an experiment that i would probably never try...

[railmonkey 0]

First post so easy on the flaming...Here is the question:If you were to play an online NL heads up match without looking at your cards or your opponent's cards using the particular info below, what general betting formula would you use to give yourself the best chance of winning?Particulars: $5.50 buy in (minimum for the site) 2 players only each player starts with 75X BB blinds rise every 10 minutes (basically Stars structure)And how many matches would you generally expect to win with your formula out of, say, 100 buy-ins?...The reason I ask is that low buy-in heads-up matches seem often to involve ultra-tight players who wait for a pp to raise or maniacs who go all-in with 2-7 os in an attempt to steal one big blind. Just curious what others think would be the most successful truly 'blind' strategy to taking on both types of players.This is not something I would actually do. Just curious...

[slappy110 0]

this is an extremely interesting question...i like to think about this...i have another idea about something ill mention in another post below this...but regarding this...i think the best strategy would be to just raise every button, bet the pot on the flop...thats it, if you get called on the flop....check behind on the turn...if he checks again, steal it, if he bets, and it looks like he missed his draw...put on the pressure and come over the top...more often than not that last bet will be a missed draw or top pair on flop no kicker kind of move rather than a slowplay on flop...out of position...limp....then bet out at every flop...same kind of thing only if he calls the flop...be done with the hand...you're out of position and well...you have no idea what you hold...wait for a better time such as you being in position...hmm...i wonder if this would work, that would be really interestingI'll just say now what i was going to mention:i read in a phil gordons book about an exercise that you could do...which would be pretty fun to try: put a piece of electrical tape (or any opaque type of tape) over the part of your monitor so you can't see your cards, and try to beat the game that way (the difference being doing this at a full ring game) The way you would beat it he goes on to say is by a couple things. 1) play your position: raise when in position, and fiven the tecture of the flop and how many callers fire more off at the flop and on the turn.2) observe your opponents: if you notice someone playing too tightly, bet into them more often. If you notice someone who is a calling station, just avoid them. If you know someone can be played off a hand...wait till a draw hits the board and represent that draw by checkraising or raising3)play your image: if you want you can sit there for 30 hands and fold it all. Then, once you see a couple people limping in, throw in a raise and bet it the whole way. If your opponents are observant enough they'll realize you haven't played one hand yet and therefore you may even get them to lay top pair of jacks down or something like that...I haven't done this yet or anything but i think it would be a blast to try out...

[railmonkey 0]

I like the strategy r.e. heads up you set out. Later on today I will try it out one time and let you know the result. I know one time is not a good sample but I don't want to spend to much $ on this! I'll let you know how it goes. Haven't read Gordons book but that looks like it would be helpful as well. Obviously, the questions behind my post is how can I improve my betting strategy without relying on my cards and that second excercise seems to be a good one. Thanks.

[slappy110 0]

of course! Good luck! post back here and tell me how it goes!!

[railmonkey 0]

Well, I gave it a shot. Lasted 18 minutes but lost. It was interesting. Had a 20% lead at one point but obviously that did not hold. That being said, I think that using the general strategy that you set out combined with ACTUALLY LOOKING at my cards will be helpful. I'd do it again but am a fan of my very small bankroll...anyway, thanks.

[slappy110 0]

well sorry it didn't work out for ya :? i want to keep thinking of new strategies for a similar idea and i'll report back to you...perhaps you should approach it like this...first look at your cards, then, if they're bad, THEN analyze it and try to beat it like you were, that way, you don't necessarily need the good cards to beat him...AND you'll get your good hands paid off well...i think this combined with the earlier strategy...it would be pretty censored tough to beat...

[wrto4556 0]

The problem with this is if you hit a set and ol' boy has top kicker and raises you. You think your bluff is no good and fold the best hand.I think it's impossible.

[railmonkey 0]

The problem with this is if you hit a set and ol' boy has top kicker and raises you. You think your bluff is no good and fold the best hand.I think it's impossible.

Are you talking about his second strategy or first? Maybe I misread it but if you are talking about his second strategy then wouldn't you know you had hit your set? Or are you saying that you might think the set (which you were aware of) would still be no good?And I would agree that it would be impossible to have a winning record playing blind if that is what you were saying. I'm just curious what blind strategy would give the lowest number of losses. In figuring that out, I can hopefully better understand what the best 'general' heads up betting strategy is.Funny side note: After I posted this, we were playing in a 6 man winner take all tourney home game after hitting the bar. It got down to two people and one guy was clearly being outplayed by the other and had about 1/2 the other one's stack. So the lessor player started playing blind and started chipping away at the other guy who had steam coming out of his head. After about 30 minutes the better player had about 1/3 stack and went all in. The other guy went to look at his cards and the better player started screaming 'you can't look, you haven't been looking'. The other guy looked at him and said 'are you serious? You went all in. I'd be crazy to call blind.' He then looked at his cards and rolled over pocket Q's which held up against A-5. The other guy flew off the handle. It was worth the $5 price of admission....cards+alcohol=silliness.

[slappy110 0]

regarding the first approach...what you said was obviously true. You could flop quads and just check fold out of position if you think he's moderately strong...the idea here isn't to win by getting full value from your opponent and making him make mistakes which you reap the benefits from...we're talking about a different game...YOUR cards aren't what youre playing...you're playing your position, your money, your image, his image, and other factors...not the cards....and the object is to try to beat it that way...yeah you have a set, congratulations, but thats not the game at which we would be trying to play...does this make sense? anyways...and regarding the second approach, it combines both of these tactics which you could get full value out of your good hands, AND play all of those other factors...in fact this is what the top pro's do....anyways i hope this cleared some things up