Heads Up - 20 Matches in the Books...

Talking Poker · #1 10-20-05, 02:24 AM

I was 8-2 in my first 10 (actually got up to 10-2 at one point).
Second 10: 5-5. Bleh!

I'm 13-7 overall, which is good. My ROI is 33%. ($350 on a $1050 investment).

The last few I played were a "Welcome back to reality - you're going to get sucked out on here too." Lost my last two matches with to back 2 outers. Ouch. The first gave my opponent a better full house, and in the second, a guy spiked his 2 outer (he had 9s and I had T8 - flop was AAT).

Long run though, I really like these. I feel like I have so much more control playing Heads Up than I do in a full SNG. I'm going to play at least 100 of these and see where I stand in the end.

I told myself I'd play 20 $50 ones. With a 13-7 record, I think I could move up to $100 if I wanted to. I assume the players will be significantly better, but you never know. I think I'll do 5 more $50 ones first and then decide...

Talking Poker · #2 10-20-05, 03:06 AM

Ok, 5 more matches in the books now. I multi-tabled (for the first time) 2 at a time for the first 4, and then played the last one solo. I ended up winning all 5 matches, but I have to tell you, I don't like the multi-tabling so much. I feel like a lose a bit of my edge.

Funny how the last match I played (solo) was the toughest one. I had my opponent down in the 3-400 chips range FOUR TIMES, and doubled him up every time, regardless of who the favorite was when the chips went in (I think it was split). Fortunately, I kept grinding him back down and was able to finish him off.

So, updated numbers:
18-7
45% ROI

I'm moving up to the $100 level tomorrow.

eddo31 · #3 10-20-05, 03:20 AM

nice job so far.

what would be the highest that you could ever see yourself playing HU? i am pretty amazed to see people playing the 5k headsup matches on stars, but i guess that isnt even that much compared to some of the live games out there. i guess it isnt that much different than some of the big no limit games on ub or fulltilt, as they are usually very short and there is much more money on the table for those.

lightfungus · #4 10-20-05, 10:51 AM

They are fun. I found the same pattern of victory at the beginning and then suckouts after 6 or 7 matches that brought me down to size, whaddya know.

Talking Poker · #5 10-20-05, 01:41 PM

I can't put a limit on the highest I would consider playing. Right now, I think $200 would be my comfortable limit, but certainly I could play for more than that down the road if my "HU Bankroll" allowed me too. If after a year, I'm up $100k playing HU matches (bear with me - just an example), you're not going to see me wasting my time with $100 ones any more, ya know?

There are a number of things I find very appealing about these:
1. I feel like I have more control over the outcome than I do a SNG.
2. They are quick - anywhere from a few minutes to 40. Average is probably 15-20.
3. You can't get cheated. Collusion is impossible, since you only have one opponent, and I'll GLADLY play HU NL with any bot.

Now that I'm moving up to $100 (and because of my good start, which I'm sure is above where my long term numbers will be), I expect my ROI to drop... but because I'll be playing for double the stakes, that's ok. It can drop to just over half as much and I'll still come out ahead by moving up.

Talking Poker · #6 10-20-05, 07:20 PM

I'm 3-2 through my first five $100 matches. One of those losses should have definitely been a win (how many times do I need to get him all in with the best hand???), but I'm sure it evens out somewhere... like this gift, for example...

This was my fastest match to date - one hand. I really thought I'd only get paid off if I hit the 8. Wasn't expecting him to shove all his chips in with 4 cards to a straight on the board, but to each their own. I think because I led at the river, he assumed I didn't have it. You'd be AMAZED at how many people make that incorrect assumption.

PokerStars Game #2850519076: Tournament #14040839, Hold'em No Limit - Match Round I, Level I (10/20) - 2005/10/20 - 17:24:47 (ET)
Table '14040839 1' One on One Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: Papa Chippi (1500 in chips)
Seat 2: Rogue23 (1500 in chips)
Papa Chippi: posts small blind 10
Rogue23: posts big blind 20
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Rogue23 [9d 7s]
Papa Chippi: raises 40 to 60
Rogue23: calls 40
*** FLOP *** [5h 6s 4d]
Rogue23: bets 85
Papa Chippi: raises 85 to 170
Rogue23: calls 85
*** TURN *** [5h 6s 4d] [Qd]
Rogue23: checks
Papa Chippi: bets 300
Rogue23: calls 300
*** RIVER *** [5h 6s 4d Qd] [3s]
Rogue23: bets 545
Papa Chippi: raises 425 to 970 and is all-in
Rogue23: calls 425 and is all-in
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Papa Chippi: shows [5c Qc] (two pair, Queens and Fives)
Rogue23: shows [9d 7s] (a straight, Three to Seven)
Papa Chippi is sitting out
Rogue23 collected 3000 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 3000 | Rake 0
Board [5h 6s 4d Qd 3s]
Seat 1: Papa Chippi (button) (small blind) showed [5c Qc] and lost with two pair, Queens and Fives
Seat 2: Rogue23 (big blind) showed [9d 7s] and won (3000) with a straight, Three to Seven

Talking Poker · #7 10-20-05, 09:21 PM

Ok... 10 $100 HU matches in the books. I went 5-5. I'm not too upset with that though, because more of the losses could have gone my way than the wins could have gone the other way. Know what I mean?

Here was my favorite. This was the second hand (I folded my SB in the first hand). Are you kidding me??? LOL...

PokerStars Game #2851756502: Tournament #14047254, Hold'em No Limit - Match Round I, Level I (10/20) - 2005/10/20 - 19:59:12 (ET)
Table '14047254 1' One on One Seat #2 is the button
Seat 1: Rogue23 (1490 in chips)
Seat 2: sylwia (1510 in chips)
sylwia: posts small blind 10
Rogue23: posts big blind 20
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Rogue23 [2c 5c]
sylwia: calls 10
Rogue23: checks
*** FLOP *** [5d 4c 5h]
Rogue23: checks
sylwia: checks
*** TURN *** [5d 4c 5h] [Kc]
Rogue23: bets 35
sylwia: calls 35
*** RIVER *** [5d 4c 5h Kc] [2h]
Rogue23: bets 85
sylwia: raises 95 to 180
Rogue23: raises 215 to 395
sylwia: raises 215 to 610
Rogue23: raises 825 to 1435 and is all-in
sylwia: calls 825
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Rogue23: shows [2c 5c] (a full house, Fives full of Deuces)
sylwia: shows [5s 4d] (a full house, Fives full of Fours)
sylwia collected 2980 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 2980 | Rake 0
Board [5d 4c 5h Kc 2h]
Seat 1: Rogue23 (big blind) showed [2c 5c] and lost with a full house, Fives full of Deuces
Seat 2: sylwia (button) (small blind) showed [5s 4d] and won (2980) with a full house, Fives full of Fours

junYUN · #8 10-20-05, 10:47 PM

omfg BRTUAL

Talking Poker · #9 10-20-05, 11:13 PM

The funny thing is I was behind the whole way! LOL...

Talking Poker · #10 10-21-05, 05:28 PM

Ok, I now have 20 $100 matches in the books. These are not going NEARLY as well as the $50 ones did. Fortunately, I just won my last two, bringing my $100 HU record to 9-11. No kidding. Yuck!

The good news is, I have had some SICK luck during these, well below what I would expect it to be in the long run. I would guess that I was in total control of 3 or 4 of those losses, even getting my opponents all in once or twice, only to have them double up a couple of times and watch everything fall apart.

It's hard to think in terms of long term numbers, but I'm fairly confident I can win 60% at this level.... Of course, if I can win 70% at the $50 level...........?

I'll play 5 more, so I'll have 25 of each to look at, and then probably do 25 more of each to have a better sample size.

If nothing else, this has been interesting, fun, and good practice.

Current numbers (the $100 ones really killed my ROI):
27-18 (18-7 for $50, 9-11 for $100)
8% ROI

junYUN · #11 10-21-05, 06:42 PM

8%... rough.. dont worry you'll hit a hot streak one of these times.

Talking Poker · #12 10-21-05, 08:02 PM

Ok, I went 4-1 in my last 5. I need a break from these (addictive things), but here are my numbers through 50 matches:

$50 - 18-7, $587.50
$100 - 13-12, -$25 (damn juice!)

Totals: 31-19, $562.50, 14% ROI.

I'm not sure if I should move back down to $50, stick with $100, or what... I think I'll play 25 more of each and reevaluate. 100 of these should be a pretty decent sample size, I would think.