question for my poker friends

[chindi 0]

I would probably play the AA in this spot, it would be tough not too. But I can't say its the right play in this situation. Folding your way to a seat is not guaranteed, but thats not the only option here if you choose not to play the AA. As tight as the tables usually are at this point, most preflop raises are successful, making it easy to increase or at least maintain your chip level with zero risk.

That's not true at all. As tight as these tables get SOME pre-flop raises are succesful, others result in re-raises that you have to give credit for strength and throw the bluff away. With the blinds at 10K, and a stack of 120K you don't have all that much room to bluff your way to more chips. It only takes one pre-flop raise that you have to let go to make YOU the small stack.

The many arguments calling for folding AA preflop in this spot make this point clear. If most will fold even AA in this spot, why in the world would you to gamble at all? Steal the blinds and antes, increase your chip stack with no risk and let the idiots that are there to gamble play their AA and get it cracked.

So you're saying here on the bubble, it's preferable to allow the small stack to increase his stack 50% (60K + 29K) when you've got AA, so that you can try to steal blinds by betting a third of your stack and hoping that you don't get called? Realizing that all it takes is one of those and you'll end up lower than the small stack you ran from?

All factors considered, chip stack, tight table, 1-7 all pay the same, there's no need to gamble here. Naturally if you are the short stack in this spot you push with much less of a hand, because then you do have to gamble.

So.... essentially it's better to let go of a 4-1 advantage... so that later if you slip in chips you can push in as the 1 - 4 dog?Hrm.

I have a question for those that have responded. How many times have you been in a similar spot, played your AA and been knocked out? I have, so I guess you could say I learned the hard way. AA? Easy call, the next thing you know you're the short stack and then out when you're 99 gets beaten by AK. And all you had to do was lay the AA down and coast home. Stupidity, bravado, ego, whatever the case may be, does not win in this spot.

'kaybe. Here's the thing.It is NOT stupid to go into a hand with the weight of statistics on your side. It is NOT bravado or ego or 'whatever' the case may be to realize that the OP is NOT in a position to coast home, no matter how many times people in this argument have ignored that point. It is also not cowardice, idiocy, or complete lack of balls to fold in this case. If you want to make an argument feel free to do it, but don't just resort to insults because you can't do the math.Let's assume, for the moment that the small stack has Ks Qs... which gives him livelier cards against the AA than he actually had, and still high enough cards he might think he's good against a limper... and remember... we don't know he has AK, you've said yourself he might go in here with any hand especially with only a few limpers in.Us: 82.13% to win.Him: 17.5% to win.So this means we have an 82% right now to knock him out of the tournament. If we fail, then we're in the short stack, and will have to play some cards.Let's look at the other side of it:If we fold here, the short stack almost doubles up and now has 89K to an average of 100K. With a few stacks in the 130s, that means that there are a couple hanging around 70K. With 19K per round of the board, we're a LONG way towards anyone having to go out, and the OP isn't even vaguely guaranteed to sleep walk his way in to the final 7. There are arguments for avoiding big pots, there is absolutely NO argument that he could fold his way to the promised land and just wait for someone to get knocked out.Also note that the blinds are coming your way, and if you don't catch anything playable there (or get a chance to limp in with AA) then you're down another 19K, and you're at the average. If you're lucky those chips went to an already big stack, if not then you're probably getting passed by a 'short' stack.

As strong as AA is preflop, you may have a better chance by laying it down. Thats what Skalansy says anyway. In fact, in his book for tournament players, he advocates folding AA in some spots when positions 1-7 do not pay the same prize. In the case where they do, its a much stronger argument.

Please to be showing where he advocates this when you're heads up against a much shorter stack (which is where the OP was).

[Rusty266 0]

I would probably play the AA in this spot, it would be tough not too. But I can't say its the right play in this situation. Folding your way to a seat is not guaranteed, but thats not the only option here if you choose not to play the AA. As tight as the tables usually are at this point, most preflop raises are successful, making it easy to increase or at least maintain your chip level with zero risk.

That's not true at all. As tight as these tables get SOME pre-flop raises are succesful, others result in re-raises that you have to give credit for strength and throw the bluff away. With the blinds at 10K, and a stack of 120K you don't have all that much room to bluff your way to more chips. It only takes one pre-flop raise that you have to let go to make YOU the small stack.I'll stand by the most preflop raises take the pot down theory, thats just the way it works. Just like AA usually will beat most other hands. The difference is, you may not have to raise preflop at all to get your seat. You may coast home with no risk. Should the worst case scenario arise, and the tournament does continue for another 30 - 40 hands, then a preflop raise will usually be successful. The same thing happens over and over, no one wants to risk their own chips by being the one to take out the short stack. Right or wrong, its very common.

The many arguments calling for folding AA preflop in this spot make this point clear. If most will fold even AA in this spot, why in the world would you to gamble at all? Steal the blinds and antes, increase your chip stack with no risk and let the idiots that are there to gamble play their AA and get it cracked.

So you're saying here on the bubble, it's preferable to allow the small stack to increase his stack 50% (60K + 29K) when you've got AA, so that you can try to steal blinds by betting a third of your stack and hoping that you don't get called? Realizing that all it takes is one of those and you'll end up lower than the small stack you ran from?I'm saying its preferable to not gamble when you don't have to. There may not be a need to accumulate more chips or maintain your chip position at all. If the need arises, the conditions favor the possibility of doing so.

All factors considered, chip stack, tight table, 1-7 all pay the same, there's no need to gamble here. Naturally if you are the short stack in this spot you push with much less of a hand, because then you do have to gamble.

So.... essentially it's better to let go of a 4-1 advantage... so that later if you slip in chips you can push in as the 1 - 4 dog?Hrm.It may very well be. The only thing is, you may not have to push as a 1-4 dog, in fact you may not have to push at all. And if you do, you likely won't get called anyway. Good lord, with all of the people that responded that they would fold AA in this spot, who's going to call your raise? No one! And thats the point. There's no need to gamble. If you do have to gamble later, you're in a good place to do so with the table playing tight.

I have a question for those that have responded. How many times have you been in a similar spot, played your AA and been knocked out? I have, so I guess you could say I learned the hard way. AA? Easy call, the next thing you know you're the short stack and then out when you're 99 gets beaten by AK. And all you had to do was lay the AA down and coast home. Stupidity, bravado, ego, whatever the case may be, does not win in this spot.

'kaybe. Here's the thing.It is NOT stupid to go into a hand with the weight of statistics on your side. It is NOT bravado or ego or 'whatever' the case may be to realize that the OP is NOT in a position to coast home, no matter how many times people in this argument have ignored that point. It is also not cowardice, idiocy, or complete lack of balls to fold in this case. If you want to make an argument feel free to do it, but don't just resort to insults because you can't do the math.No one resorted to insults at all. If thats the way you interpreted it though, well thats on you. In truth, I was trying to think of ways to describe my opinion of my own play in those type situations. But I do need to remember the sensitivity of some posters, so perhaps I should have spelled that out. I'm in the big blind with QQ. I would have folded but there's a limper and I'm stiffed in to the pot. With a board of Q-7-4-2, my opponent pushes. Naturally I call. My opponent has 2-2. Now tell me what the odds are again? The river is a 2 and I go from near the chip lead to out of the tournament on the bubble. 18 got a seat and I was 19th. Why? Because I wasn't smart enough to just fold the hand regardless of what the odds were to win my $530 seat. I couldn't have been in a better spot, but I broke the cardinal rule in a tournament of that type and at that stage. I gambled when I didnt have to.

As strong as AA is preflop, you may have a better chance by laying it down. Thats what Skalansy says anyway. In fact, in his book for tournament players, he advocates folding AA in some spots when positions 1-7 do not pay the same prize. In the case where they do, its a much stronger argument.

Please to be showing where he advocates this when you're heads up against a much shorter stack (which is where the OP was).

In his tournament book for advanced players, he does recommend folding AA to move up a spot on the payoff ladder, but the situation was different because all spots did not pay the same. I mentioned it because even when they do not, it is still sometimes correct to fold AA preflop. And this is one of those times.Would I have folded AA? I already answered that one. Probably not and I haven't in the past. But I have been knocked out on the bubble in similar tournaments, where the top finishers all get seats to another tournament, so many times with unbeatable hands, that I now see the light. Fold and let someone else do the gambling.In the end its all irrelevant anyway. You do it your way I'll do it mine. The only thing that is certain, is that my bankroll will be higher this month than it was last month. Everything else is up for discussion

[greatwhite 0]

That's the way I see it. I would let someone else do the gambling on the bubble. However, I would not fold AA under normal tournament circumstances, where there is a normal payout structure instead of an entry going to the top 5 finishers.