a new chart in a few years with completely different recommendations.

Short stacked heads up play is solved.

The charts won't change.

Following them is burning money v most players in some spots though.

As for the rest of your questions winni I'd be happy to chat via pm so as not to clog this thread or you can post in the husng forum there plenty of people there who give great advice

I guess these GTO preflop charts have gotten really advanced. That is why Polk was so insistent he needed to beat Negreanu.

I will have to check out HUSNG. Most of the strategy forums here are sort of dead.

If it is solved, it is kind of funny that these guys were playing for all the $ on TV totally oblivious to that.

I wouldn't assume though that any kid with a GTO chart could beat Negreanu in HUSNGs starting deep.

Why is it not a push 100% of the time with two deuces when you have six big blinds?

It is a push 100% iirc

That is not what you said earlier. Do you see why your earlier answer can be pretty close to disproven with simple logic regarding your loss when you limp with a hand that would have stolen, compared to to the tiny gain from limping when facing a hand that would have called?

I stated that many of the hands that are pushes in the Nash charts are also best pushed in a mixed strat, 22 included.

I learned more about strategy here in NVG than any of the strategy forums. I have no interest in playing spin and gos much, but this short stack GTO seems really important. I would assume it applies to playing from CO or whatever also.

It is interesting that all the regs thought you had to shove with 10xBB with AA because you would also not shove with like AA. However, many casual players and old school players played better in some situations maybe by limping or raising rather than just shoving short. People started shoving with 10xBB or less in SNGs and it got worse with the charts making people think everything was push/fold. However, before GTO, a lot players started raising or limping some at 10xBB or whatever.

One thing I've learned studying gto solutions is often poor players stumbled across the 'correct" strategy at some nodes and often when they did it was by taking a line that everyone intuitively 'knew' was bad.

Multiway things aren't so clear. Multiple solutions can exist and it's also not guaranteed to even be breakeven when you play 'perfectly'. Opponents deviations can gift EV to other players at their and your expense. But yes there are plenty of spots In mtts / sngs where what people have 'known' to be poor play, is actually the best option both in terms of exploiting recs v and in terms of some psuedo gto strat v regs.

( husngs are ideal games to be solved due to the lack of a bubble, unraked pots, no multiway quirks, and shorter stacks making solving less RAM and time consuming than for 100bb poker.)

Which is why we should question ourselves when we see players take lines we consider to be bad play. Some of the hands posted in the high stakes thread recently make me puke. My gut tells me there's no way some of the lines can be good. But I'm not a high level player who has studied the villain in hand / solutions etc.

No doubt there's spots where dnegs has stumbled across the 'correct' line, but people calling him out for not following push fold charts when the professionals in this format long ago stopped even thinking about Nash above 5bb - like not in the vocabulary of the strat discussion - are guilty of what they accuse dnegs of being.

Anyway I think I've done the obligatory gto tarding up of an nvg thread, maybe someone could come along and say something about whether the human body has evolved to eat meat or the nutritional benefits of veganism so we can completely hit bingo for a dnegs thread.

Some good thoughts and some bad thoughts about some of the shallow hu play here. Two true things:

1) It is correct to play a robust strategy and incorporate a lot of open limps down to about 7-8bb hu...really down to about 5bb if you want to be fancy about it. So some stuff like open jamming KQs at 11.5 is...not good.

2) There were lines taken shallow (particularly with some button limps and Axo non jams) that are pretty much unjustifiable regardless of "reads" or "match strategy" or "style" that were simply clear mistakes, by both players.
---

It really surprises me how bad these guys were at basic shallow hu. With that said a few months back I caught some high roller ft on tv with some actual world-class mtt players and I was pretty impressed by the lines taken hu 8-15bb eff in a few televised hands I saw, so I do think there are some tourney regs out there who have put some more work in and play more respectably

But if you're playing a husng challenge format for 6 figs, a bit shocking that you don't know weak Axo should snap jam btn and jam bb over limp or whatever at 10bb or less.

Only years? What took this little geniuses so long?

Anybody know where Jason Somerville went? This will be a push but lol I am trying to buy some new RIU outfits and his site shows no clothes Love that kid, super entertaining and have not seen him around in a long time.

Probably not the same people. It is really amazing that the "GTO solution" indicates Hellmuth played absolutely correct limping 99 is 7xBB on the final hand in which he induced Negreanu to shove 75s. 5 years ago everyone would think that was crazy.

I guess all the online kids convinced each other that if a chart said shoving was better than folding, anything but shoving was bad.

I am not convinced that the current GTO approach isn't going to be changed in 5 years. However, learning it is probably really valuable for most SNG and MTT players.

GTO is GTO. It's not meta, it's not something that is evolving or changing. The GTO solution is fixed and will not change.