AcidJoe

I have a friend who is an excellent crib and backgammon player but watches poker but has never played. We were talking about playing yesterday and he said he would play AA against any number of opponents all in preflop. I said to him you want 1 or 2 against you not 6. Your 80% against one approximately 72% against 2 and greatly diminish after that. He told me I was flat out wrong. I bet him $5 a hand and would deal out cards to prove my point.

I dealt him to black AA's then dealt out 6 random hands out of the cards left. We played 10 hands of which he won 4. Some of the flips that came out were incredibly funny. 2 spades on the flop with running spades to give the 10 of spades the high flush. One 2 on the flop with a 2 on the river to give the j 2 off the winning hand.

I just ran the numbers through poker stove as I wasn't sure what the exact percentages were but here we go:

AA vs 6 random hands 43.5%
AA vs 5 random hands 49.2%
AA vs 4 random hands 55.9%
AA vs 3 random hands 63.8%
AA vs 2 random hands 73.4%
AA vs 1 random hand 85.2%

The importance of raising with Big hands to limit the field becomes obvious when you look at the above chart. I remember reading somewhere the Doyle used to sit at a table and deal out hands face up to get an idea of what cards his opponents could have and then doing flops to see how all hands improved.

Just thought I would share this.

NOTE: This percentages change if your in a hand with Dr.Tyore and he has 7 8 as he will almost always crack your AA. LOL

__________________
Kristy, why can't we all just get along?

pkrfce9

so you wouldn't be happy to get all in against 6 opponents pf with AA? to be fair his 5 bucks should have been against 5 bucks from EACH opponent

where's jimmy?

__________________
I can't tell you how awesome it feels to win a WSOP bracelet!

cadillac

Lol.

AA vs 6 random hands. Everyone is all in for $100. pot = $700

10 hands so AA guy pays $100 X 10 = $1000


4 of 10 hands he wins pot 4 X $700 = $2800


wins - losses is $2800 - $1000 = $1800


We have $1800/10 = $180


So this play makes us $180 every time we do it.



What seems to be the problem here?

__________________
Stupid is as Stupid does - Forrest Gump

AcidJoe

I wasn't saying it wasn't profitable. I was surprised that someone who is reasonably card savy didn't understand that his win percentage went down considerably as the number of opponents went up. I knew what the win % was for 2 or 3 opponents and knew with 5 to 6 he was below 50%. Some of the goofy hands that hit was surprising. He honestly thought AA could never fall below 50%.

__________________
Kristy, why can't we all just get along?

pokerJAH

I have done this a few times with AA against a random hand to see if AA will win 1 in 8 hands (as it should) heads up. Even against 23 with the other two suits, 23 still have a 13% chance to win. Another reason for never folding the SB when there are multiple callers pre-flop.

__________________
Vegas June 15 -19

ReefAquarium

Huh??

__________________
Not smarter than a grade 5 or Kristy Sea

actyper

I'm sure you end up bleeding off more money in the SB than any other position (other than BB). Completing in the SB 100% is not advisable, mtts or cash.

AcidJoe

MTT may be a different issue than a cash game based on the structure. If the blinds are moving fast and the chips aren't deep, I'll gamble early to hit the small blind. Now if your dealing with long levels and deep chips then obviously waiting for some kind of hand is certainly better than bleeding every small blind.

__________________
Kristy, why can't we all just get along?

Bumbaclat

The problem with that is the cost of playing the hand is more than just completing the small blind... if you want to see all 5 cards. The 13% chance of winning is greatly reduced if the goal is to out flop the AA. If you keep paying all the way down, the cost of the times you don't get there far outweigh the times you do. and all of this out of position so even if your hand gets there your AA opponent might fold to a river bet.