AA versus AK

[Styrofoam]

Oh really ? a moron well MAYBE your an ASSHOLE

Going home up is never a moron thing to do.

Playing for hours and being ahead and then going home busted on the last hand is what an Asshole might do.

I hate to disagree with you, but i do. folding AA is quite possibly the WORST thing you could have done in this situation. Against nearly any hand he can go all in with you're purely DOMINATING him. You have 350$ in front of you with more than 70% to double your money (this if he doesn't have a pair, or an ace) to 83% to win if he has a pair, and even better if he has Ax. Quite frankly, i find it hard to believe you'd fold in this situation to "go home 300$ up" and if you did, then IMO it was the dumbest move anyone could make.

 

[Dorkus Malorkus]

Here's a really interesting way of looking at it. Think of it as ... hmm... for lack of a better term, I'm going to coin a new term and call this reverse pot odds ...

There's a reason such a term hasn't already been coined. Can you guess what it is?

Seriously, it is never +EV to fold Aces preflop except in certain satellite situations, as has been said 2567584826 times before. Give me any example hand (realistic - not some event where first pays $100,000, second pays $99,999 and third pays $3 or something) you're willing to come up with to try and prove otherwise and I'll do the math and show you you're wrong.

depending on what those other four people are holding, my pre-flop chance of winning ranges around 40% in most cases (five handed, pre-flop).

This is wrong for starters.

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 55.7503 % 55.54% 00.22% { AhAs }
Hand 2: 11.0665 % 10.52% 00.55% { random }
Hand 3: 11.0540 % 10.50% 00.56% { random }
Hand 4: 11.0506 % 10.50% 00.55% { random }
Hand 5: 11.0786 % 10.53% 00.55% { random }

In actuality it may be even higher than this because of the likelihood opponents are holding totally dominated hands (Ax, pairs). Surely you can see that a 55% chance of up to quintupling (depending on stacks obv) your chips is +EV?

 

[Beriac]

Once, I had pocket aces pre-flop, and I raised, and someone else had 97 it turned out, and they called, and like, the flop came 732 rainbow, so I was like, "check", and villain said "right back atcha babe", and the turn came T, so I bet the pot, and villain like totally called, and the river came a 9, and so I bet, and villain raised, and I called, and I, like, LOST!!

Anyway, that's why I always fold AA pre-flop now.

 

[Toadly]

You played that wrong my friend.when you slow play Bullets on the flop you just opened yourself to disaster....When he re-raised you it was time to fold

 

[ChuckTs]

...Beriac's post was a joke

 

[Toadly]

...Beriac's post was a joke

Yeah I guess I missed the last line in his post.............opps:withstupi

 

[Lo-Dog]

Once, I had pocket aces pre-flop, and I raised, and someone else had 97 it turned out, and they called, and like, the flop came 732 rainbow, so I was like, "check", and villain said "right back atcha babe", and the turn came T, so I bet the pot, and villain like totally called, and the river came a 9, and so I bet, and villain raised, and I called, and I, like, LOST!!

Anyway, that's why I always fold AA pre-flop now.

I think some teenage girl has killed Beriac and has assumed his identity.

 

[Jack Daniels]

There's a reason such a term hasn't already been coined. Can you guess what it is?

Yes, the reason is that the specific use of this concept in practice is so rarely actually needed.

Seriously, it is never +EV to fold Aces preflop except in certain satellite situations, as has been said 2567584826 times before.

If I've told you once, I've told you 2,982,371.4 times, not to exaggerate. Besides, check back tomorrow, ChuckTs may need to be excused for not believe you about how many times it has been said.

Give me any example hand (realistic - not some event where first pays $100,000, second pays $99,999 and third pays $3 or something) you're willing to come up with to try and prove otherwise and I'll do the math and show you you're wrong.

This is wrong for starters.

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 55.7503 % 55.54% 00.22% { AhAs }
Hand 2: 11.0665 % 10.52% 00.55% { random }
Hand 3: 11.0540 % 10.50% 00.56% { random }
Hand 4: 11.0506 % 10.50% 00.55% { random }
Hand 5: 11.0786 % 10.53% 00.55% { random }

In actuality it may be even higher than this because of the likelihood opponents are holding totally dominated hands (Ax, pairs). Surely you can see that a 55% chance of up to quintupling (depending on stacks obv) your chips is +EV?

I think you should have spent a little more time on your hand generator coming up with the numbers. At least give me the courtesy to competely blow me out of the water with a higher percentage that 55.75%. It is possible for me to have a 96% advantage preflop (granted that means 2 players hold KK and the other two hold QQ), but it is possible. Why not go for the gusto in your attempt to flaunt math skills?

I think you need to go back, reread the post (sound out all of the words this time), and see if you can understand the entire concept. This isn't simply about one single hand of AA, four other all in players with random hole cards, and the mathematical chance of quintupling up. There was more to it to consider (which I did, albeit quickly at the time), and that you've ignored here.

God, now I really do have to go find the hand history and post all of the details.***


Footnote***: ChuckTs, if I do find the hand history and post it, you may need to excuse yourself again. Just fair warning, is all.

I'm Jack Daniels, and I approve this message. LOL

 

[Dorkus Malorkus]

I think you should have spent a little more time on your hand generator coming up with the numbers. At least give me the courtesy to competely blow me out of the water with a higher percentage that 55.75%. It is possible for me to have a 96% advantage preflop (granted that means 2 players hold KK and the other two hold QQ), but it is possible. Why not go for the gusto in your attempt to flaunt math skills?

(a) There's quite a big difference between 40% and 55%. Yes, you said "in most cases", but even that is untrue.

(b) Putting some cards into Pokerstove is a rather silly way for me to "attempt to flaunt my math skills".

I think you need to go back, reread the post (sound out all of the words this time), and see if you can understand the entire concept. This isn't simply about one single hand of AA, four other all in players with random hole cards, and the mathematical chance of quintupling up. There was more to it to consider (which I did, albeit quickly at the time), and that you've ignored here.

I read your post, and I still think you're trying to cover up the fact that you somehow think folding was good because a K flopped (as you initially implied multiple times before the rest came up) under a lot of random waffle. Post the hand history, there's little I can do to extensively contest your assertions until you do aside from looking at it from the logical perspective that having a 50% chance of having 500% more chips is actually a good thing.

 

[Jack Daniels]

(a) There's quite a big difference between 40% and 55%. Yes, you said "in most cases", but even that is untrue.

Okay, let's call it 55% for the sake of you trying to "prove" I did the wrong thing. Anything I should stipulate to? Should my AA have been suited, maybe? Let me know. Thanks. In any case, I'll stand by the explanation presented.

(b) Putting some cards into Pokerstove is a rather silly way for me to "attempt to flaunt my math skills".

I completely agree. See, admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery.

...and I still think you're trying to cover up the fact that you somehow think folding was good...

See this is why you need to go back and re-reread it. I'll admit it here. I THINK FOLDING IN THIS SCENARIO WAS CORRECT. There, I've said it. I'm no longer trying to cover up the fact that I thought I was correct. All along I thought I was saying I was correct, but apparently I was trying to cover that up. I should be more careful to agree with myself from now on.

Post the hand history,

Said I would, if I could. But after reading your posts, I have to ask first if it is going to suffice for me to type it in? Or do I need to go get a soft copy and publish an official version? I just want to be sure that if I post it, your first response isn't going to be, "yeah, but where is the official transcript, you just typed this in."

there's little I can do to extensively contest your assertions

I realize it is a misquote, but I couldn't pass it up. This must be your way of trying to cover up the fact that you agree with me but can't take the heat of standing alone. LOL

the logical perspective that having a 50% chance of having 500% more chips

Or a 50% chance of having 1/8 the cash out. Hmmm .5 to be 5x or .5 to be 1/8. Guess we've come full circle. Thank you for your assistance.

 

[Dorkus Malorkus]

Okay, let's call it 55% for the sake of you trying to "prove" I did the wrong thing. Anything I should stipulate to? Should my AA have been suited, maybe? Let me know. Thanks. In any case, I'll stand by the explanation presented.

Do you revert to spouting out random crap every time a part of your argument is proven wrong? If so, I'll just stop responding now. Let me know, thanks.

I completely agree. See, admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery.

Grow up. Seriously.

See this is why you need to go back and re-reread it. I'll admit it here. I THINK FOLDING IN THIS SCENARIO WAS CORRECT. There, I've said it. I'm no longer trying to cover up the fact that I thought I was correct. All along I thought I was saying I was correct, but apparently I was trying to cover that up. I should be more careful to agree with myself from now on.

Actually, you should read what I have posted, as it would become apparent to you then that you've taken the small part you quoted out of context.

Said I would, if I could. But after reading your posts, I have to ask first if it is going to suffice for me to type it in? Or do I need to go get a soft copy and publish an official version? I just want to be sure that if I post it, your first response isn't going to be, "yeah, but where is the official transcript, you just typed this in."

Again, grow up. I am actually trying to help you by showing that you are wrong here, but part of me wonders why I should bother when you are seemingly so ungrateful for my efforts.

I realize it is a misquote, but I couldn't pass it up. This must be your way of trying to cover up the fact that you agree with me but can't take the heat of standing alone. LOL

Yet again, grow up.

Or a 50% chance of having 1/8 the cash out. Hmmm .5 to be 5x or .5 to be 1/8. Guess we've come full circle. Thank you for your assistance.

You appear to be assuming that you're always going to win the tournament if you fold. This may come as a surprise to you, but this assertion is incorrect.

 

[KerouacsDog]

Too funny.........

 

[Jack Daniels]

Do you revert to spouting out random crap every time a part of your argument is proven wrong? If so, I'll just stop responding now. Let me know, thanks.

Quite the contrary...all of the crap I spout out is fully thought through. I'm offended by the accusation that my crap is random.

I completely agree. See, admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery.

Grow up. Seriously.

Now see, your response here is much more like random crap, don't ya think? Although, I'm not accusing you as it is quite possible that you have put a lot of thought into this.

Actually, you should read what I have posted, as it would become apparent to you then that you've taken the small part you quoted out of context.

This confuses me a little. I did read what you wrote, and while I did trim it down, you specifically accused me of trying to cover up that fact that I thought folding was correct. Specifically, you said, "...I still think you're trying to cover up the fact that you somehow think folding was good..."

How did I misread this? There is no cover up. I do believe that folding here was correct. If put in the exact situation again, I would fold again. Notice I put the word exact in italics and underlined. I don't want you to think I will simply fold AA at any given time.

Again, grow up. I am actually trying to help you by showing that you are wrong here, but part of me wonders why I should bother when you are seemingly so ungrateful for my efforts.

Again, help me understand your response. I should "grow up" because I asked you questions? Or was it questions you didn't like? Based on your previous messages, I figured these were valid questions. Let me try it again...

Is it going to suffice for me to type it in? Or do I need to go get a soft copy and publish an official version? I just want to be sure that if I post it, your first response isn't going to be, "yeah, but where is the official transcript, you just typed this in.

Would you like to take another crack at answering the above questions?

Yet again, grow up.

This was simply a retaliatory statement. But you didn't respond and I don't see a denial. Was I right? See, just one more example of you intentionally ignoring certain things that I type. You've been doing this from your first post.

You appear to be assuming that you're always going to win the tournament if you fold.

Ahhh...no. I'm not making that assumption. It is impossible to win a tournament if you fold. Imagine that heads up. Fold, fold, fold. Eventually all my chips would be gone. That would just be silly.

As I've said before and am saying again, this was a calculated fold in a very specific situation. Nothing more. (Side Note: for those of you following the on-going drama/saga, the official count for how many times this has been said, based on a previous post, is now 2567584827.)

And while I do think you think you are attempting to help, until you stop simply spouting your numbers out without due consideration for other information presented, it's a poor job at helping. I'd much rather you simply said, "I don't agree with that decision because (enter monologue here). But I'm glad it worked out for you."

Now, one thing in all of your math that you've intentionally neglected to include consideration for is the fact that I would have been calling from the fourth stack out of five stacks. So while winning would have potentially quintupled me up, for all but one loss scenario I would have been knocked out of the tourney.

I'm guessing that your next post will now include this fact tied to your math in an attempt to "prove" me wrong. Although, I could be wrong about that.

Thanks for all of the help you've been so far.

Cheers,
JD

 

[Dorkus Malorkus]

I'm going to ignore your pathetic personal snipes, because frankly, personal internet arguments are stupid.

Here is a link to someone explaining far better than I ever could as to why your thought process regarding folding AA is terrible.

The ICM is here if you want to fiddle about with various scenarios.

If you have any further queries or petty little insults you'd like a reply to, tough crap frankly, because I'm more than happy to let you be stubborn and continue thinking folding AA is good in certain non-satellite situations, given your attitude.

I've ignorelisted you by the way, so if you want to waste your time typing out a long-winded, smartassed riposte that I won't even see, well, go ahead.

 

[Jack Daniels]

For those of you following along in the saga, this response is for you (since Dorkass has run away and blocked me. )

My response to all of the below...LOL

Guess I won't get my questions answered now. Oh well. Thanks for watching. Now, back to the show...

I'm going to ignore your pathetic personal snipes, because frankly, personal internet arguments are stupid.

Here is a link to someone explaining far better than I ever could as to why your thought process regarding folding AA is terrible.

The ICM is here if you want to fiddle about with various scenarios.

If you have any further queries or petty little insults you'd like a reply to, tough crap frankly, because I'm more than happy to let you be stubborn and continue thinking folding AA is good in certain non-satellite situations, given your attitude.

I've ignorelisted you by the way, so if you want to waste your time typing out a long-winded, smartassed riposte that I won't even see, well, go ahead.

For those of you that do wind up reading down here too, LOL again.

 

[BetUICan]

Wow...that was a heck of an argument/critism/advice column going on here...informative and entertaining. Beriac's post must be a joke...otherwise I need to hunt down what tables he plays on....LMAO! Let's all be forgiving now!

 

[Toadly]

So folding AA preflop to a all in bet after playing live poker for more than 10 hours is stupid........even though I was up more than twice my start stack ?

The wisdom of one can not beat down the wisdom of the many I guess ?

But I would bet if any of them had several long term(12 plus hours) live poker session, winning sessions, get bullets cracked for there entire stack and 12 hours of work..they might think differently. AFter this happened a few times I had enough. When it's getting late NOTHING is gonna take my stack.....

Going home broken and tired is no fun at all. Fulltime players think differenlty I guess............Play for 12 hours and face a 20% chance of losing it all or folding...............Fold please and go home a big winner.

But having long term goals is stupid.............folding Aces pre-flop is stupid...........Yeah OK

If a person has a goal of winning 2 out of three session.he sticks to his goals and meets them.................That is what a fulltime ring player does he wins full time or he can't be a fulltime player.

 

[Dorkus Malorkus]

Post deleted because FP said it far better than me.

 

[F Paulsson]

But I would bet if any of them had several long term(12 plus hours) live poker session, winning sessions, get bullets cracked for there entire stack and 12 hours of work..they might think differently. AFter this happened a few times I had enough. When it's getting late NOTHING is gonna take my stack.....

Aha.

I saw another thread where you advocated bringing 30% of your bankroll to the table. I'm starting to see a pattern - you're willingly giving up a huge edge because you're afraid to lose your stack. If what you bring to the table costs you a large portion of your bankroll, then I can see why: Losing would simply be devastating to you.

This is why I - and many others with me - strongly suggest having robust bankrolls: so that we can make the most profit. If you're only playing with 5% of your bankroll, making a call with AA preflop is not a big deal. I know that I stand a chance of losing what I push in, but more importantly I know that I'm gaining more on average than I lose.

If I can't get myself to push my entire stack in with AA preflop, I'm playing out of my (bankroll's) league.

 

[whyareunvs]

I would rather have a made hand almost always over a draw and AK while it's a nice draw you only have a 1 in 4 chance of hitting your pair by the river. Straights are also a problem as you have to have an exact three cards for your straight where as with a hand like T-J you have many more cards that help you get there.

 

[stretch833]

Jack, kudos to you on having the discipline to make that decision. I can't see myself folding at that point, but definately cannot fault you for doing it. Who knows, maybe after reading a few more discussions like this, i won't feel like such a noob. LOL

 

[Toadly]

Aha.

Losing would simply be devastating to you.

If I can't get myself to push my entire stack in with AA preflop, I'm playing out of my (bankroll's) league.

You guys have such a over inflated ego about what is the Correct way of playing poker...........LMAO.......LOL

Losing my stack on any one givin night would by NO means DEVASTAE me........................Please..... I have won over the last 30 sessions in a row and before that I was winning 2 out of 3........Understand that I
concder a winning night anything over what I started with,Sometimes a winning night means only playing for 12 hours to go home 12 dollars ahead with a start stack of 400.....So No I am in no danger of being Devastated.......


What I do differently than most of you is this.........I think of my bankroll as parts directly related to how many times I can win a session out of 3, 5 or 10..................What ever.When I started playing poker it I was winning only 3 out of 10 sessions so I was not trying to fool myself into thinking I could actually win at poker.I played freerolls for many moons before that.........anyway once I was winning 2 out of 4 sessions regularly I was willing to play at anyone time up to half of my total bankroll. When I was winning 2 out of 3 regularly I new for sure I could win at poker and actually make money................When you win 66% of teh time playing with 33% of you bank roll puts you in no danger..................It puts a ton of groceries in your kitchen...which means I take money from my bankroll regularly




NOW....I am winning a lot of sessions .....so I did not fold aces because I was afarid....It;s the way I play out side of the box and go home a WINNER..that is the damn point here isn't it.TO GO HOME A WINNER


IF folding aces after a 12 -14 hour session makes some of you sick......OH WELL

But there are ways to do things that are outside the box...and teh ways that work outside the box................WORK GREAT

YA know why ? ..........Because everyone else is playing the Normal and Correct way.......So I now this and use it to my avantage.

Anyway....there are different ways of skinning a cat friends. And some are better than your ways.......Sorry

 

[Dorkus Malorkus]

Oh God, where on earth do I start with this?

You guys have such a over inflated ego about what is the Correct way of playing poker...........LMAO.......LOL

(a) I find FP to be quite humble actually, given the extent of his knowledge. There's only one person (aside from me) who's being egomaniacal in this thread.

(b) Have you ever stopped to think that so many people think a particular way of playing poker is correct because it is actually correct? Or are all the professionals who write books and online articles wrong, and you, with your pearls of wisdom such as "Play for half your bankroll if your winning half your sessions" and "Fold Aces preflop if there's a danger you'll end up down for the session" right?

Losing my stack on any one givin night would by NO means DEVASTAE me...

Losing half your bankroll in one night would "by no means devastate you"? Losing half your bankroll, rebuying, then losing the other half would "by no means devastate you"? Okay, whatever you say!

I have won over the last 30 sessions in a row

Congratulations, you're either (a) on a remarkable upswing, or (b) the world's biggest liar. I'll leave the readers to judge.

Sometimes a winning night means only playing for 12 hours to go home 12 dollars ahead with a start stack of 400.....So No I am in no danger of being Devastated.......

You're in no danger of being devastated because sometimes a winning night means only playing for 12 hours for a 12 dollar gain? Uhhh, what?

...anyway once I was winning 2 out of 4 sessions regularly I was willing to play at anyone time up to half of my total bankroll. When I was winning 2 out of 3 regularly I new for sure I could win at poker and actually make money...

This is quite possibly the most hilarious thing I've ever read on Cardschat. Do you think that the fact you're winning half the sessions you play is any protection against getting your stack in twice with KK vs AA, or getting sucked out on in a huge pot twice? Considering that with half your bankroll in play all it takes is two monster v monsters or bad beats to completely demolish your bankroll, I have to wonder if you actually play poker and are not just making all this stuff up as you go along.

When you win 66% of teh time playing with 33% of you bank roll puts you in no danger...

See above. If you cannot see why you are incredibly wrong here, well, the countdown to busto is starting.

NOW....I am winning a lot of sessions .....so I did not fold aces because I was afarid....It;s the way I play out side of the box and go home a WINNER..that is the damn point here isn't it.TO GO HOME A WINNER

You are making a novice's mistake here. Poker is not one session, then another session, then another session, it is one extremely long, continuous session. To end up in profit for one session, by doing something so utterly ridiculous as fold Aces preflop, you are losing money in the long run.

But there are ways to do things that are outside the box...and teh ways that work outside the box................WORK GREAT

"Outside the box" =\= "Talking nonsense"

YA know why ? ..........Because everyone else is playing the Normal and Correct way.......So I now this and use it to my avantage.

"Everyone else is playing the normal way"? What planet do you live on exactly, where no donks play poker?

Anyway....there are different ways of skinning a cat friends. And some are better than your ways.......Sorry

lol

 

[blankoblanco]

When you win 66% of teh time playing with 33% of you bank roll puts you in no danger..................

.........................*head explodes*

 

[Toadly]

I have shared my ways and you have stoned them down............That's ok.................I only came in here to share what has worked for me. I said to myself I would only do it once after this type of shit

I'll just take my BIG FAT head lying ass and go back to where I came from.......Bye Bye