I SHOULD feel bad...
but I don't...NEVER LIMP WITH ACES!
PokerStars Game #16564434234: Tournament #83881638, $5.00+$0.50 Hold'em No Limit - Level VI (100/200) - 2008/04/07 - 19:43:07 (ET)
Table '83881638 1' 9-max Seat #6 is the button
Seat 5: JYizzle (2615 in chips)
Seat 6: meccapoker (3680 in chips)
Seat 8: slim730 (1775 in chips)
Seat 9: GoingGray (5430 in chips)
slim730: posts small blind 100
GoingGray: posts big blind 200
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to GoingGray [2c Ks]
JYizzle: folds
meccapoker: folds
slim730: calls 100
GoingGray: checks
*** FLOP *** [4c Qs Tc]
slim730: checks
GoingGray: checks
*** TURN *** [4c Qs Tc] [Kh]
slim730: checks
GoingGray: bets 200
slim730: raises 600 to 800
GoingGray: calls 600
*** RIVER *** [4c Qs Tc Kh] [Kd]
slim730: bets 775 and is all-in
GoingGray: calls 775
*** SHOW DOWN ***
slim730: shows [Ad As] (two pair, Aces and Kings)
GoingGray: shows [2c Ks] (three of a kind, Kings)
GoingGray collected 3550 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 3550 | Rake 0
Board [4c Qs Tc Kh Kd]
Seat 5: JYizzle folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: meccapoker (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: slim730 (small blind) showed [Ad As] and lost with two pair, Aces and Kings
Seat 9: GoingGray (big blind) showed [2c Ks] and won (3550) with three of a kind, Kings
Poor bugger just kept getting the worse of it all game long. I know how he feels. I went on to win this one, but three handed against two of the tightest players I've come across in along time at this level.
PokerStars Game #16564434234: Tournament #83881638, $5.00+$0.50 Hold'em No Limit - Level VI (100/200) - 2008/04/07 - 19:43:07 (ET)
Table '83881638 1' 9-max Seat #6 is the button
Seat 5: JYizzle (2615 in chips)
Seat 6: meccapoker (3680 in chips)
Seat 8: slim730 (1775 in chips)
Seat 9: GoingGray (5430 in chips)
slim730: posts small blind 100
GoingGray: posts big blind 200
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to GoingGray [2c Ks]
JYizzle: folds
meccapoker: folds
slim730: calls 100
GoingGray: checks
*** FLOP *** [4c Qs Tc]
slim730: checks
GoingGray: checks
*** TURN *** [4c Qs Tc] [Kh]
slim730: checks
GoingGray: bets 200
slim730: raises 600 to 800
GoingGray: calls 600
*** RIVER *** [4c Qs Tc Kh] [Kd]
slim730: bets 775 and is all-in
GoingGray: calls 775
*** SHOW DOWN ***
slim730: shows [Ad As] (two pair, Aces and Kings)
GoingGray: shows [2c Ks] (three of a kind, Kings)
GoingGray collected 3550 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 3550 | Rake 0
Board [4c Qs Tc Kh Kd]
Seat 5: JYizzle folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: meccapoker (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: slim730 (small blind) showed [Ad As] and lost with two pair, Aces and Kings
Seat 9: GoingGray (big blind) showed [2c Ks] and won (3550) with three of a kind, Kings
Poor bugger just kept getting the worse of it all game long. I know how he feels. I went on to win this one, but three handed against two of the tightest players I've come across in along time at this level.
Comments
Here is why. On the turn, there is 400 (edit) in the pot. You bet 200 and get raised by 600 more. So it is to you to call 600 into 1400 pot which is 2.3:1 calling odds. However he has 775 left (which you cover) so your implied odds are 600 to win 2175 or 3.6:1. However, you only have 5 outs out of 46 cards left leaving you an approximate 10:1 dog.
Basically his trap worked but you got lucky. You bet out with what you thought was the best hand and called a raise with what you thought was the best hand (when you were actually a 10:1 underdog). Most of the time you lose this pot and further, most of the time when you lose this pot you double him up.
Look at this another way. If you are not folding the river, then why not just push him all in on the turn? Then it's more clear that you got all his chips in and he was 10:1 favourite. That's a pretty good trap.
Any time you crack aces - you got lucky (statistically speaking).
The point is not that the K2 call on the turn was bad - I'm sure Str82ace would admit to that openly.
The point is that AA was terribly played. Any time you limp -check-check a straighty / flushy board you put yourself in a situation to lose a pot. Had the hero checked behind on the turn (he had position) - we would not be praising the villain for a great trap.
I made a mistake on the turn, and if it were any other card but a K or 2 on the river, I would have tossed my hand. I got lucky, but villian let me get lucky, that's all. I saw no strength, and he had a nice little trap set up...just managed to get out of it with a couple cards that cinched it for him.
Okay, let's say hero checked the turn. What do you think is going to happen on the river for each of those 46 possible river cards? How many of those cards could hero fold to an all-in with his top pair? We know of 5 of those where he definitely wouldn't fold (2 Ks and 3 2s). So what else is folding to? There are 2 aces left so maybe if one of those hit. But what else? There are no flushes. Perhaps if a J hit? Probably not, so over those 46 possible outcomes, AA is going to average a very nice win, even with a check on the turn.
If we step back to the flop, we can see that hero is in an even bigger world of hurt since he has no pair and no draw. He has to hit runner runner to catch up and over come AA. Say they both checked the flop and turn. Hero will still be ahead with his AA at a very high percentage, let's say 95% against that runner runner. However, a lot times hero will now have a pair and will lose a bet. Sometimes hero will bet on the end with K high and lose. Overall, I would say that again AA will come out ahead.
So why does this seem so counterintuitive? Well I think the first stumbling block is that AA is not deep stacked. The pot on the flop is 400 and AA has 1575 left.
One could almost argue that the best way to play AA in this spot is to check it to the river and hope hero can call a big bet (or make one at some point).
I suppose the type of players these guys are is a factor as well. If you are against a calling station you want to just make normal value raises and bets. Against a hyper-aggressive you want to show weakness and come over the top.
If none of that is there and the players are fairly normal, then I argue the play by AA is completely acceptable due to the fact that over the long run, he will make more by playing it this way.
Would I have called a raise pre or post flop? No
Would I have called a bet on the turn? yes, IF my card hit, despite my low kicker.
Anyone who plays aces like that shouldn't complain about getting the cracked. Opponent could have taken a small pot pre or post flop, but elected to let me catch up and surpass him. Frankly, if he saw me call the turn raise, he must have had me on SOMETHING. The river should have been enough for him to rethink his allin bet.
I'm not congradulating myself for my play on this hand, quite the contrary, I got off lucky this time. I don't condone any of my actions either. But considering how THIS hand played out, I'm not condemning myself for my actions either.
This is quite true. As a matter of fact, one shouldn't complain at all about random cards being dealt. One should complain about cheating, smelly players, slow players, etc. How a guy wants to play his hand is entirely his own business. And if he plays is poorly, I am happy rather than complain, especially if he doesn't think he played it poorly.
This is what I am addressing in my posts. Never is too strong a word to be used in poker. And ironically enough, I think I have shown that limping with AA in this hand was just fine (one of the very few times it may be correct).
You guys that have been disagreeing with me have not shown any analysis or numbers. You are just saying "See, he limped with AA and lost all his chips." When analysing plays, you should bring out all the different ways it could have gone down not just one result that's good or bad for somebody.
Open your poker minds and take it to the next level. Reread what I have written and come back with a good arguement against it, something that has some analysis to it.
Agreed.
The error was checking the turn given the texture of the board - unless you have the capability of folding when something crazy happens.
IMO AA gets stacked in this particular situation more often than the reverse. Very rarely is the BB going to put everything in with less than 2P.
If BB has a pair, he has 5 outs and is about 10% to draw out. He may call a turn bet or he may bet if checked to. There is some element of player style her as well.
If BB already has AA beat at the turn, the yeah, AA will get stacked. But how often is that going to happen against two random cards that BB has especially if they are the lower end of random given his pf check?
I think the key thing to look at here is the size of SB's stack which is really quite critical with 7.5BBs. AA is definitely looking to double up here. Any other good hand like JJ or A9 and he is shoving preflop. And he would probably be happy to take it down right there. But with AA you have such a large preflop lead, you can afford to see some cards and I think in lots of cases you will win just that 400 pot anyways. But sometimes you will double up and sometimes you will get stacked. Sometimes you will win one bet but that's still than just the blinds. The math to do is over all combinations of BBs cards and board cards, is limp-check-check going to be a money maker or a money loser.
It appears that most here believe a money loser but I beg to differ and once again I have shown some math and examples to back me up. This thread would be much better if someone could come up with some counter analysis.
This innocuous hand seems so straightforward at first glance, I might just enlist the help of an expert to see a professional opinion. I'm pretty confident here (so far...lol).
Your logic and analysis are very sound Pants, and I'm not debating that part. But you're making alot of assumptions. Assuming a preflop raise would have been called...a flop bet would have been called. Its common to think that with AA, more times than not, you either win a small pot, or lose a big one. This case, due to slowplaying his hand, he lost. Yes, he had me on the turn, totally and completely. HIS mistake is assuming the river king didn't do me any good considering my turn call.
I welcome comment from the pro you mentioned though.
Your analysis is based on the fact that we know our Hero has K2o... You have to look at it from the point of view of the Aces... what range can he put our Hero on. If he can put our Hero on K2o... then by all means he can check the turn... but any decent range puts those aces in much greater peril of being cracked... the board is straightening and flushing, and Villain checks... absolute garbage play!!!
I gathered this post was about the dismal play of the Aces... not the great suckout ability of the OP!! (no offence
None taken. I'm the first one to admit I suckedout...just feels good to have happened finally!