I have discussed this topic in a couple threads already and, though i did get some good advice, I didn't get anything nearly as specific as I would have liked.
I think I was framing it wrong.

NEway; I've been running into a growing number of opponents who MR bttn 100%
and i'm guessing this will become more and more popular. I've even heard a player ask if it might make sense to make a minimum bet size >2X a standard rule to take away the edge from being able to MR your entire range profitably from the button. I don't know about all of that but I do know players are doing this and that i'm having a hard time coming up with good countermeasures.

I have done a lot of work with Poker Stove, I've been thinking about this ALOT, and i've put this into practice a little bit with good results so far. (small sample size)

What I'm trying to find or establish is a baseline/default/ or GTO solution for defending your BB vs a villian who minraises his bttn EVERY hand.

This is where I'm at;
I think we have to defend about 50%; violent leaks pointed out that defending less makes bttn profitable without ever hitting a flop/even if you just MR and give up every time you will make SOME profit by MRing 100% if your opponent defend less than 50%
We also know that you are supposed to win on the button and lose from the BB, so we can't PROVE that we are being exploited if we continue with less than 1/2 our hands from the BB vs MR.
We do have to consider the express odds we are being laid also (we are getting 3 to 1 to call MR from BB in order to see 60% of the board). To me the disadvantage of being OOP and the 3 to 1 express odds cancel each other out to some degree (maybe entirely??)
So, I have started defending with the top half of the deck vs an opponent who MRs every hand until I have a reason to deviate or adjust.

So as a default, I propose continuing with the top half of the deck.
of the continuing range I think we should be flatting 50% and 3 betting 50%.
So my range will look something like this;
Range vs 100% MR on Bttn HU:A2s+,K2s+,Q5s+,Q7o+,J7s+,T8s+,98s,A2o+,K5o+,Q7o+,T 9o
As a place to start I will suggest raising with the top half of that range 75% of the time and flatting 25%, and flatting with the bottom half 75%, 3 betting 25%.

Simply playing the top half of the deck vs villains entire range means that you'll have the best hand 75% of the time and good express odds to boot.

When you three bet you very likely have the best hand
when you call you will still have at least 51% equity vs a random hand and 3 to 1on your call.


I'm asking if this strategy seems good, bad, great, terrible, or otherwise.
I hope someone has a better default strat or some other good advice. I'd welcome even a simple -1 ("not even close man") or +1 ("you're on the right track")

Is this too tight/loose/aggressive/passive?
If you were building a poker bot what would his default setting be vs MRer?
Thoughts?

There aren't really defaults in HU poker. You need to be able to adapt to the player and the cards that are coming.

Is your opponent aggressive post flop or passive? or unknown?
Have your cards been coming hot or cold?
Who has momentum?
What have you been able to do post flop so far?
How much are they defending their BB?
How are they responding to 3-bet? Calling? 4-betting? Folding?
How do they respond to c/raises?
Do they seem like they are sticky? or a "playmaster"?

Based on all those things, you have to adjust your range.

And to more directly answer your question, IMO hands like Q7o play terrible OOP. You never flop a good draw and the flops that do pair you don't tend to be that profitable.

I think low suited queens probably suck for about the same reason.

There actually is a gto somewhere, just no one knows it.

True. And that's the point of the original post--trying to narrow down what a GTO defense strategy would look like.

My thought is that there's not really much value in knowing it anyway, since the bulk of HU play is about adjusting to game flow dynamics.

For example, we might use the strategy mentioned in OP, but what happens when we hit cold cards for a while? Are we really going to fold the first dozen hands of a match, or will we mix in a 3 bet with a hand that plays OK that's not on the list?

Or maybe we find that BUT folds to our first few 3 bets. We obviously need to quickly start adjusting our buff and value 3 bet ratios, and our corresponding calling range.

And, I'm likely not going to widen my preflop range to the GTO defense range vs. a 100% opener until I know for sure that villain even opens 100% of buttons. Assuming I take a dozen or so hands to make this assumption, I'll already have some reads on my opponents tendencies, which will influence how I want to approach the match.

Thank you zachvac
and that's what i'm trying to get at.
Why is everyone so quick to write this off?

There also has to be a default
Is it that hard to imagine that you play ten hands with a guy who is MRing every bttn without getting a specific read on him? Maybe no hands have been shown down and he seems to be taking pretty standard, solid lines but your not really sure. Maybe you've played with this guy before and his game is always evolving or changing post flop (he could be new, expirmenting, like to shift gears, or just playing drunk 1/2 the time) but you just don't have a good read on him other than: he MR's bttn 100%

OK, the people who have been in the conversation from the other thread KNOW what I'm asking. for the rest;
I'm just looking for a starting place. I believe (with very little certainty) that I have a decent one. Just imagine you are programing a poker bot. What will it's default setting be for defending vs 100% MR frm Bttn?
You HAVE to have a default when programing a bot unless you want to input a billion different algorithms.
so, you are readless
or solve for GTO
or what is the starting point from which you deviate
or if you had to stick to exactly one strat for defending vs 100%BttnMR for the rest of your poker life...etc,etc,etc
if you don't know then you don't know. you could still tell me if you think my strat looks OK or not. But please try to avoid "it depends", I know it depends and I know i will have to adjust for each opponent but I also KNOW there is a GTO solution and that there has to be SOME kind of guidlines for defending your BB vs MR.
Does my strat look totally wrong for one reason or another or does it seem OK?

OK, in responce to the Q7o and suited Queens. I get that they are not easy to play but let me just explain where my range came from;
I looked at the Equity vs Random hand for all the paint cards down to ten and found the smallest kicker suited/unsuited that will give us better than 50% equity vs random hand. If you drop below T as your high card you will never be there. So all the hands in my range have better than 50% vs random hand. Q7o, though difficult to play post flop Will be a favorite vs random hand, so will Q6s. My thinking is this; if I am getting 3 to 1 then I can call with anything that is likely to be a favorite vs button even though i am OOP.
Why;.. I will hit the flop with Q7 about 1/3 of the time. He could hit as well and I might have the second best hand, however, that door swings both ways and because i have 52% or so (and probably have the best hand to begin with) it will be at worst a wash (when we both hit the flop some of the time) and in fact I will just barely usually be the one who makes the better hand when my opponent and I both hit the flop (when I have Q7). Now consider also that I only NEED to end up profitable one flop in 4 to call with 3 to 1 pot odds and calling a player who will min raise with any two cards starts to look OK to me (with Q7).
I mean, there is definately a huge edge for being in position but is it really beyond 3 to 1?
Let's look at a toy game quickly
Imagine players A and B start with 100 chips each with player A always getting the button and player B always being OOP post flop.
Player A, on the bttn, must put 3 units in and player B, OOP, must ante only one unit. The preflop action is skipped entirely and the action starts at the flop.
Who will the edge go to? assume they are equall skilled. Which player will win?

I am not at all sure and think its a very close call. If the 3 to 1 handicap is a perfect balance against playing OOP then it will make sense to enter a pot when you get 3 to 1 and have at 51% equity OOP.
I think i'm being fair, but if I'm underestimating the edge of position then that's where its at. If i'm overestimating the positional edge enjoyed by the dealer then it stands to reason that we should be calling whider than my range.

So, that's what I'm thinking. I mean there are surely players who would never call a MR OOP with Q7o, and I don't think they are wrong but I think (if my opponent MR's every button) Q7o is at the very bottom of a continuing range. I doubt there would be much difference in overall profitability/lack there of if you dropped that hand as I feel it is a very mediocre call. Same with Q6s and T9o. But you have to draw a line somewhere and that's where I drew mine.

Am I missing something, totally off base, maybe onto something?
Who wins the toy game?
Any advice at all would be helpful. I feel like I am making some headway on a problem that completely escaped me just a couple weeks ago but I'm doing 95% of it by myself and I don't know how much faith I have in my conclusions. Now you see where my logic is coming from so any thoughts on this would be helpful.
Thanks in advance for your input.

I understand the math behind it, getting great odds, having decent equity, but I don't think that I can play Q7o OOP against an unknown and show a profit.

Hence my comment. I don't think I can do it with Q-5s either.

There are other hands, not in your list that I'd rather play either as a call or a 3-bet, probably mostly the suited connectors.

But back to my point about the GTO range thing.
1st BB of a match, I'm not playing 50% of hands, button hasn't given me a reason to
10th BB of the match, and but has raised everyone - I might adjust to a wider range depending on what's happened so far and my image. Have I 3 bet yet? Have I called a couple hands so far? What happened post flop?

That all matters. If I haven't 3 bet yet. I can probably raise ATC and show a profit on hand #10. If I haven't called yet, I can probably call a wider range because BUT will likely put me on high cards.

If I've 3 bet three times already in the 1st 10 hands, I'm probably not going to come in with a another 3 bet bluff right away, but I probably will widen my value range, expecting to get played back at a lot.

So here we're 10 BB into the match, and we've already deviated our strategy based on what cards fell and what happened. Obviously I started with a hand range on hand #1 that consisted on hands I felt comfortable playing OOP vs. a standard range, but I'm certain that isn't the hand range that is GTO vs. a 100% button open, mostly because I can't assume button will open 100% of the time until I see a few more hands, and hence, I'm playing tighter than GTO.

@Donovan. I think you've got most points right.
A few thinks to think about;
- Not being exploitable preflop isn't an issue, you're going to lose money OOP anyway, so Q7o or 50% is a complete arbitrary point to start defending. Not that I think it's far from GTO if I had to guess and FWIW i'm only slightly tighter vs a 100% MR.
- The equity of your preflop hand vs a random hand isn't the most important factor to decide whether or not to include it in your defending range. For instance 67s has only 45%, 22 has only ~50% equity and K5o has 53%. It's about playability and I would adjust my range a bit in that aspect. I would add some sc's and 1 gappers instead of the worst Qxo and Kxo hands. Makes you able to rep some hands on low coordinated boards as well.

I disagree completely. Obviously we can deviate to exploit certain opponents but in general unless you're a bumhunter there's going to be more spots where you have to use your default than spots you aren't.

I apreciate what your saying itsaniceday, I actually thought about changing my starting range to include some suited connecting cards that don't have quite 50% equity based on playability and to get rid of the less playable 51%+ hands, and I think that's fair advice. I just didn't want to post a list based on my own personal opinions about playability and such.

I just found a chart in an old book "caros complete missing arsenal" that has a chart that may be more apropriate, its just based on profitability and has a column for HU(or 2 opponents) and another for many opponents then lists them by %. That chart would likely be better than my list but they really didn't deviate much, off memory I'm pretty sure my range and that list are 90% similar (and the mods you suggested are mostly how it differs)

BTW, I didn't come up with the list for the sole purpose of "not being exploited", as I'm sure Zach can attest to. I was just arguing against another players idea that we have to play at least 50% simply to avoid being exploited. Because we are supposed to lose from the BB it isn't enough to profit from the Bttn to prove exploitation and believe me i get that. It just so happens that, after a lot of thought and some research, 50% seems to be right or rightish to me. It has the added bonus of not allowing opp to MR profitably with his entire range, but that was not the goal.

I'm just thinking that playing the top half of the deck (whatever we decide that actually is) vs a random hand will give us a chance to see the flop at a bargain (3 to 1) while having the best hand 75% of the time.

Calling a MR with, say, Q7o means getting 3 to 1 express odds and probably having the best hand. That seems totally defensible to me. Remember too that its the bottom of my range, dropping it wouldn't change much. I feel like its a marginally profitable call even OOP. Even if you simply fit or fold you should do well enough I think. You'll hit the flop about 1/3 of the time and, assuming that's profitable, it's more than enough times.

I'm sure it is profitable to hit the flop with Q7 vs random hand even OOP. There will be times you make a second best hand but they shouldn't cost that much (if you hit the Q the only overs would be A and K and I don't think you'll go broke with a pair of queens with an ace or king on the flop and if you hit the seven the same logic will apply but even more so). Plus your opponent will make the second best hand at least as often as you do (after all you will usually have the best hand preflop). As long as you've shown a willingness to float with bottom pair or worse you should make some money on the Q75 type flops when your opponent has 87, A5, TT, etc. And just winning a single bet when opponent Cbets or the flop goes x/x and you get a bet paid on the turn, will make this a very profitable scenario. In fact if you just take the pot down with no extra bets when you hit the flop you do so at a profit. The only problem will be when you make a second best hand and, like I said, that door swings both ways (granted its worse OOP than in pos, but I feel that the other factors far outwiegh that).

The feeling I'm gettin is that most don't disagree with my strat by much. The fact that playability was not included is a limitation that I admit but that's an easy enough fix I think. What if we could actually determine the "most profitable" fifty percent of hands and adjust my range where necessary??
Would that seem OK??

JUST FYI, I totally left out all the pairs from my range;
suprised that wasn't pointed out.
here's my range for continuing vs 100%MR from Bttn;
A2s+,K2s+,Q5s+,Q7o+,J7s+,T8s+,98s,A2o+,K5o+,Q7o+,T 9o,22+
50% calls and 50% raises.

After thinking more about it I think its pretty OK to add the suited connectors down to 65s for playability as recomended by itsaniceday. You are getting a very good price to continue and your opponent could have any two cards.
If the edge of position doesn't make up for the 3 to 1 express odds you're being laid you could possibly add some other hands but I won't think I'd want to play too much whider. It will be hard to make any real money with the bottom of the range as it is "but keep in mind you don't have to make money very often when you're getting 3 to 1 on your call".

Just because you're supposed to lose money from the BB doesn't mean that your defending range should be arbitrary. As long as the SB shouldn't be able to open 100% of hands, then youre going to have to defend ~50% (or whatever number you think it will be based on similar math).

And since equity does not easily convert to EV, then you need to use some other method for determining which hands to defend.

I think one of the keys to adjust to the 100% BTN raisers is their reaction to 3-bets: Fold / Peel / 4-bet%. IMO basing yourself on plane equity for your range only goes that far, especially when they're close. 35s has more playability than Q7o.

I agree to play about 50% of the hands from the BB. But it's pretty bad to give your 3-bet range the top 50% of the hands you decide play, or the top 25% of total hands. It's very exploitable and many of these hands, when villain peels, are second best hands in a bloated pot OOP. I think your standard should be to 3-bet-fold the bottom 25% of your range, flat the middle half and 3-bet for value the top 25%. Then move these around according to villain's reactions. Against a lot of them I actually up the 3-bet due to a lot of peel & fold.