|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 10/15/2008 9:21:22 PM PACIFIC |
 Ace little suited vs. Ace middle suited, shorn, 31. Mar 2003 10:40 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| In trying to find leaks in my game, I have noticed that I like to call with suited Aces in many situations unless the game is really aggressive. So far, I have done quite well with these hands, but I don't think that long run this is a +EV play. I just get enamored with hitting the "nut flush". Anyway, while thinking about it, I thought I would ask a question of the forum to get input from other players (stdioh, I would love to hear your thoughts): I think that calling with A-2s through A-5s in typical games is better than calling with A-6s through A-9s. Obviously, if you hit the flush or two pair with either, you will probably win. If you flop only an Ace, you will probably lose. Bu Ace little suited also has the straight possibility where Ace middle suited does not. I am wondering how much this extra "way to win" is worth and whether or not it is enough to make the marginal call? Thanks, Steve | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Ace little suited vs. Ace middle suited, stdioh, 31. Mar 2003 11:13 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 31. Mar 2003 10:40 shorn wrote: > In trying to find leaks in my game, I have noticed that I like to call with > suited Aces in many situations unless the game is really aggressive. So far, I > have done quite well with these hands, but I don't think that long run this is a > +EV play. I just get enamored with hitting the "nut flush". Anyway, while > thinking about it, I thought I would ask a question of the forum to get input > from other players (stdioh, I would love to hear your thoughts): > > I think that calling with A-2s through A-5s in typical games is better than > calling with A-6s through A-9s. Obviously, if you hit the flush or two pair > with either, you will probably win. If you flop only an Ace, you will probably > lose. Bu Ace little suited also has the straight possibility where Ace middle > suited does not. I am wondering how much this extra "way to win" is worth and > whether or not it is enough to make the marginal call? I'm of the opinion that A-little suited is *much* better than A6, A7, and A8 suited. Indeed, just hitting your ace is generally not going to make your hand. Where you are good is a flop like KXX when you're holding AX or you need to hit your flush. Adding the extra wheel possibilities are great. If I'm holding A5 suited for instance and manage a flush draw and a wheel draw, for instance, plus I also have the chance of my ace being live, it makes for a wonderful drawing hand. Especially when you hit your gutshot and tilt some player who doesn't notice that you had the flushdraw too. That said, I only want to play my AX-suited to a big field. If it is folded around to me in late position I'll either go for a steal with this hand or I'll dump it. If I can limp with it then I want at least 4 opponents to make it worthwhile. But against a field of 6 or so, I love this hand. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Ace little suited vs. Ace middle suited, shorn, 31. Mar 2003 11:29 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks stdioh. That is what I thought too. My leak, however, is playing this hand regardless of position which I know is stupid because I do need a larger field to play. I don't know if you have any "pet" hands, but this is mine. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Ace little suited vs. Ace middle suited, stdioh, 1. Apr 2003 09:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 31. Mar 2003 11:29 shorn wrote: > Thanks stdioh. That is what I thought too. My leak, however, is playing this hand > regardless of position which I know is stupid because I do need a larger field to play. I > don't know if you have any "pet" hands, but this is mine. I still have a fondness for T7 offsuit, but that doesn't mean I won't fold it when appropriate. I just love having it in the BB etc. That said, pet hands kill your hourly rate...they really do. You're essentially making a mistake on purpose and adding it to the ones that you don't know about. AX can be really bad...it's a hand that you need to handle with extreme care. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Ace little suited vs. Ace middle suited, AnyAce, 1. Apr 2003 09:27 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I also like playing suited aces (my nickname is AnyAce, lol). Anyway did a quick run on twodimes.net comparing suited A5 vs suited A8 against what I would call "typical" preflop hands KQo, JTs, ATo and your intuitions were correct. A5 suited wins(20.0%) about 2.6% more often than A8 suited(17.6%). (I definitely recognize that this is only one situation, but I thought it gave at least anecdotal evidence to how a typical hand would play out). Results: A5 Suited http://twodimes.net/h/?z=11575 pokenum -h ac 5c - ks qc - jd td - ad ts Holdem Hi: 1086008 enumerated boards cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV Ac 5c 217311 20.01 820881 75.59 47816 4.40 0.221 Ks Qc 338690 31.19 742652 68.38 4666 0.43 0.313 Jd Td 251176 23.13 817097 75.24 17735 1.63 0.238 Ts Ad 217946 20.07 807177 74.33 60885 5.61 0.228 A8 Suited http://twodimes.net/h/?z=11576 pokenum -h ac 8c - ks qc - jd td - ad ts Holdem Hi: 1086008 enumerated boards cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV Ac 8c 188853 17.39 849166 78.19 47989 4.42 0.195 Ks Qc 352331 32.44 729387 67.16 4290 0.40 0.325 Jd Td 246468 22.69 823956 75.87 15584 1.43 0.233 Ts Ad 239073 22.01 787652 72.53 59283 5.46 0.246 | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Ace little suited vs. Ace middle suited, shorn, 1. Apr 2003 12:08 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks! This is great information to have. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Ace little suited vs. Ace middle suited, NiceFella, 4. Apr 2003 00:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think the additional benefit of the straight draw with A-little suited is very small indeed. Realize that any straight draw you pick up with A5s or less is going to be an inside straight draw, and it will be to the low end of the straight. If you look at various computer simulation hand rankings, you'll find the Axs hands pretty much clumped together without much clear ordering of the kickers. For instance, the "No-Foldem" rankings of 10 hands played to the river with no folding ranks the suited kickers KQJT98574362. My own simulations with Turbo Texas Hold'em reorder the kickers variously depending on settings, with KQJT98573642 being one result for an "aggressive" lineup. Pokerroom.com ranks the kickers KQJT95874632 based on actual play: https://www.pokerroom.com/evstats/totalStats.php?order=value Regardless, the expected value differences for the kickers aren't really very great. I don't think you can say that the tiny benefit of catching an inside bottom straight draw outweighs the similarly tiny benefit of catching a random medium pair. NiceFella | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|