How much of the value in Axs comes from hitting the 'x'?

[Glurfle]

Okay, so my usual game these days an extremely loose and usually quite passive game, such that I'm willing to limp Axs from pretty much any position. When I enter the pot with it, it's because I expect at least 5 and more likely 6 or 7 others to come in, and I usually fold postflop without a flush draw or two pair. This is a game where essentially every Ace will get played, so I can fold a mere pair of Aces pretty easily. With all those conditions in mind, a situation came up today that I wasn't quite sure about. I had A6s in EP, 1 limper ahead of me, and the dealer accidentally exposed a 6. Does this change your decision to play? I thought about it for a moment and folded. I'm not entirely convinced that it's hugely +EV for me to be playing these in EP anyways, and I figured the lower chance for two pair or trips made it questionable enough that I could fold. Thoughts?

[huzitup2]

I have the same affection for AXs as do alot of players; in loose games - especially passive ones - it's nice to start with a hand that, if it comes in, is likely to be the nuts.

That said, it is a marginal hand, and if I had seen one of the "X's" exposed - as you did - I would probably muck it.

Think about it this way.

How much better is A-5s than A-6s ?

Answer: Alot !

You'll seldom make the straight but when you do you SHOULD get an incredible amount of action.

How does this apply to seeing one "X's" exposed ?

*

You are a longshot to flop 2 pair or trip "X's", but without this longshot your hand becomes much less valuable - and remember it was a speculative hand to begin with.

I think you did the right thing.

*

Question . . .

If instead of "AXs" you had picked up "JTs", and the dealer had exposed the 9 of your suit - would you want to play ?

*

From early position, I wouldn't.

From the button I probably would play it - although I'm not sure that I'd be correct in doing so.

I hope that helped.

-H

[SoBeDude]

If instead of "AXs" you had picked up "JTs", and the dealer had exposed the 9 of your suit - would you want to play ?

Actually losing a card that pairs one of your hole cards is much worse than losing one of your suit.

there are 6 cards in the deck that pair one of your hole cards, there are 9 cards that match your suit.

-Scott

[huzitup2]

The 9 of spades is a KEY card; I would far rather see a J or a T exposed - especially against a huge field.

When I play JTs I don't do so hoping to flop a pair.

Occasionally a pair will win here, and yes, seeing a J or a T drastically reduces my chances for a [miracle flop] of trips (or even two pair), nonetheless - - -

I'd MUCH rather play on knowing that one of my "pair" cards is missing than I would knowing that my chances of achieving my primary goal - a straight or a flush - have been significantly reduced.

I will run a "sim" for JTs to determine just how much my straight/flush chances are reduced by having the 9 of my suit unavailable . . .

Off the top of my head I'd guess the answer to be ALOT.

Best wishes,

- H

[L0QTiS]

Just choose a few hands and ran them through the twodimes simulator

pokenum -h as 6s - jh 9d - ah 8c - th 2d - 8s 5c
Holdem Hi: 850668 enumerated boards
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
As 6s 146851 17.26 657574 77.30 46243 5.44 0.199
9d Jh 274841 32.31 574111 67.49 1716 0.20 0.323
8c Ah 117958 13.87 670622 78.83 62088 7.30 0.175
2d Th 154218 18.13 694734 81.67 1716 0.20 0.182
8s 5c 94712 11.13 738395 86.80 17561 2.06 0.121

vs (with the exposed 6)

pokenum -h as 6s - jh 9d - ah 8c - th 2d - 8s 5c / 6h
Holdem Hi: 749398 enumerated boards
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
As 6s 110006 14.68 594208 79.29 45184 6.03 0.176
9d Jh 251751 33.59 496080 66.20 1567 0.21 0.336
8c Ah 109379 14.60 582450 77.72 57569 7.68 0.184
2d Th 140680 18.77 607151 81.02 1567 0.21 0.188
8s 5c 80013 10.68 655433 87.46 13952 1.86 0.115

EV 0.199 vs 0.176