Quick Question for the more mathematically inclined

Iago

If money wasn't an issue and there were an unlimited amount of heads-up games available would there be a case for simply pushing all-in on every hand?

could this be a viable strategy and would it work out to be profitable in the long run?

No, I've no idea why this thought is running around in my head today!!


edit: I mean this in the terms of heads-up tournament play rather than cash play.

RoundTower

If money wasn't an issue there would be a case for lighting your fire with it, but no, it wouldn't be profitable in the long run.

Hectorjelly

Unless the blinds are massive then this is going to be a losing strategy.

NickyOD

Your oponent will just wait and call with a hand that holds up more often than not against any of your random hands which would only need to be something like Q7 or better, so you lose more than you win.

ApeXaviour

Iago wrote:

If money wasn't an issue and there were an unlimited amount of heads-up games available would there be a case for simply pushing all-in on every hand?

could this be a viable strategy and would it work out to be profitable in the long run?

No and I'll tell you why. If I was playing heads up with you, and you were using this "strategy". I'd simply fold the hands that I reckon you have a better chance of beating me with than I have of beating you. I would win all-in hands more often (assuming blinds are negligible in comparison), thus win more more money.

Iago

NickyOD wrote:

Your oponent will just wait and call with a hand that holds up well against against any of your random hands whihc would only need to be something like Q7 or better, so you lose more than you win.

granted but at that stage (presuming it's not the first hand) you'll still have chips left over and will still be in the game. Also when he gets a hand that he's willing to call with you may have a better hand or simply outdraw him on the hand. At which point you have won the game and the entry fee.

You only have to get lucky once, but he has to have a better hand and/or get lucky more than once after the first hand. I suppose it would depend on how willing your opponent is to risk his entry fee against and what hand range that leaves him with.

What if you were to narrow the range to include any hand with a T or higher or any two suited cards. Would this make a difference to the overall success rate?

padraig_f

I've thought of a variation of this that might be profitable. It came to me one night whilst playing online after the pub. I'm not having the best of luck and feeling a bit frustrated I decide to have a little fun for $50. I intend to join a $50 buy-in 6-max NL table and go all-in on the first hand whatever I'm dealt then leave. It's a bit juvenile I know, but I just wanted a bit of action and would've been quite happy to get a caller with a better hand. Anyway, this guy raises to $1, I think I was dealt A2o, I go all-in. He says something like "lol, ok" before folding. I win the pot and leave the table, showing a $1.75 profit.

What if you were to table-hop doing this and no-one knew your strategy? Would you make enough to cover your losses when you get called?

Let's say you're only called with AA/KK. This beats a random hand 83.8% of the time. So your EV from that pot is $16.20, showing a loss of $33.80. The chances of one of your 5 opponents having AA/KK is about 1/22. So to cover your losses you need to make ($33.80/21) = $1.60 per hand when you're not called. This means you need roughly an average of 2 limpers or one raiser (blinds are 25c/50c) when you go all-in. That's not unrealistic to expect. You need a bit more if you add QQ to the mix but it could still be profitable (you could for example drop your buy-in to $30 to limit your losses).

Iago wrote:

What if you were to narrow the range to include any hand with a T or higher or any two suited cards. Would this make a difference to the overall success rate?

Many SnG players on Party actually employ this strategy in heads-up play, and I can tell you from experience, it's not profitable

Lafortezza

If money is unlimited why are you playing poker when it takes up so much coke-and-hooker time?

What if you were to narrow the range to include any hand with a T or higher or any two suited cards. Would this make a difference to the overall success rate?[/QUOTE]

using sklanskys groupings will increase it by a good percentage, and then you ad the rest of the ingredients to increase your precentage further!