AQs vs. AKo

[Reef]

Which is better, and why?

[GuyOnTilt]

It depends.

Edit: In general, AQs is a better hand in full ring limit games and limit tourneys. There are situations where AKo would be better though obviously. Others would be better qualified than I to answer the other questions with absolute certainty.

GoT

[Reef]

sweet! Not only did the GoT answer and reply first, but I fricken voted the same as the GoT! I rock!

[DBowling]

The only time AK is better than AQ (preflop) is when your opponent is holding AK, AQ, KK, or QQ.
I only play NL and i think the answer is too complicated to be given in vote form. It has a lot to do with position and number of players in the pot. Also, if the pot is raised or not, and by much, and how deep the stacks are. As for tournaments, i think its important to know what stage of the tournament you are in.
In general, if i were in a blind stealing position, id prefer to have AKo. Its not likely that i am going to be playing a big pot in this instance, but if my opponent has one of the above mentioned hands, i will be playing a pot for sure. I think high card strength is more important here.
This is opposed to AQs, which doesnt offer me any advantages over AKo, unless i flop a flush draw. The problem is, if this is all i flop, vs my opponent with a decent hand, he will not give me proper odds to draw to a flush.

Now if I were in the SB, BB, or LP after a lot of limpers/small raise and lots of callers, i would probably prefer AQs. Whether i had AKo or AQs, it isnt likely i have the best hand, and as i mentioned before, there isnt much difference between the two. However the potential amount of money i can win if i can flop a flush draw is much larger, and ill likely have better odds to draw to it.

Pretty much comes down to suited connectors playing well in multiway pots. Im too tired to elaborate. And if anything i typed doesnt make sense, its also because im too tired.

[Djogolf]

**EDIT** ignore my post...ran it again on pokerstove and AQ has slightly higher equity against 9 randoms...guess my feeble brain just couldn't grasp that concept...

GoT,

Please explain where/how you come up w/ this thinking? No matter how I try and figure this (full limit ring/Limit Tourney) I cannot get how AQs has higher EV than AKo. I've tried against randoms, against big hands, little hands, ect., ect...

Wondering if you have seen this written, or are figuring it differently than I would? Thnx

--Golf

[Michael Davis]

In a big multiway pot AQs is better than AKo.

-Michael

[Djogolf]

yes, i edited my above post...ran it again and against 9 randoms AQs was slightly higher equity...

guess my brain doesn't work properly against 9 random hands

--golf

**Edit** I must have butchered pokerstove my first time through earlier (i think i must have ran AQo instead of AQs), ran it again against just 3 players holding (p1)any broadway, (p2)any suited, and (p3)any pair JJ or lower (i figured these were the most likely hands to see in a medim limit game), and AQs was still about 1% better...wish I was at home to check this against my own personal PokerTracker numbers /images/graemlins/frown.gif

Anyways all in all, what I really mean is GOD I HATE BEING WRONG /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[fnord_too]

Personally the only one I found close was NL full ring, where I picked AQs since you typically have rich post flop play there and TPTK is not nearly as good as it sounds.

In shorthanded, the flush value is greatly diminished.

In NL tournies, except in the early rounds, I am probably only getting involved with these hands for a goodly amount pre-flop, and AKo is a much better hand to get all in with pre flop. (There are a few reasons for this. One is that there are only 6 hands you are in really bad shape with AKo, but 24 you are in really bad shape with with AQs (3 AA, 6KK, 12 AK, 3QQ). Along these same lines, if you get all in with someone pre flop, there is a good chance they have a big ace or good size PP; against this range of hands you are dominated far less often with AKo.)

In limit ring games I just like TPTK, which I am twice as likely to get with AKo. The flush value of AQs may make it better in full ring games that see a lot of people going to the flop and sticking around to long, but I don't typically play in that sort of game.

[fnord_too]

[ QUOTE ]
It depends.

Edit: In general, AQs is a better hand in full ring limit games and limit tourneys. There are situations where AKo would be better though obviously. Others would be better qualified than I to answer the other questions with absolute certainty.

GoT

[/ QUOTE ]

In limit tournies, I think AKo is better since you will typically have few people going to the flop (at least in my experience). Of course, it's kind of moot since you are going to play AQs the same way you would play AKo pre flop in all of the scenarios most of the time (and post flop play will depend on many many things).

[balkii]

Which is better

AKo

why?

Uh...cause it wins more money.

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
The only time AK is better than AQ (preflop) is when your opponent is holding AK, AQ, KK, or QQ.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or KJ, or KT, or KQ, or Kxs.

AQs can be better in limit ring games in situations where you have a multiway pot. I'm not sure about tournaments.

Justin A

[DBowling]

edit: im an idiot, told you i was up too late

edit2: youre right, but i think the rest of what my post said stands. in a small shorthanded pot youre better off with AKo. in a large multiway pot, youre better off with AQs.

and AK vs KQ and AQ vs KQ is the same +ev. If you make AQ suited, it has a slight advantage(1.5%), if that redeems anything i said at all (btw, this is the only hand i ran at twodimes, hence my incorrect assumption)

[Reef]

[ QUOTE ]
**EDIT** ignore my post...ran it again on pokerstove and AQ has slightly higher equity against 9 randoms...guess my feeble brain just couldn't grasp that concept...

GoT,

Please explain where/how you come up w/ this thinking? No matter how I try and figure this (full limit ring/Limit Tourney) I cannot get how AQs has higher EV than AKo. I've tried against randoms, against big hands, little hands, ect., ect...

Wondering if you have seen this written, or are figuring it differently than I would? Thnx

--Golf

[/ QUOTE ]

This is from Ed Miller's article:

[ QUOTE ]
The overwhelming majority of the time, you won't make a flush, and the suited aspect of your hand will be worthless. But on those hands that you do make a flush, the reward is huge. You will win a pot, often a large one of ten or fifteen bets or more, that you would have otherwise lost. Winning an extra ten bet pot once every twenty hands averages to an extra half bet for every hand you play. That's a huge difference.

[/ QUOTE ]

hope that helps

[BusterStacks]

Doesn't winning an extra huge pot one every 20 times assume optimal payout of suitedness? I don't think this considers times when you are beaten by a boat, or the times you will have to call one bet (or two) on the turn, only to have your flush draw not pay out. Furthermore, your implied odds are cut down in better games, due to better players who will pick up on your draw and charge you more. I'm not sure but I think I'd rather have AKo

[Reef]

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't winning an extra huge pot one every 20 times assume optimal payout of suitedness? I don't think this considers times when you are beaten by a boat, or the times you will have to call one bet (or two) on the turn, only to have your flush draw not pay out. Furthermore, your implied odds are cut down in better games, due to better players who will pick up on your draw and charge you more. I'm not sure but I think I'd rather have AKo

[/ QUOTE ]

I respect your opinion, however I'm going to go with Ed Miller and GoT on this. In limit full (and whenever there is a multiway pot), AQs is better specifically b/c of this suitedness.

[Reef]

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't winning an extra huge pot one every 20 times assume optimal payout of suitedness? I don't think this considers times when you are beaten by a boat, or the times you will have to call one bet (or two) on the turn, only to have your flush draw not pay out. Furthermore, your implied odds are cut down in better games, due to better players who will pick up on your draw and charge you more. I'm not sure but I think I'd rather have AKo

[/ QUOTE ]

I respect your opinion, however I'm going to go with Ed Miller and GoT on this. In limit full (and whenever there is a multiway pot), AQs is better specifically b/c of this suitedness. We also asssume that we're smart players who are not going to be capping a made flush on a paired board, etc. In some other aspects, I think people get too psychologically attached to AK a lot more than AQ when they hit top pair- making any hope of good laydowns that much tougher.

[BusterStacks]

When you get opinion of your own, I'll respect it as well. I'd like to know who is showing a higher profit with AQs than AKo in their poker tracker after over 75k hands or so. This seems odd.

[Reef]

[ QUOTE ]
When you get opinion of your own, I'll respect it as well. I'd like to know who is showing a higher profit with AQs than AKo in their poker tracker after over 75k hands or so. This seems odd.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was my opinion for months before this post, after a discussion with my friend (whose pro) about this exact topic

[DBowling]

Party poker 50nl and 100nl
98,947 hands
AKs dealt 268 times 2.03 bb/hand
AKo dealt 880 times 1.12 bb/hand
AQs dealt 297 times .51 bb/hand
AQo dealt 875 times .57 bb/hand

So i think my sample size is still too small, as my AQo is more profitable than AQs. But AKs is quite a bit more profitable than AKo. Use these numbers to prove/disprove whatever you want.

[cnfuzzd]

which is better? Having sex on monday, or having sex on tuesday. You need more context.

peace

john nickle

[balkii]

I'd like to know who is showing a higher profit with AQs than AKo in their poker tracker after over 75k hands or so.

i'd also like to know.

[balkii]

The easiest way to answer this question is to ask yourself if you would trade all your AKoffsuits for AQsuiteds.

I wouldn't. Ed Miller wouldn't. And anyone who would doesnt like money.

[Brian]

I'm surprised this thread has generated so much debate. Straight from HPFAP:

"Hand Groupings:

Group 1: AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AKS

Group 2: TT, AQs, AJs, KQs, AKo

These rankings reflect not only which group each starting hand belongs to, but also its approximate order in that group as well."

Yeah, it's an approximate order, but theres a reason that AQs is ahead of AKo.

There are of course times when I'd rather have AKo than AQs. These mostly involve heads-up situations when I believe my opponent to be holding a big pair or a big Ace. But, in most limit ring game situations, AQs has a higher EV than AKo.

I have 4 Poker Tracker databases, 3 of which have close to 100k hands, the other 60k. In every one of them, AQs is showing a higher profit per hand than AKo by about a .1bb/hand.

-Brian

[Brian]

Where does Ed Miller say that he wouldn't?

-Brian

[balkii]

Hi Brian,

My 100K hand 3/6 database has AQs at 1.01 BB/hand, and AKs at .9 bb/hand. is AQs better than AKs too?

[Brian]

I never claimed that Poker Tracker statistics were definitive. You are the one who said you'd like to know who is showing more profit with AQs than AKo over a significant amount of hands. Well, I am.

Have you anything to say about HPFAP's hand ranking order or anything to add to your arguments of "cause it wins more money"? And did Ed Miller ever say AKo is better than AQs?

-Brian

[Reef]

[ QUOTE ]
Party poker 50nl and 100nl
98,947 hands
AKs dealt 268 times 2.03 bb/hand
AKo dealt 880 times 1.12 bb/hand
AQs dealt 297 times .51 bb/hand
AQo dealt 875 times .57 bb/hand

So i think my sample size is still too small, as my AQo is more profitable than AQs.

[/ QUOTE ]

exactly

[balkii]

I never claimed that Poker Tracker statistics were definitive. You are the one who said you'd like to know who is showing more profit with AQs than AKo over a significant amount of hands. Well, I am.

touche.

Have you anything to say about HPFAP's hand ranking order

not really, other than it was written years ago about a nearly completely different game.

And did Ed Miller ever say AKo is better than AQs

call it an educated guess.

[cnfuzzd]

This entire discussion is out of control. AKo and AQs work so well in so many different places that to ask which one if preferable without context is non-sensical. Seriously. This is out of control.

peace

john nickle

[DBowling]

i agree

[GuyOnTilt]

Hey Balkii,

In the vast majority of full handed limit games being played today, AQs is a better hand than AKo in general. Like Brian said, there are situations where I'd rather have AKo, but AQs is going to turn a bigger profit per hand than AKo. AKo is going to win you a lot more money overall because it's dealt four times as often obviously, but when you asked if you'd exchange every AKo with an AQs, my answer would be a definite yes. And given the texture of limit tourneys I would rather have it there too. I'm really surprised such an overwhelming majority think AKo is a better hand in those two games.

GoT