debate: not raising aa/kk preflop in nlhe

[Smasharoo 0]

First off, totally uncalled for. Im trying to build a valid arguement to someone can tear it apart and I can see where my error in judgement is happening. Im trying to use the Socratic method (state the problem, take a stance and defend it) to solve my misunderstanding. No, the Socratic method would involve someone else asking you questions so you could reason out the answer. Not you asking arbitrary questions.What you're using is the "confused by simple concepts but unable to admit that" method.Not nearly as effective.

[Ender142 0]

So, you just got caught in an unusual situation. Tough luck.

Valid point - is an uncoordinated flop an unusual situation? Are most flops somewhat coordinated, that you would fear for your AA in a multihand? Or is an uncoordinated flop more common than a coordinated one?Dev

I would say since you would consider at least any two suited cards, two high connecting cards like J-10, J-Q, or K-Q, or high pairs on the flop to be a coordinated one, your going to see alot more of those types than ragged queen high flops.Either way, i think slow-playing the big pairs (by slow-playing i mean either not opening with a raise or not re-raising if you do just limp) is a bad descision even if you DO get a ragged flop. Why? Lets say soemone has AK and is faced with an all-in descision on that ragged queen high flop. Do you really think he is going to call? Not a chance. If you hadnt slowplayed, however, you would be taking all his money by putting him all-in pre-flop because its a tough hand to get away from for most people.

[Devilkin 0]

No, the Socratic method would involve someone else asking you questions so you could reason out the answer. Not you asking arbitrary questions.

The please, ask me questions! Ill debate this to the ends of the earth until I understand this concept.Please, add constructive criticism to the posting. I am disappointed that you have yet to explain WHY not raising AA is a bad idea in NLHE, especially if its a 'simple concept'.Im asking for help from the forum.Please, assist me with this one.Dev

[princeof56k 0]

I like to think of it this way: Would you slow play Top Pair? The obvious answer is no. If you flop TP, you bet to either force out draws or make them pay to draw. This is because while you're out in front with TP, that hand is still very vulnerable.Basically when you have pocket Aces you have TP before the flop. Now while thats strong (as you can beat any other pair), it is definately not unbeatable. Just like TP, you need to bet to force out draws or make them pay to draw.With KK or even QQ the same logic applies (as your probably out in front pre-flop). Your raise pre-flop will cause people with overcards (either an A or K respectively) to either fold or pay to see if they hit their overcard on the flop.

[Devilkin 0]

Either way, i think slow-playing the big pairs (by slow-playing i mean either not opening with a raise or not re-raising if you do just limp) is a bad descision even if you DO get a ragged flop. Why? Lets say soemone has AK and is faced with an all-in descision on that ragged queen high flop. Do you really think he is going to call? Not a chance. If you hadnt slowplayed, however, you would be taking all his money by putting him all-in pre-flop because its a tough hand to get away from for most people.

And there we go - an EXCELLENT arguement, one that I believe was stated above, but nicely put here. Simply put"You will have a better chance getting someone like AKo to call all in before the flop than with an uncoordinated board". Thank you for this simple yet very helpful statement.This is all I was asking for.ThanksDev

[Smasharoo 0]

I am disappointed that you have yet to explain WHY not raising AA is a bad idea in NLHE, especially if its a 'simple concept'. I did.See my post on visability.

[Ender142 0]

I am disappointed that you have yet to explain WHY not raising AA is a bad idea in NLHE, especially if its a 'simple concept'.  I did.See my post on visability.

He also explained why your call was an even worse idea. My advice for people on this board: dont listen to anything this misfit has to say.

[Devilkin 0]

I did.See my post on visability.

My apologies Smash . .I did miss that posting as I scanned through the debate trying to answer everyone's opinions.Let me work with this concept of visability a bit.You are saying, that by limping, you are given no idea what kind of hands your opponent holds, and that only be raising preflop can you get a 'read' on your opponent, since most (not all, since there are novices out there that will call me with 22 or A10s) will only call with a very strong hand, and a reraise indicates a top hand?Dev

[boxcaral 0]

I am disappointed that you have yet to explain WHY not raising AA is a bad idea in NLHE, especially if its a 'simple concept'.

Because by not raising you: - have no information on the strength of your opponents; - allow garbage hands to beat you on the flop; - lose fold equity; - don't put money in the pot when you have the best of it.Clear yet?

[Devilkin 0]

He also explained why your call was an even worse idea. My advice for people on this board: dont listen to anything this misfit has to say.

Point was already conceded that the call of the all in was bad . . . . and yes, I did miss Smash's post on visibility. I've reread it and responded with a question.And thus far I havent stated unequivicably that Im right and everyone else is wrong. This is supposed to be a friendly debate about poker concepts - Im concerned that its going to spiral into a flame war with no positive results.Dev

[dynamic1 0]

the only time I think slowplaying these hands is valuable is this...your in early position and your certain that someone will raise behind you. When that raise comes you re-raise a good amount, (a pot sized reraise). You will then get all the other callers out aand either pick up the pot right there or be in a heads up situation against someone that probably has a drawing hand or a smaller pair, both good situations for you. If you happen to limp in and there is no raise behind you, you just have to be very careful on how you proceed with the hand. Also, this I think is more for tourny play, not neccesarily cash game play.

[Devilkin 0]

- have no information on the strength of your opponents;- allow garbage hands to beat you on the flop;- lose fold equity;- don't put money in the pot when you have the best of it.

Good points. Thanks for the quick, point form summary.This is also what I was looking for. The raise is to weed out the garbage hands, and to trim down the number of hands Im competing against. Fold equity is also enhanced, since I did the original raising, and another very strong bet will only enhance the chances of opponents folding, unless the flop has hit something beyond TPTK for them.I know this may seem like 'the basics' for a number of you, but keep in mind there are a multitude of lurkers, many of whom are just learning the game. Ive only been at it for a few months now, so Im still struggling with some concepts, as Ive demonstrated.If I've offended anyone, that was not my intention. Just an open debate about theory and concepts was all I wanted.Dev

[Devilkin 0]

the only time I think slowplaying these hands is valuable is this...your in early position and your certain that someone will raise behind you. When that raise comes you re-raise a good amount, (a pot sized reraise). You will then get all the other callers out aand either pick up the pot right there or be in a heads up situation against someone that probably has a drawing hand or a smaller pair, both good situations for you. If you happen to limp in and there is no raise behind you, you just have to be very careful on how you proceed with the hand. Also, this I think is more for tourny play, not neccesarily cash game play.

I agree wholeheartedly with your statement - Id love to compete preflop with someone with a drawing hand, or lower pocket pair. If I can trim the board to a heads up, and I hold AA, the odds are strongly in my favour.Your second point, where you limp early, and no one ahead reraises, is risky. Point conceded. The reason I even asked the original question is that I was baffled by the lack of a reraise by the holder of both AA and KK - both went against what I believed to be 'proper' poker theory, resulting in my confusion and the request for help from the forum.Thanks for contributing.Dev

[GaryMorris 0]

Dan Harrington states that you should slow play big pocket pairs 1/5th of the time....I think I will defer to the advice of this poker great.... The logic behind it is that if you dont limp with them some of the time, then when you do try to limp in people will know that they can push you around...You obviously dont have one of the top hands, thus, why not try to run you over? The reason most people wont do it, or cant stand to do it is that they have problems laying it down. When you raise pre-flop you are basically telling them(the players at the table), I have something strong here, and giving them info, thus letting them know you probably have a big pocket pair, when they come back at you after the flop with a big re-raise or check raise, you feel like you can then lay it down, because obviously the guy can beat aces...Its a sort of complicit agreement between players. When you dont raise with aces, I guess your fear is that when you come over the top of someone else's flop bet you are concerned that you wont know if you should fold if they come back over the top of you. Would they go all in with TPTK? It makes you think more, and definitely makes the game harder for you, but it gives your opponents less info about you and makes it harder for them to play against you. Its a trade off but I think that giving your opponents less info about your game is better than making your decisions easier... Just my opinionNow, I dont you should limp with them if everyone at the table likes to see the flop, a huge field is bad. If that is the case, raising is a must. In most competitve tournies though, the players are a bit more selective and sophisticated so you dont have many seeing a flop at once, which is all the more reason to limp and trap someone. You opportunities to gain chips is limited since less people see flops, so you must capitalize on your big hands.

Yes and the 1/5 of the time Dan is talking about slowing AA is heads up in a no limit tournament. You can take most of your oponents chips this way. Did you see Daniel N's victory last Wednesday at Tunica?

[....Ian.... 0]

this may have been said in this thread alreead (sorry if it has)but THE ONLY REASON to do this is if you are 99% certain that you will be raised PREFLOP. otherwise it's unwarranted risk.

[Reg Dunlop 0]

Doyle Brunson once said the AA can either win you a small hand or lose you a big one.

Doyle also says he often does slowplay Aces or Kings from early position or from middle position if he is the first to enter the pot in order to re-raise if someone comes in for a raise behind him. Nice try.

Doyle was talking about ring games and not a tournament. When I first read his book I had a hard time differentiating the two and tried slowplaying my Aces or Kings in tournaments to bad results. Every now and then I'll slowplay UTG if I'm sure I'll get a raise but most of the time I'll at least give them a healthy 3XBB bump and hope for the re-raise.

[Rob-L 0]

What, using my read, instead of known hands, could I fear from an opponent, that would cause me to fear for my AA when a rag flop (or uncoordinated flop) hits?  Yes, when a coordinated flop hits, you can second guess yourself.The stance Im defending is that AA unraised builds the pot with BB equivalents, and when the uncoordinated flop hits, a large bet or all in may be enough to get an all in call from a draw hand, or a TPTK.  Lets keep the discussion to that, shall we?Dev

I'm going to jump in here even though I think Devilkin is being stubborn. (No offense)I think the weak part of your stance is that it is based depending on an un-coordinated flop. (And that no one else will raise) First of all, how often does an uncoordinated flop occur? I won't break it down mathmatically, but just recall your own experience. Or, get a deck of cards and deal out some flops to see how many are totally uncooridated. It seems in my experience that more often than not, there is usally some kind of flush or straight draw possibility. Admittedly, Some of the straight draws are weak and would require someone to play garbage hands to make them. However, if you limp with AA from early position you will more than likely allow people who are loose, or maybe even not so loose, to come into the pot with hands that they would have folded had you raised.If you limp from late position with many limpers in front of you, you are in the same situation. So now basically, you are left with "hoping" that the flop is totally uncoordinated, which I think is a fairly rare occurence.Also, with so many garbage hands in the pot, how would you know the flop didn't hit someone? If I had 22 in early or early-middle position and you made a standard raise - I'd probably fold. However, if you limp I may stick around with that 22. Now the uncoordinated flop of Q - 7 - 2 rainbow hits. It won't get much more uncoordinated than that.With so much potential garbage in the hand how do you know this is truly uncoordinated? It's not the straights and flushes you have to fear now, it's the sets and two pairs.So now, if you make a giant raise, or go all-in, who's going to call you? Only someone that the flop has hit hard. If everyone folds, what have you gained? The bets from the pre-flop calls. But ONLY if everything goes yor way. No one else raises, and the flop is uncoordinated. Then what? You gamble that the flop truly didn't hit anyone. What have you risked? You risked getting a lot of chips in the pot and getting stung by a bigger hand.Why not just buy a lottery ticket?Basically, what I am saying is that it sounds like your whole premise is that if an uncoordinated flop hits, you can make a killing limping with AA. But, that can be said for just about any two cards as well couldn't it?I also have to ask myself - would you have asked this question if the person who limped with AA (and KK for that matter) had lost to your AQ? Probably not - I'm guessing you would have gone on thinking that limping with AA is stupid.With that being said - I'm not saying there is never a situation that you wouldn't limp with AA., but I would think that it's a pretty rare event.

[Smasharoo 0]

You are saying, that by limping, you are given no idea what kind of hands your opponent holds, and that only be raising preflop can you get a 'read' on your opponent, since most (not all, since there are novices out there that will call me with 22 or A10s) will only call with a very strong hand, and a reraise indicates a top hand?More importnatly you get much of the money in when you are *guranteed* to have the best hand which by definition limits your exposure to mistakes postflop. Someone calling a big raise with 73 and hitting two pair is a lot better than limping and having someone with 73 hit two pair.Do you see why?

[mx957 0]

Your theory of limping in with AA or KK is asking for two things to happen.. (as you've stated) 1) an Uncoordinated flop and 2) an person that is willing to call off all their chips when they catch a single card on the flop.If you are sure you are ready for the other things that might happen on the hand then I guess the risk is worth it, but what happens if the uncoordinated flop is 772 and the big blind limped in with 72. or if the flop does miss everyone and you put your big bet out there and no one calls.I think you are risking a lot and only getting a marginal gain. I agree that people are to willing to put all their chips into the pot with marginal hands but you are asking for alot if you think that you won't allow marginal hands to catch up to you in the end.

[Smasharoo 0]

I agree that people are to willing to put all their chips into the pot with marginal hands but you are asking for alot if you think that you won't allow marginal hands to catch up to you in the end.People who are callig all their chips off with TP are the same people who would have caled a big raise pre-flop.You're just giving them a chance to hit hands that beat you without making them pay for it.Beyond stupid.

[Ender142 0]

Point was already conceded that the call of the all in was bad . . . .

No, i think you misinterpreted my intent in that comment. Im arguing that your call was a good call, and i stated why above. Go back and read it.When there are only 4 possible hands that can realistically be beating you (AA, KK, QQ, 66) compaired to 7 hands that you realistically have beat (KQ, QJ, 77, 88, 99, TT, JJ), and the pot is laying you more than 2-1 on your call, its a no brainer. Whats more is that you could probibly rule out AA, KK and QQ just based on the pre-flop action since you wernt re-raised. There was no way in hell to know that one of those hands was out there based on the information you had. One peice of useful advice, though stupidly obvious, that Smash did give was that "if you could see everyone's cards, it would be an easy game". Well, the only way your making that fold correctly is if you could see their cards. Otherwise, your passing up on a key opportunity more often than not.

[Smasharoo 0]

One peice of useful advice, though stupidly obvious, that Smash did give was that "if you could see everyone's cards, it would be an easy game". Well, the only way your making that fold correctly is if you could see their cards. Otherwise, your passing up on a key opportunity more often than not.Ludicrous.I've seen weaker anlytical skills, but not from anything walking upright.

[ghoti7four 0]

I actually enjoyed this thread only because I hadn't thought about visibility in such concise terms, so thanks to smash, also thanks again to smash for clearing up the Socratic method thing (I really really really get irritated when people throw some processed marketed dumbed down philosophical catch phrase around i.e. whatever doesn't kill me makes me stronger, zen feng shui bullsh!t, I recall something about occams razor discussed in a thread earlier, and particularly religion is the opiate of the masses... errghh that burns me up, but thats just my own neurosis--oh yeah anything about Freud too). Anyways, I had one point to add. Devil guy or whatever your name is... since you seem to be interested in statistics consider how often you get pocket aces. If it happened every hand you certainly should play them in every way possibly getting tricky making all sorts of dashing television worthy professional poker player moves. However, as they are rare and because limping with them creates all the problems which have been explained quite clearly above you should do your best to win pots (granted the larger the better--but please try to win with them)... don't instead set yourself up to get outdrawn on by some clown with a seven of clubs and eight beers to the brain.

[Ender142 0]

I agree that people are to willing to put all their chips into the pot with marginal hands but you are asking for alot if you think that you won't allow marginal hands to catch up to you in the end.People who are callig all their chips off with TP are the same people who would have caled a big raise pre-flop.You're just giving them a chance to hit hands that beat you without making them pay for it.Beyond stupid.

Ok, you go ahead then and fold TPTK queens so that my poket 10s or KQ takes it down. Thank you very much, have a nice day.

I've seen weaker anlytical skills, but not from anything walking upright.

And ive seen weaker playing concepts than folding TPTK every time you face a big raise, but not from anything that can actually form a coherent sentance.

[Stylistic 0]

You can do anything in poker, I disagree that it is "stupid' to slow play big pocket pair at a filled table. Although I do agree that it is important to understand that there are more situations in which you shouldn't slow play pocket pair versus protecting them. However, I think the thought of "NEVER" doing it is considered a closed minded way of playing. But here is the rule of thumb IF YOU DO slow play those hands."You can slow play those hands, but you better be good enough to let it go easily"