Jump to content

aces in first hand of wsop


Recommended Posts

ok this may be a stupid question, and feel free to tell my why, but i think its legitimate.you sit down at the WSOP and pick up aces in the first hand. you're late position, with two limpers behind you.you are not a professional or a recognized player. for argument's sake, you are below 30 and look like an internet player. how much do you raise? do you go all-in?i think the all-in move is not stupid, since the other players may think you are just some internet kid, who will move all-in with AK or any high pockets, and that this possibility more than covers the relatively more likely situation that you could raise less and win a few more chips.does the answer change if there is a raiser in front of you?cheers,danielp.s. please only tell me its a stupid question if it really is a stupid question, and not just because you flame every post instinctively.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Someone posted this exact same question yesterday.
i think the post you're referring to was someone asking if 7 people go all-in in front of you, should you call? i think my question is quite different.
Link to post
Share on other sites

You fold.Just kidding. But you can't be serious. Why would you go all-in on the very first hand?Chances are you'll just win the blinds. Oh boy! That's just bad poker. I'd raise maybe 5 times the big blind.That's the problem with a lot of Internet players they want to win it alll in one hand. It's all about portion control. You want to maximize your profit. The goal is to extract the most from your opponent. Going all-in especially on the first hand will most likely have the opposite effect. Just my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You fold.Just kidding. But you can't be serious. Why would you go all-in on the very first hand?Chances are you'll just win the blinds. Oh boy! That's just bad poker. I'd raise maybe 5 times the big blind.That's the problem with a lot of Internet players they want to win it alll in one hand. It's all about portion control. You want to maximize your profit. The goal is to extract the most from your opponent. Going all-in especially on the first hand will most likely have the opposite effect. Just my opinion.
good answer IMO.
Link to post
Share on other sites
That's the problem with a lot of Internet players they want to win it alll in one hand.
don't disagree, but given that this is the prevailing opinion, surely people might put you on less than AA. since they are doing this, they might call. you might argue that people won't want to take the chance to lose 10000 on one hand, but i'd bet a lot of people would be willing to take a coin flip to double up in the first hand because they can picture themselves using their big stack to dominating tables all the way to 5 mil.just a thought - thanks for the opinions.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Other than KK, it's tough to imagine ANY hand possibly calling a pre-flop all-in on the first hand...especially after when people are limping in so probably no one has a great hand. No one wants to bust out on the first hand and people want to shake the rust off and get into the groove. To me, since the blinds are very small, the best gamble might be to raise like 5-6x the BB and hope that someone calls or comes over the top of you because they think you're stealing or a pro thinks they can outplay you after the flop so they call with anything. Otherwise make the standard raise and hope for a call. Go all-in and odds are very strong that you win virtually nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A coin means that you’re going lose half the time. Remember AA is the best STARTING hand. It’s not the best two cards but the best five. So lets say you have AA and you go all-in and someone calls. They flip over 72 of diamonds. The flop comes k 5 9 all diamonds. Nest two cards are blank, blank. You just lost to a flush. Thanks for playing see ya next year. Also on another point, I respectfully disagree. A lot of people (at least those who have confidence in their game) would not try to double up on the first hand before the flop.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the nature of the post is the fact that most pros don't respect internet players and know they overplay the hell out of many weaker holdings. Sooo, with that in mind, overpushing with premium holdings can be a good play if that's the stereotypical image. The only problem with pushing all in here and trying to catch an "image call" is that most people traveled all the way out to the WSOP and paid 10K (or won a satellite to get there), so they are probably not too thrilled at the prospect of busting on the first hand. This is true at most tables. People usually play tight when they first sit down at new tables, especially at the beginning of tourneys. This is a good reason why it's ok to throw out some big bluffs early in a tourney as many are more susceptible to a bluff early. Mike Caro talks about this concept in several of his books and videos. I think the best play is to just overbet the pot a bit, which keeps with the loose internet image, while getting more value out of your hand.....hopefully.

Link to post
Share on other sites
A coin means that you’re going lose half the time. Remember AA is the best STARTING hand. It’s not the best two cards but the best five.  So lets say you have AA and you go all-in and someone calls. They flip over 72 of diamonds. The flop comes k 5 9 all diamonds. Nest two cards are blank, blank. You just lost to a flush. Thanks for playing see ya next year.  Also on another point, I respectfully disagree.  A lot of people (at least those who have confidence in their game) would not try to double up on the first hand before the flop.
you will never lose with A-A "half the time" heads-up.especially against 7-2 suited or offsuit.aseem
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be a great play if you have a bunch of pros at your table. You probably won't be called and pick up $75 in chips but I think there will be less people willing to steal your blind or push you around...

Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree you’re not going to lose half the time heads up with aces - my point was that just because you have aces doesn’t guarantee a win even against the worst possible starting hand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i HIGHLY disagree that a lot of people will call off their entire stack pre-flop on the FIRST hand just to double up.any "good" player will lay down even kings in this spot.any "bad" player will NOT want to risk their stack in the first hand; most amateurs have the common philosophy of "just wait for others to bust so that you can make the money".look at it this way. if you play this hand normally, your EV (expected value) might be something like 20 big blinds. that is, if you play it normally, you will win ON AVERAGE 20 big blinds that hand.if you push all-in, what is your expected value?if everyone folds, you won 3.5 big blinds (the posted blinds and the two limpers' calls).if one person calls, you won 80% of approximately 202 big blinds, which is 161.5 big blinds.obviously, you want someone to call if you push all-in. your logic is that someone might think you DON'T have aces and will then call, which you want.however, by pushing all-in, you are forefeiting the EV you get when you make a standard raise; that is, you forefeit your normal EV (for example, 20 big blinds) in hopes of getting an EV of 161.5 big blinds.do you get one caller often enough to justify forefeiting that EV in hopes of a higher one?let's look at the basic math.if you make a standard raise, your expected total value is 20 big blinds.if you push all-in, assuming there is P probability that you get one caller (assume for simplicity that all other times, everyone folds--two calls is EXTREMELY unlikely), your expected value is [P x 161.5] + [(1 - P) x 3.5] = 158 x P + 3.5 big blinds.to make pushing more profitable than a standard raise, the EV of pushing has to be greater than 20 big blinds, which means that P has to be greater than 10.5%.can you honestly expect one caller at least 10.5% of the time? i highly doubt it. thus, making a standard raise is more profitable than pushing.there are a few other factors:1. you forefeit your post-flop edge if you're a good player. that is, a "good" player often has a higher EV with aces than a bad player, since he has the ability to lay them down when he knows he's beat, AND he can extract maximum value when he knows he's ahead. thus, if the EV of making a standard raise and playing it out is higher for a "good" player (say, 30 big blinds), which means you need to expect a caller if you push MORE than 10.5% of the time--possibly around 15% - 20% of the time, which makes pushing even more unlikely and even more unprofitable than playing it out.2. you have horrible tournament equity. on day one in a huge field, doubling up will mean nothing, so why bother with it? there is a MONSTROUS 20% chance for you to get knocked out if you get a caller--that's WAY too high for day one.3. you'll possibly lose respect. tournaments differ from cash games in that you can't afford to take marginal edges, and you need to minimize variance in addition to profits. that means that when you push all-in, you might KNOW that you're the favorite, but you'd still prefer a fold. this means that when you push all-in next time, you might want a fold but you might instead get a call since your opponent has lost respect for your pushes (maybe you've developed a LAG image after pushing pre-flop on the first hand). plus, you might lose your power to bluff effectively with similar reasoning.to push here is just ridiculous, IMHO.aseem

Link to post
Share on other sites

Going all-in would serve no purpose. Most people wouldn't even call you with KK on the very first hand. Why should they? Doubling up at this point of the tourney would probably mean almost nothing in comparison to how many chips you will actually need to get into the money. In the first few rounds of a big buy-in tournament the blinds are so small that almost everyone will be very weary of playing a pot of any significant size. If you raise all-in and steal the blinds you just wasted a chance to at least pick up a few chips early on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I can picture a few situations where you might be able to go all in and expect all call. They're aren't a lot of them, however, so you're probably going to get far less value for your aces than you could.I would NEVER worry about risking my tournament to play aces heads up. You are never worse than a 77% to win the pot, regardless of the cards your opponent is holding. In fact you are most often going to be a better than 4:1 favorite. So any arguments citing a possibly bust out of the first hand, support a FAR too timid play to have any legitimate expectation at winning the tournament. It's those scenarios like having AA in the BB of the first hand and all other 9 players are all-in ahead of you. I think it's pretty easy to fold aces in this spot but never if you can get a heads up or even 3 way pot.I think the question comes down to the best way to exploit your "internet qualifier" image. It is surely not by going all-in. The way pros would attempt to exploit their advantage over you would be to outplay you after the flop, if you set them all in they lose the ability to do that and would have to have a super premium holding to make the call. They also know that you're VERY likely to be holding a Skalansky tier 1 hand and will make thier decision based on that. Obviously you have them dominated if they call but the concern is how rarely you'll get called.I vote for a raise to 6x the BB. It appears overly agressive which one might think typical of an "internet player" and represents a MUCH larger range of possible hands. It is much easier for someone, namely a pro, to put you on a hand like AK or AQs and make a move at you when the flop is a T 7 4 rainbow.I remember some advice Daniel has given in the past. He said that amateur players might be better off by getting more chips in preflop by putting in bigger than normal bets because their player is likely weakest postflop and that you should be raising a little more than the "norm" against pros so that you force them to define their hand. I think both concepts apply equally well in this situation and should be considered with the argument against simply going all in to come up with a large, but callable or raisable bet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone wants the distinction of being eliminated on the first hand in the world series of poker, thus extra incentive not to call the all in.Hmmm, maybe I should have read the above post that sounded much like mine before offering my input.

Link to post
Share on other sites
don't disagree, but given that this is the prevailing opinion, surely people might put you on less than AA. since they are doing this, they might call. you might argue that people won't want to take the chance to lose 10000 on one hand, but i'd bet a lot of people would be willing to take a coin flip to double up in the first hand because they can picture themselves using their big stack to dominating tables all the way to 5 mil.just a thought - thanks for the opinions.
i'll take that bet.(i highly disagree.)aseem
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that a raise would be in order. However an All-In seems a bit strong. Remember the first say is really about staying alive not winning. I would raise about 4 or 5 times the big blind and let the hand play out. Why let an underdog catch a hand and bust you early. Thats my two sense... whatever it is worth

Link to post
Share on other sites
i HIGHLY disagree that a lot of people will call off their entire stack pre-flop on the FIRST hand just to double up.any "good" player will lay down even kings in this spot.any "bad" player will NOT want to risk their stack in the first hand; most amateurs have the common philosophy of "just wait for others to bust so that you can make the money".look at it this way. if you play this hand normally, your EV (expected value) might be something like 20 big blinds. that is, if you play it normally, you will win ON AVERAGE 20 big blinds that hand.if you push all-in, what is your expected value?if everyone folds, you won 3.5 big blinds (the posted blinds and the two limpers' calls).if one person calls, you won 80% of approximately 202 big blinds, which is 161.5 big blinds.obviously, you want someone to call if you push all-in. your logic is that someone might think you DON'T have aces and will then call, which you want.however, by pushing all-in, you are forefeiting the EV you get when you make a standard raise; that is, you forefeit your normal EV (for example, 20 big blinds) in hopes of getting an EV of 161.5 big blinds.do you get one caller often enough to justify forefeiting that EV in hopes of a higher one?let's look at the basic math.if you make a standard raise, your expected total value is 20 big blinds.if you push all-in, assuming there is P probability that you get one caller (assume for simplicity that all other times, everyone folds--two calls is EXTREMELY unlikely), your expected value is [P x 161.5] + [(1 - P) x 3.5] = 158 x P + 3.5 big blinds.to make pushing more profitable than a standard raise, the EV of pushing has to be greater than 20 big blinds, which means that P has to be greater than 10.5%.can you honestly expect one caller at least 10.5% of the time? i highly doubt it. thus, making a standard raise is more profitable than pushing.there are a few other factors:1. you forefeit your post-flop edge if you're a good player. that is, a "good" player often has a higher EV with aces than a bad player, since he has the ability to lay them down when he knows he's beat, AND he can extract maximum value when he knows he's ahead. thus, if the EV of making a standard raise and playing it out is higher for a "good" player (say, 30 big blinds), which means you need to expect a caller if you push MORE than 10.5% of the time--possibly around 15% - 20% of the time, which makes pushing even more unlikely and even more unprofitable than playing it out.2. you have horrible tournament equity. on day one in a huge field, doubling up will mean nothing, so why bother with it? there is a MONSTROUS 20% chance for you to get knocked out if you get a caller--that's WAY too high for day one.3. you'll possibly lose respect. tournaments differ from cash games in that you can't afford to take marginal edges, and you need to minimize variance in addition to profits. that means that when you push all-in, you might KNOW that you're the favorite, but you'd still prefer a fold. this means that when you push all-in next time, you might want a fold but you might instead get a call since your opponent has lost respect for your pushes (maybe you've developed a LAG image after pushing pre-flop on the first hand). plus, you might lose your power to bluff effectively with similar reasoning.to push here is just ridiculous, IMHO.aseem
wow, well done aseem, this is definitely one of the best posts ive ever read on this forum in 6 months....if not THE best.
Link to post
Share on other sites

First hand of the WSOP blinds are 25-25. So the pot is has $100 in it before it gets to you. If you move in, you are overbetting the pot by $9,900. Good odds you're laying, guess you really wanted to protect that hand. Even if you lose $1000 getting your aces broken first hand... you still have $9,000 left. Just raise with them and play as you normally would. Obviously if one of the limpers re-raises you, you re-raise a considerable amount... and if for some reason he re-raised you again, then you could consider moving in... but moving in pre-flop with $100 in the pot is ludacris. If you moved in, and someone asked you why you moved in pre-flop with AA and then showed them, i have a feeling you'd be laughed right off the table.

Link to post
Share on other sites
any "good" player will lay down even kings in this spot.
There are many (otherwise) pretty good players who would call with kings there.
any "bad" player will NOT want to risk their stack in the first hand; most amateurs have the common philosophy of "just wait for others to bust so that you can make the money".
There are many bad players who would call with kings there. I'd venture to say most bad players. Some will beat you into the pot, "knowing" they've got you. The truly terrible will call with worse, but this will be rare of course.
look at it this way. if you play this hand normally, your EV (expected value) might be something like 20 big blinds. that is, if you play it normally, you will win ON AVERAGE 20 big blinds that hand.
Cite your source. 20 sounds pretty damn high to me. You will lose a good portion of your stack a significant proportion of the time. The math below is meaningless for comparitive purposes if you just make up the number 20.
if you push all-in, what is your expected value?if everyone folds, you won 3.5 big blinds (the posted blinds and the two limpers' calls).if one person calls, you won 80% of approximately 202 big blinds, which is 161.5 big blinds.
And approximately 20% of the time you lose 200 big blinds, which is 40 big blinds on average. Leaving us a rough ballpark EV in the event of a call of 121.5 big blinds.
however, by pushing all-in, you are forefeiting the EV you get when you make a standard raise; that is, you forefeit your normal EV (for example, 20 big blinds) in hopes of getting an EV of 161.5 big blinds.
121.5 big bet EV is a lot closer.
do you get one caller often enough to justify forefeiting that EV in hopes of a higher one?let's look at the basic math.if you make a standard raise, your expected total value is 20 big blinds.if you push all-in, assuming there is P probability that you get one caller (assume for simplicity that all other times, everyone folds--two calls is EXTREMELY unlikely), your expected value is [P x 161.5] + [(1 - P) x 3.5] = 158 x P + 3.5 big blinds.to make pushing more profitable than a standard raise, the EV of pushing has to be greater than 20 big blinds, which means that P has to be greater than 10.5%.
When the EV is corrected to 121.5, p=.14. This is assuming of course, that the 20 BB estimate is reasonable.
2. you have horrible tournament equity. on day one in a huge field, doubling up will mean nothing, so why bother with it? there is a MONSTROUS 20% chance for you to get knocked out if you get a caller--that's WAY too high for day one.
This is just silly. Doubling up means a lot. If you knew you'd get called if you jammed AA, it's the right play. We don't know that, so it's debateable, and probably not the right play EV wise. But if you're not willing to take an 80% chance of doubling up on day 1, you're off your tree, in a Phill Hellmuth sort of way. The above statement above implies that you think AA should be folded if the pot was jammed before you. Are you part of that strange contingent?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...