|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 12/1/2008 9:20:03 PM PACIFIC |
 Playing AA in NL, iceman5, 23. Dec 2003 13:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| How would you play AA preflop in a NL cash game in these 3 situations. $25 buy in with blinds of .10 / .25 #1) You are UTG. I would raise about $1.50 (which is just about the same amount I like to raise with any raising hand) #2) You are MP and EP has opened with a raise of $1. I would reraise about $4. #3) You are LP and EP has opened with a raise of $3.50. The EP has a good hand and will probably call just about anything so why not go all in? The third one happened to me today. EP raised $3.50. MP went all in for $4.25. I was on the button with AA and went all in for $23. The EP called. I won. EP had QQ. MP had T3s. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Playing AA in NL, mroban, 23. Dec 2003 18:02 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I usually make a pot sized raise in either of the first two positions. But in a low blind game, you might need to raise it a little more to ensure you dont get too many callers. I usually play $50 or $100 and a pot sized raise is usually enough to limit the field sufficient but still get a few callers in loose games. In $25 NL, I love the allin play there because the second raiser you can almost definitely put on JJ, QQ or KK (maybe even AK or AQ since he was going allin with a short stack). So you probably have him beat and the play guarantees you heads up against the first raiser if he calls. But normally, if just against one raiser, I would make another pot sized raise to try to get him to call and not blow him out of the water. You are ahead, so why not play the flop? If you are so sure he is going to call, all the more reason to make a smaller raise. I think I would only go allin preflop if the pot was sufficiently large already and I thought I could win without seeing the flop. Too much can happen by putting your opponent allin. I would rather outplay him on the flop. But I am sure others may disagree with me here. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Playing AA in NL, iceman5, 23. Dec 2003 18:14 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| mroban said: "But normally, if just against one raiser, I would make another pot sized raise to try to get him to call and not blow him out of the water. You are ahead, so why not play the flop? If you are so sure he is going to call, all the more reason to make a smaller raise." Im sure you have more experience than me, but that doesnt make sense to me. If he raises to $3.50 and I only make a pot size reraise he will almost always call. Now the pot is about $11.50. Now he has the choice of bailing out depending on whether or not an overcard to his PP comes. If he has QQ and the flop brings an ace or king, he will probably check fold to my pot size flop bet. If he hits his set he will bury me. It sounds to me like making a river bet in limit where you will only get called if you are beat. If I make a large preflop reraise, he is forced to make his decision without seeing what the flop brings. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Playing AA in NL, mroban, 24. Dec 2003 04:40 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| My point here iceman was exactly that. If you push your stack in and you are sure he is going to call, you know he has an underpair and risk him hitting his set. That only happens around 10% of the time so 90% of the time you are going to win your opponents whole stack. But 10% of the time you lose your whole stack. Obviously over time, the play is very profitable. The problem with my approach is that a player can call a smaller pot sized raise with less than QQ or KK which increases the chances of getting beat on the flop. After considering these answers, perhaps pushing all in is the best play. But I have lost my entire stack pushing all in preflop numerous times and have had more success outplaying my opponent on the flop. If your opponent has AK he would fold the allin play, but if the flop comes with an A, you can slow play your set and he will usually bet aggressively. I won two huge stacks with that exact play last night. I had AA 2x. The first time the flop came AKx and I was up against a player with AK. He paid me off with his whole stack. I was playing $50 and my stack was over $100 at the time. His was around $45. I am pretty sure if I put him allin before the flop he would have folded. Instead, he paid me off. The second time I was against KK. Flop came again with an AK. In this situation, it would have played the same either way. He would have called all in preflop. I still got his stack. But Lee is right, its hard to tell when your AA is beat. If the flop comes rags and you bet out and get reraised, you have to make a decision. And a player with KK is likely to think he is ahead on a ragged flop as well. Anyway, you can't really argue with Lee's response. So I will stop arguing it. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Playing AA in NL, mroban, 24. Dec 2003 14:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I have given this alot of thought after reading a few of these posts. Iceman, I am not sure I am that much more experienced than you at all. Probably not. So take what I say with the appropriate grain of salt. I play every day online at UB and PartyPoker (mostly $50 and $100 NL) and usually win a fair amount per session. I think in general the decision to go allin before the flop has to involve a few other factors that nobody has discussed: 1. the kind of player you are facing 2. how big is his stack relative to yours On a $25 NL game, if you reraise the pot to $11 (in the situation you disagree with me) after he raised to $3 he will call. Assuming his stack is around $25 at the time (or thereabouts) you have pretty much made him pot committed. If he has QQ and the flop comes with all undercards, he is pushing allin. If the flop comes with an ace and you hit your set, you can check to him and slowplay it. He will usually make a bet at some point in the next two rounds. If he doesn't hit his set and there are overcards, he will fold (or not). My point originally was that pushing all in gives him a chance to see all the cards and possibly two extra cards to hit his set on. I am still not convinced always putting your opponent all in preflop is the best play. If the flop comes with overcards and he raises you or just flatcalls you are obviously in trouble and can save some bets. Again, I think the allin preflop is a better tool to try and win a pot without seeing the flop. I realize that having AA means you are an 88% favorite before the flop and the odds are way in your favor but I like to play my hand on the flop. I feel I can sniff out the sets often enough to make that play favorable and a player that would go allin preflop in $25 NL is apt to put his chips in on the flop as well if he has an overpair. The only problem I can tell with my approach is that you let guys in possibly that would have folded (maybe the JTs, or KQs or even smaller pairs) an allin bet. But those guys also might pay off a bet on the flop if they are drawing. Finally, I think if you are only going to push allin preflop with AA, then you become a very predictable player. I try to make the same raises and reraises (pot sized) no matter what I am playing. I think it disguises my hand and makes it difficult to know if am holding a monster or just making a play at the pot. I am not an expert and not a pro, so this is just my two cents. But it seems if AA is the only hand you are going set players allin with preflop, its a bad idea. If you are willing to do it with AA, KK or QQ and the occasional bluff, then fine (and if so, I don't want you at my table!!). Just my humble opinion. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Playing AA in NL, iceman5, 24. Dec 2003 15:42 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I agree with alot of what you said. The main part that I disagree with is when you said that "If the flop comes with overcards and he raises you or just flat calls you are obviously in trouble and can save some bets. " Since I dont know what he has, I dont know what his overcards are. Also, I had position on him, so he would have to act first and couldnt just flat call me. Also, even if I was first to act, I dont think him flat calling me or raising me means Im definately in trouble. 2 real examples from today: 1. I had QQ and raised a limper. We were heads up with a flop of A94. He checked. I bet, he raised. Turn was a blank. Luckily for me he made a cheesy small bet and I called. River was a blank. He checked and I checked. He had TT and I won. He did save himself some money with the raise but I was still ahead. 2. I called a $1 raise with AQs. We were heads up with a flop of JJ5. He bet and I raised. He folded and said "I can never get a good flop". He may have had AK for all I know. Back to our discussion, if the guy had raised $1 or so I would agree with you, but when he raises $3.50 from UTG with blinds of .10/.25, hes not trying to take the blinds. He wants action and with AA, Im happy to give it to him. Id rather him make the decision to risk his whole stack now when Im a huge favorite instead of later when he has more info about the hand. In relation to my discussion with Schuster, here is another example of a raise of 14BBs. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Playing AA in NL, mroban, 24. Dec 2003 17:16 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I guess I didn't realize the blinds were as low as they were. In that context (especially if the raise was much larger than he had made thusfar) you could probably put him on QQ or KK. So in that context, I would agree. In the $50 and especially $100 NL ring games, a $3.50 raise is quite normal preflop and wouldn't necessarily tip me off on a players hand (unless they were particularly tight in which case they would probably fold the allin play). If you had this guy pegged as looking for action and was sure he would call the allin play, I totally agree that was the right play in this instance. But I think we would agree the answer is "it depends". I wouldn't consider going allin preflop with AA always the right decision. I for one am not a slider. Its just not how I play. So if I make that play, I think its obvious I am playing AA (to anyone paying attention) and I doubt I would get any action. So I would only make that play (myself) if there was a raise, a few calls and I thought there was enough in the pot to blow everyone out and take it down preflop. Otherwise, I am going to try and trap on the flop (which has worked beautifully a few times recently). I have taken far many more stacks than lost playing my AA that way. Great stuff, thanks for the discussion. Really forced me to think alot. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Playing AA in NL, Schuster, 24. Dec 2003 01:22 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > I think I would only go allin preflop if the pot was sufficiently large already and > I thought I could win without seeing the flop. Too much can happen by putting your > opponent allin. I would rather outplay him on the flop. I disagree with this. If your aces are beat, most of the time it will be difficult to see and you will lose your whole stack, but you won't necessarily win the other guys whole stack when your aces are good. Anytime I have the chance to get all the money in before the flop when I'm holding AA, I'm going to take it in a heartbeat. As far as iceman's questions... if the blinds are 0.10/0.25 then raising it to 1.50 seems high. 6 big blinds? That's close to double the pot. Sure I'd love someone to call, and if I thought they would, I'd go ahead and do it, but it seems like too much of an overbet. It's tough to give a definate answer to any of the questions because it's all an "it depends" situation. A guideline I use though when I don't know much about an opponent is to error on the side of caution. In this case, it probably means overbetting my AA instead of underbetting, still not quite 6 BB though. If I was first in, I'd make it about a buck. If I only win a small pot preflop, then thems the breaks, but I'd rather not be put into a situation where I reraise a little bit and then have an unknown opponent move in on me after a seemingly harmless flop. Ugh! Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Playing AA in NL, mroban, 24. Dec 2003 04:30 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| On further thought, I like Lee's response. Getting your money in before the flop with AA can never be a bad play. I guess my point Lee is that I generally dont like pushing in my entire stack unless I know I have my opponent beat. If he is going to call an all in bet, its usually with KK or QQ which is a huge dog against the AA. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Playing AA in NL, iceman5, 24. Dec 2003 13:27 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Lee, I think in theory you are correct about 6BB's being too much, BUT....on the tables I play, I promise you if I raise to $1, I will get 4 or 5 callers. Raises of $1 or less get no respect at the $25 NL game (at least not on PokerStars). Sometimes I raise to $2 with AK and get 2-3 callers. I dont know what they are calling with but its got to be junk. Today I had QQ and raised $1.50. I got 2 callers. Flop came Axx. I bet the pot and they both folded. I had 3-4 hands similar to this within 2 hours of play today. One hand I open raised $1.50 from MP with AJs. A guy called with JT. More on this in a coming post. Anyway, thats why I have to disagree with you that $1.50 is too much. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Playing AA in NL, Aisthesis, 27. Dec 2003 11:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hmmmm... sounds like we're playing largely the same tables, but I do generally prefer the 4 BB raise--actually I often run into the problem of only getting the blinds even with a 4 BB bet on AA in EP. But admittedly, there's a lot of variation depending on table. I don't think there's necessarily a "correct" way to do it, so if your higher raise is working, go for it. (I will say that I usually keep the lower one pretty much regardless since I can also make that raise on occasion with a low pair or suited connector--whereas I would feel very uncomfortable making a higher raise). By the way, ice, when are you usually online at pokerstars and what's your handle there? Would be fun to sit down at the same table sometime! (tonight I probably won't be on until pretty late if I make it at all, but otherwise I'm usually around in the evening) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Playing AA in NL, iceman5, 27. Dec 2003 12:29 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I play under the name "utrecht". I work in the evening so I play in the morning and late at night (after 10:30 CST). Are you "aisthesis" at PS? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Playing AA in NL, Aisthesis, 29. Dec 2003 22:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Yes, I am. Unfortunately haven't been able to play the last few days as my internet connection was down until just a little while ago. I'll look for you, and hopefully we'll find a table there soon. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Playing AA in NL, rdale, 28. Dec 2003 02:48 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| #1: Fine way to play it, you can either milk them with nice board, or if reraised raise back an amount that induces an all in, or move in yourself. #2: At this limit, this sounds like a fair way to get more money in the pot out of the initial raiser, who probably isn't going to let go for $3 to him. Depending on the players chip count, I consider a 25% of his stack or more if the opponent is short stacked and I have him covered, especially if I believe I can get him to push the rest in. Everyone else at the table, if they are sane should be ducking out quick and you are now heads up with a weaker hand. If I am covered by the opponent, I consider heavily pushing all in here to double up. I found people with the chips are willing to put them in play, especially against someone that has proven to be fairly aggressive with TT, JJ, QQ and AK. #3: All in is great here, or again enough of the stack to induce the all in or leave them pot committed to the rest of the chips. I like all in preflop, because it eliminates other decisions. You know where you are now, on the flop, if they just spiked a set, you are probably going to call the all in anyways... if you bet half their stack they are going to move with a set, top pair etc, but fold the draws most likely. Played AA UTG at a $100 max buy in table online last week... it was $1-$2 four player very loose aggressive game. I raise the minimum, guy next to me folds, small blind makes it $4 and big blind makes it $8. I have about $110 after starting with $25, small blind is sitting on $95 or so and big blind around $78. The pot was big enough in my mind to take right there... and the plan from the beginning was to move in on the aggressive play that was expected to follow. I push it to $100 to have them both covered small blind called, big blind folded after much complaining. JJ was the big blinds hand, and he got no help, said merry christmas and was a good sport. I like the weak raise play when they less aware and standard open raise UTG when it is suspected they are paying attention and would know what was happening, and can more than likely count on someone being super aggressive back at me. All in with AA especially in a cash game with enough money in the pot to make it interesting. I know they will have to get lucky to beat the hand and I can buy in for another $25 if they hit, they are probably going to give it back soon enough. I figure if I can't reasonably consider all in preflop with AA... then I shouldn't be playing the game. To the later discussion on the subject: When having a lot of chips... if I can't try to bully and push with other strong but more vulnerable hands AKs and QQ-TT, forcing players into folding initial raises taking coinflips at best, huge underdog situations at worse, then I'm in the wrong game and need to play something else instead of no limit hold'em for cash. You will get called more with your AA, playing aggressive and constantly put the pressure on the table when you are in a hand, especially preflop with good cards. I don't even mind losing with TT to QJs, because once the cards are flipped the table knows you will play that hand super strong, should it win... they know it too, you just get the bonus of the opponents stack. I am working on the idea of losing a little to win a lot. When you more than have a player covered you are up around $200 and the other player has $25, putting him to the decision to fold KQ with Ax isn't that bad of a play, win or lose the next time you try that "move" you are getting called, and you will be doing it with stronger cards. Attempting to win bigger pots later, while losing less harmful ones is a sound investment. Bluffs/Aggressive Play with more mediocre hands in no limit at the right price seem to carry much more weight for me than in limit hold'em. Where it doesn't seem to matter if I"m a complete rock at the limit I play, I still get lots of action. It fixes the only all in preflop with only AA image, and doesn't really cost that much and 50% or so pays if done at the right times. | ||
| 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 |
|