Here's a rough idea for a deep-stack strategy--maybe it sucks, but I'd like to hear what you folks think. Let's say you have over 200 BB and several other similar stacks at the table.

Vs. shorties (including full-stacks) you just play normally. But when another deep-stack is in the hand, you make some changes.

First, you raise ATs-AKs in addition to AKo. You also raise maybe 1/3 of the time on 66-TT (that 66 is the smallest hand that can be the nuts on an unpaired board), 1/6 maybe on 22-55 (which can make quads), as usual on JJ-AA. And then also maybe 1/3 or so on all SCs (54s-KQs and 53s-KJs).

Vs. a deep-stack, you'll then always open push the stone cold nuts as well as certain draws--namely nut flush draw, open-ender to nut straight with at least a runner-runner flush or, if there's a straight showing, you're pushing nut straight with flush redraw plus just nut flush draw.

I'm just going to claim that this should be profitable on all boards, but I'd love to hear exceptions.

In any case, since the lowest uncapped game I know is 2/5, I'll have to buy in for 1k to do the experimenting. So, if I do it, I really would like to have it theoretically VERY sound first--since I'm not a fan of risking $1k for a dumb strategy.

Revision: I think 22-55 are pointless to raise. They can only be the nuts with quads, and open-pushing quads would only work long-term against an idiot. For every nut hand here, you MUST have the right proportion of draw hands for this strategy even to be interesting.

Let's start with a K65r board, and say you open push. You have 3 instances of 78s here (not the one without runner-runner flush) and 3 instances of KK. 66 clearly has to fold against this range.

I think this means, however, that you have to raise SCs always from MP--otherwise it's just one SC if you raised 87s only 1/3 of the time.

How about a K65 two-tone board?

Now you're pushing KK, 87s in the appropriate suit (which is a coinflip to 66 more or less), and your big flush draws. So that's makes 3 big winners, one coinflip, and then ATs-AKs, which can be 3 or 4 hands depending on how the suits fall.

That also has to fold out 66.

On a made straight board with flush draw, I think it's obvious where we're at, since you're just open pushing nut straight with flush redraw. Another made nut straight has to fold (but probably won't).

On flush boards, you also should have (after raising) nut flush a little more often than naked AKo with just the A--although that is relative to the board and probably means you need to raise down to maybe A8s (or perhaps randomize with any suited A is the best way). Basically, if no K is there on a flush board, you have AKo 4 times and if a K is there, you have it 3 times. So you need at least 5 or 6 made nut flushes for little flushes to lay down. So, you might always raise AQs and randomize at 1/2 on everything else, giving you in theory 6.5 nut flushes.

Also, you only make these overbets on dynamic boards--never on paired boards or such because there's no hand you can get called with by anyone but a fool. You also don't do it with the straight flush. The A-high flush would be stupid to call a bet of $1k in a pot of less than $100--unless he thinks you're insane, which is not really the image I'm going for here.

On any kind of static board (draw-free or dead-end), you just play out your hands like you usually would.

Ok, so much for my strategy suggestion. I have no idea whether it would be any better than just playing normally--but it seems to me like it HAS to be +EV, could lead less than optimal players to mistakes and would at least be fun pushing a huge stack in the middle once in a while. The real question is whether you gain EV in those situations over basically "normal" play. It's certainly a much more conservative version of a BOW-ish strategy.

Why do you want to try to fold 66? I don't understand any of this.