Folded Aces Preflop For The First Time Ever

[Shadybet 0]

damn swedes and their safe cars..

[rwood 0]

i always fold aces because they always lose, it's just impossible to beat those games where everyone goes to the river

[yergan 0]

i always fold aces because they always lose, it's just impossible to beat those games where everyone goes to the river

Thats why I play higher limits. People respect my raises more.(sw)

[AceJackOffS 0]

I don't think there is a big adavantage to stalling, especially if you havea a big stack. You are only helping the short stacks at your table. I like to play fast so the blinds can hit the short stacks quicker and more often.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

I don't think there is a big adavantage to stalling, especially if you havea a big stack. You are only helping the short stacks at your table. I like to play fast so the blinds can hit the short stacks quicker and more often.

yeah, but the blinds go up faster in relation to how many hands they get to see, I love the stall tactic, particularly in turbvo sng's

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

I don't think there is a big adavantage to stalling, especially if you havea a big stack. You are only helping the short stacks at your table. I like to play fast so the blinds can hit the short stacks quicker and more often.

IN an mtt, I throughly agree with you, btw.. I only stall when I'm a big stack when it's down to one table.. in an mtt, it's too good of chance to pick up dead money

[showstopper24 0]

I think stalling is a good straegy on online poker

[bdiddy122 0]

can someone tell me wtf (sw) means?

[AceJackOffS 0]

IN an mtt, I throughly agree with you, btw.. I only stall when I'm a big stack when it's down to one table.. in an mtt, it's too good of chance to pick up dead money

i didn't realize you were talking about a SnG.

[Balloon guy 158]

Only the TOP pros can make that laydownnice

[WhatArunAA 0]

can someone tell me wtf (sw) means?

sarcasm warning

[Teffy 0]

sarcasm warning

oh come, that was served up on a platter. missed opportunity.

[grannysmith 0]

I cannot stand when people stall in multi's, obv near the bubble. I'm playing to win and these whores are not letting me play the same amount of hands as everyone else.those 20 multis the paydays for the first level suck anyway STALLING IS FOR DONKY LOSERS

[DUSTINFLYZ172 0]

and boy is it sweet.. I am in a two table full tilt satilite with 11000 in chips.. next closest is 4000, and average chip stack is 3800. there are seven players left, and 5 of them get satilite seats. there is literally no way I can not get a seat, blinds are 100/200 and there are several short stacks. man it felt wierd to fold aces but I think there's literally no chance of me not getting a seat, as long as I just fold. .I'm also slow rolling them ( IE I am taking maxium time to fold each hand.

Why not play a hand and bust somebody? Oh wait. Your a puss.

[Socrates 0]

I did this yesterday too. I was UTG with AA and afraid of getting outdrawn. I just put it down before I got in trouble.

[flintsword 4]

and boy is it sweet.. I am in a two table full tilt satilite with 11000 in chips.. next closest is 4000, and average chip stack is 3800. there are seven players left, and 5 of them get satilite seats. there is literally no way I can not get a seat, blinds are 100/200 and there are several short stacks. man it felt wierd to fold aces but I think there's literally no chance of me not getting a seat, as long as I just fold. .I'm also slow rolling them ( IE I am taking maxium time to fold each hand.

Let me get this straight, you have almost three times the chips as the next guy, everyone is angling to avoid being tossed to the rail on the bubble, you have AA, and you folded the aces? A good surgeon can re-attach those balls you lost somewhere along the line (I am trying to be funny here, not horribly insulting).You are playing poker for a reason, right? Sorry, that play is just insane. I want to hear a really good player (DN, where are you?) say that folding aces preflop in this situation is even remotely a feasible play. The forum name is 'full contact POKER', not 'justify a donkey play just because you have chips'.You have the whip hand with a huge stack and you are dealt AA: Fold? wtf.Sure it is your choice. Sure you have a lock on the seat, granted.Your decision was to post and fold anything and everything. What you had is irrelevent to that idea, so you can hang the "I folded AA" superman cape in the cloakroom ... you were coasting.I would have bet my aces to get more chips. That deep into a two-table tournament, you will get one caller unless the remaining players are maniacs. Heads up, AA is just fine.But they are your cards to fold, call, or raise as you see fit. Good luck in the event you qualified for.

[Cookie Monster 0]

and boy is it sweet.. I am in a two table full tilt satilite with 11000 in chips.. next closest is 4000, and average chip stack is 3800. there are seven players left, and 5 of them get satilite seats. there is literally no way I can not get a seat, blinds are 100/200 and there are several short stacks. man it felt wierd to fold aces but I think there's literally no chance of me not getting a seat, as long as I just fold. .I'm also slow rolling them ( IE I am taking maxium time to fold each hand.

[Homer Simpson 0]

mmmmm....... Cookie

[RodReynolds 87]

Let me get this straight, you have almost three times the chips as the next guy, everyone is angling to avoid being tossed to the rail on the bubble, you have AA, and you folded the aces? A good surgeon can re-attach those balls you lost somewhere along the line (I am trying to be funny here, not horribly insulting).You are playing poker for a reason, right? Sorry, that play is just insane. I want to hear a really good player (DN, where are you?) say that folding aces preflop in this situation is even remotely a feasible play. The forum name is 'full contact POKER', not 'justify a donkey play just because you have chips'.You have the whip hand with a huge stack and you are dealt AA: Fold? wtf.Sure it is your choice. Sure you have a lock on the seat, granted.Your decision was to post and fold anything and everything. What you had is irrelevent to that idea, so you can hang the "I folded AA" superman cape in the cloakroom ... you were coasting.I would have bet my aces to get more chips. That deep into a two-table tournament, you will get one caller unless the remaining players are maniacs. Heads up, AA is just fine.But they are your cards to fold, call, or raise as you see fit. Good luck in the event you qualified for.

http://www.philhellmuth.com/articles.html?id=50At the end of this article, Phil talks about how it can be correct to fold aces pre-flop, in a situation similar to this. I don't understand your argument at all. You grant him that he has a lock on the seat, implying that he has a 100% chance to win something, and it is impossible to gain anything besides this. He has maxed out his EV, just by folding, and you admit this. The only thing that deviating from this strategy of folding can accomplish is to lower his EV, or to keep it constant. Is it not clear that if he loses an allin with his AA, to say a guy with 4000, then his odds of winning the seat decrease? And if wins the allin, his chances stay the same, ie. 100%?The only way your argument could make sense is of course to argue that he does not "have a lock" on the seat.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Edit: I've taken the time to write for you a possible defence.Dear RodReynoldsMy statement "Sure you have a lock on the seat" was not meant to imply a 100% success rate of winning said seat. This of course is impossible. Strange things can happen. I suggest that he only had a 98% chance of winning the seat by folding. Let us now, to simplify the argument, that he runs into a man with a 2000 chipstack. BigD raises w AA, and is reraised allin by this guy. Should he call? Let us say he has an 80% of winning the hand, and that if he wins, he has a 99% chance of winning the seat, and if he loses, he has a 95% chance of winning. So, we average over all events, and his average chance of winning is 0.8(.99) + 0.2(0.95) = 0.982. So, he has increased his chances by 0.2%. I told you he should play AA, you ignorant fool! Also, let's ignore the fact that I made up very many figures to support my claim. I win.Sincerely,Flintsword

[Naslund44 0]

http://www.philhellmuth.com/articles.html?id=50At the end of this article, Phil talks about how it can be correct to fold aces pre-flop, in a situation similar to this. I don't understand your argument at all. You grant him that he has a lock on the seat, implying that he has a 100% chance to win something, and it is impossible to gain anything besides this. He has maxed out his EV, just by folding, and you admit this. The only thing that deviating from this strategy of folding can accomplish is to lower his EV, or to keep it constant. Is it not clear that if he loses an allin with his AA, to say a guy with 4000, then his odds of winning the seat decrease? And if wins the allin, his chances stay the same, ie. 100%?The only way your argument could make sense is of course to argue that he does not "have a lock" on the seat.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Edit: I've taken the time to write for you a possible defence.Dear RodReynoldsMy statement "Sure you have a lock on the seat" was not meant to imply a 100% success rate of winning said seat. This of course is impossible. Strange things can happen. I suggest that he only had a 98% chance of winning the seat by folding. Let us now, to simplify the argument, that he runs into a man with a 2000 chipstack. BigD raises w AA, and is reraised allin by this guy. Should he call? Let us say he has an 80% of winning the hand, and that if he wins, he has a 99% chance of winning the seat, and if he loses, he has a 95% chance of winning. So, we average over all events, and his average chance of winning is 0.8(.99) + 0.2(0.95) = 0.982. So, he has increased his chances by 0.2%. I told you he should play AA, you ignorant fool! Also, let's ignore the fact that I made up very many figures to support my claim. I win.Sincerely,Flintsword

snipe

[kennyg1966 0]

http://www.philhellmuth.com/articles.html?id=50At the end of this article, Phil talks about how it can be correct to fold aces pre-flop, in a situation similar to this. I don't understand your argument at all. You grant him that he has a lock on the seat, implying that he has a 100% chance to win something, and it is impossible to gain anything besides this. He has maxed out his EV, just by folding, and you admit this. The only thing that deviating from this strategy of folding can accomplish is to lower his EV, or to keep it constant. Is it not clear that if he loses an allin with his AA, to say a guy with 4000, then his odds of winning the seat decrease? And if wins the allin, his chances stay the same, ie. 100%?The only way your argument could make sense is of course to argue that he does not "have a lock" on the seat.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Edit: I've taken the time to write for you a possible defence.Dear RodReynoldsMy statement "Sure you have a lock on the seat" was not meant to imply a 100% success rate of winning said seat. This of course is impossible. Strange things can happen. I suggest that he only had a 98% chance of winning the seat by folding. Let us now, to simplify the argument, that he runs into a man with a 2000 chipstack. BigD raises w AA, and is reraised allin by this guy. Should he call? Let us say he has an 80% of winning the hand, and that if he wins, he has a 99% chance of winning the seat, and if he loses, he has a 95% chance of winning. So, we average over all events, and his average chance of winning is 0.8(.99) + 0.2(0.95) = 0.982. So, he has increased his chances by 0.2%. I told you he should play AA, you ignorant fool! Also, let's ignore the fact that I made up very many figures to support my claim. I win.Sincerely,Flintsword

wtf does Hellmuth know he only has 10 wsop bracelets

[Dogpatch 2]

wtf does Hellmuth know he only has 10 wsop bracelets

...and he cries like a *****, doesn't that make him a donk automatically?(and if I need to post a "sw" puh-lease.)

[flintsword 4]

http://www.philhellmuth.com/articles.html?id=50At the end of this article, Phil talks about how it can be correct to fold aces pre-flop, in a situation similar to this. I don't understand your argument at all. You grant him that he has a lock on the seat, implying that he has a 100% chance to win something, and it is impossible to gain anything besides this. He has maxed out his EV, just by folding, and you admit this. The only thing that deviating from this strategy of folding can accomplish is to lower his EV, or to keep it constant. Is it not clear that if he loses an allin with his AA, to say a guy with 4000, then his odds of winning the seat decrease? And if wins the allin, his chances stay the same, ie. 100%?The only way your argument could make sense is of course to argue that he does not "have a lock" on the seat.

Ok, granted I was foaming at the mouth for my post.Your reply was funny because yes, I am a bit of a poker math geek at heart and read Paul Simon's column way too much.There was a kernel of truth in your post and instead of considering it objectively, I reacted quickly and incorrectly. Sound like an apology? Read on.Folding AA because you have a lock on the seat? Sure, why not? They are your cards to decide on.A top player recommending it is a good play? Phil justifying an AA laydown by a movie star in a column counts as that. Why not?If raising with AA with a dominating chip advantage is a bad play, well, I didn't buy it. That said, your post has gotten me to thinking on this situation a lot.Even after I posted it was bugging me, probably because you were right and I was too wrapped up in my opinion to actually think about it before posting.Well, it's a forum, so if you can't post, what is the point. I should have thought about it more.I will admit that you have reasons to lay down any hand (including AA) and cruise to the seat qualification by vitue of your chip lead. It is a passive winning strategy but the key word there is 'winning'.Even after posting my reply, I considered that perhaps my uncharacteristicly vitriolic reply to your post may be signs that I have a problem laying down big pairs. Well, I had to lay down a big pair recently, did not, managed to luckbox my way to a win, but after looking at the hand, realizing that I should have folded it, it looked likely that I have to get a better grip on not marrying myself to big pairs or big hands.I decided that I was going to enter the MONSTER event at party, so entered a cheapo qualifier ($6 NL 10 player, winner gets a seat in the freeroll), built up a very big chip lead (sound familiar) and when four-handed, my KK was raised and then reraised all-in. One of the players was uber-tight, so it was not too much of a stretch to figure one of them for AA. Turns out that one was AA and the other 98. I luckboxed myself into winning with a King high str8, but the fact remains that: (1) I was a 16% dog to win with my KK, and (2) I should have folded. I won the tournament but when I researched the hand I lucked out on, I remembered your post.A few days later I got tossed to the rail (191 out of 193) in the Protege 2 Charter Member tournament recently, when my AK connected with a T K x flop, I got reraised, and I decided to just ignore my opponent basically telling me he either had KT or a set. He had a set of tens.Sorry for the long post, but the ghist of it is that I find myself facing the fact that I tend to wed myself to big hands and nothing was budging me from this opinion.The good thing about a forum is that it gives players a chance to really improve. You were right and sometimes - to improve - it helps to get off the high horse and look at reality a bit.Thanks for posting an interesting situation which has probably impoved my game. As for any vitriolic shots I took responding to your post: my apologies. Best of luck in your games.

[RodReynolds 87]

Ok, granted I was foaming at the mouth for my post.Your reply was funny because yes, I am a bit of a poker math geek at heart and read Paul Simon's column way too much.There was a kernel of truth in your post and instead of considering it objectively, I reacted quickly and incorrectly. Sound like an apology? Read on.A top player recommending it is a good play? Phil justifying an AA laydown by a movie star in a column counts as that. Why not?+other stuff

You were supposed to get much angrier. You don't belong here.Nice post though, I'm glad you thought about it some more, and it makes a little more sense at least.Also, I think you may have got me confused with the OP, and so, since you did not jab me with any vitriol, I can not accept your apology. In addition, I think that vitiol sustains the OP, so I'm not sure he'll know what to do with your apology.Finally, the article I gave you, I'm not sure you read the whole thing. At the end of the article he really does advocate a fold. I wasn't talking about his movie star story.The End.