Interesting AQ hand

[rkiray]

Paradise 5/10. A bit looser and more passive than normal, but fairly typical. 38% seeing the flop. Most of these players are not in my database. None of the people who see the flop are known to me.

I have the button with A /images/graemlins/club.gif Q /images/graemlins/spade.gif

Folded to MP1 who limps, MP2 limps, folded to me, I limp, sb completes, bb calls.

Flop : J /images/graemlins/heart.gif 5 /images/graemlins/club.gif 9 /images/graemlins/heart.gif

checked to me, I bet, sb folds, bb calls, MP1 calls, MP2 folds.

Turn : 5 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif [J /images/graemlins/heart.gif 5 /images/graemlins/club.gif 9 /images/graemlins/heart.gif]

checked through. I think I probably should have bet again.

River :A /images/graemlins/spade.gif [5 /images/graemlins/diamond.gifJ /images/graemlins/heart.gif 5 /images/graemlins/club.gif 9 /images/graemlins/heart.gif]

BB bets, MP1 folds, I raise, BB calls.

How did I do?

[lil']

If you're going to limp with A-Qo, could you at least post why you did it? Otherwise all you will get are 5000 "You should raise A-Q" posts.

[rkiray]

I thought preflop limp is what made this interesting. I would not have played it this way a couple of months ago, anyone have any guesses as to why I'd play it this way? Also any guesses on what the BB had?

[Mike]

I find this number players and type of hand the hardest to play. There is no huge loose game pot, little action, and little information.

Looking at the flop, I would think you are in the lead. Post flop, looks like an autobet by you, callers may have a dream, but they don't want to get serious. On the turn, no one is doing anything, are they watching tv? I like the raise on the river, the disinterest in the previous rounds makes your hand a front runner. Unless someone underplayed a set, nice pot.

[PokerNoob]

You were varying your game. I can't think of anything that beats you that he wouldn't have reraised. He had a pair of aces.

[chesspain]

[chesspain]

Ah...maybe because you had a brain cramp?...or you want to not make as much money as possible...am I getting warm?

[rkiray]

Not even close on why I limped. 1/2 correct on opponent's hand (he had A9o)

[Gar Pike]

I would think it was because you wanted to get more people to call PF and then call your bet on the flop. Isn't A Q one of those 'Plays well except with exactly 3 (or 4) players' type of hands?

[chesspain]

I'm sorry, I don't think your play was correct or all that interesting. When you have a hand like AQ to play after two limpers, you raise to: get more money into the pot, and knock out others who might out-flop you with garbage like low connectors or single jacks and kings. Clearing out more hands PF means you are more likely to win the pot immediately when rags hit on the flop and you come out betting.

[rkiray]

A couple of weeks ago I was in Las Vegas and I droped in on the Wednesday poker discussion group. I was very lucky, since this was the only time I've been there; Mason was the guest speaker. The format was Q&A. I thought the discussion of this play was the most interesting part of the meeting. Since someone asked him about this play, he has written about it somewhere, I just don't know where.

Mason recomends that when some people have limped in front of you, you should often just limp with AQ (and sometimes just limp with AK). He listed three reasons why this was a good play. Anyone care to guess them?

Mason admits this play is -EV preflop, but he believes you more than make it up postflop. I thought the most interesting question of the meeting came from Dynasty. He asked how good a postflop player you needed to be to make this play. Mason said you didn't need to be very good at all. He thought the hand generally played itself postflop. Dynasty followed up with something like there had to be some players that this would be a bad play for. And Mason replied that if you were so bad that you wouldn't raise a Q high flop when bet into, you shouldn't make this play, but he thought most players were good enough for this to be a good play.

I've been waiting for a good hand to discuss this with for two weeks. The other times I've done this on-line there was no showdown. The weird thing was in the day I had left in Vegas I got to make this play twice in 6.5 hours in the Mirage 6/12 game and once in 2 hours at The Bellagio 15/30 game. The Vegas games are definitely more loose passive than your typical Paradise game.

Still think it's not an interesting hand?

[Squirrel]

I personally think that there is a big difference between 2 limpers and "some".

I would have raised these 2 MP limpers before the flop.

[rkiray]

I admit I wasn't clear from his discussion how many limpers you need for this. I think 2 may not be enough. But I'm sure three would be enough since he mentioned doing this from both middle and late position. Anyone know where he has written about this play? He also didn't say anything about what type of table or opponents it works best against.

[GuyOnTilt]

I've heard Mason advocate this before. However, I don't think your hand is the type of situation that Mason is suggesting...

I think you should've raised Preflop. The two limpers in this case were from MP and open-limped after 3 or more folds. This indicates weakness, and you should punish them and extract bets from them now when they're willing to pay them with inferior hands.

Now, if I had held AQo in MP and there were 2 EP limpers or 1 EP and 1 MP limper, then I would limp in some of the time. I believe these are types of situations where Mason is advocating limping in with AQo. And I do agree that you can make up the EV you lose by limping postflop. I've only recently taken up limping in EP and MP after limpers with AQo sometimes and I like it.

[lil']

You say this is a looser and more passive game than you are used to, with almost 40% seeing each flop.

Just raise the two limpers and let the passive players call you with their junk. No need to make things more difficult than they need to be.

[chesspain]

S&M wrote about this in HEFAP in a brief chapter on playing AQ in loose games. They suggest that you sometimes might want to limp from EP when you are fairly certain a raise will not knock out anyone.

However, it is becoming increasing more rare to find true calling station games online, even at Party microlimits. I find that raising with AQ from EP tends to knock out at least half the field, which seems to give me +EV, since any flop that contains an A, Q or rags is often easy pickings after you have shown strength with a PF raise.

[Squirrel]

I don't think Mason elaborates in HEFAP, (my copy is loaned out so I can't check) however I am quite sure it is more than 2. I will sometimes limp with AQ in late position but 4 callers is usually my cutoff if I decide to limp. I almost never limp in late position with AK.

I am also more likely to limp after EP limpers than MP limpers.

[rkiray]

I'm not sure if this just applies to loose games. I'm sure it doesn't apply if there is only one limper before me, but I think two may be enough. The way the discussion went it sounded to me like this was a fairly standard play in most games. The three reasons MM mentioned for it being a good play sound fairly univerisal to me. The Pokerbabe gave me a ride back to The Mirage after the meeting. She was out of the room handling an adminstrative detail when this discusion started. We discussed this play on the ride and she named the exact three reasons MM gave in an nanosecond. She phrased them differently, but the ideas were the same. She really knows her poker. No one has guessed these reasons yet.

PS I thought the Pokerbabe discussions were better than the meeting. Only because it was 15-20 minutes of headsup discussion with a real expert.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought the most interesting question of the meeting came from Dynasty. He asked how good a postflop player you needed to be to make this play. Mason said you didn't need to be very good at all. He thought the hand generally played itself postflop. Dynasty followed up with something like there had to be some players that this would be a bad play for. And Mason replied that if you were so bad that you wouldn't raise a Q high flop when bet into, you shouldn't make this play, but he thought most players were good enough for this to be a good play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason's answer to my question was very, very wrong. I like Mason but in the two times both he and I have been at that group, he had a very bad habit of interrupting people and dominating the discussion. Since I'm not a regular there, I wasn't willing to make a big deal out of it since most people showed up to listen to Mason.

When you've got AQ and the flop comes either Ace-high or Queen-high, the hand is not easy and straight-foward to play. Just prior to the AQ discussion at the group, Mason had given an example of how he unconventionally played AA. He had slowplayed the flop in order to get two big bets in on the turn so that he could drive out 5-out hands. With AQ, those kinds of plays are going to necessary just as often. That's the crux of my arguement.

If you are going to give up that pre-flop equity by limping with AQo, then you need to be a very good post-flop player. You definitely need to be a winning player and probably need to be among the top 1/3 of winning players at that limit. If you can't recognize situations when you need to play the hand in a way other than bet and auto-raise, then you can't give up that pre-flop equity.

I think the discussion at the group started with raising AQo out of the blinds. Obviously, there are going to be many situations when checking the flop or turn with the intention of going for a field clearing check-raise is going to be appropriate.

Mason's dismissive "the hand is straight forward to play comment" was a disservice to that group.

[rkiray]

I must admit I didn't find the hand I posted easy to play. Especially the turn. Normally I would have fired one more bet there, but to give away a secret Mason's first reason this is a good play is that you save money if you don't hit the flop. If I would have bet the turn, I didn't see anyway this play was saving me money.

[GuyOnTilt]

I'm not familiar with Mason's 3 reasons, but I'll give it a wild guess:

In loose/passive games it's sometimes better to limp in with AQo because,

1) You save yourself money when the flop misses you.
2) You disguise your hand.
3) A raise will not likely limit the field.

Am I even close??

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
...to give away a secret Mason's first reason this is a good play is that you save money if you don't hit the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really detest this reason Mason gave. He also says something similar about not raising the flop with a set when there is a flush draw on the board and several players are in the pot. He says you'll be happy you didn't put extra money in the pot when the flush card comes on the turn.

[chesspain]

Anyone whose primary concern is losing too much money when playing good cards probably should not be playing for money /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi rikay:

With only two limpers you should raise. This way you get to play three handed and sometimes win with an unimproved hand.

Best wishes,
mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi rikay:

Your confusing this situation with one where many players have already limped in. Once many players are in, you must improve your hand to win. Against two people that's not the case. So if five people have limped in for instance, and you don't make anything, you can be happy you saved the bet. However against just two people it's a very different situation and the fact that you raised before the flop may help you win the pot. Do you see the difference?

Best wishes,
Mason

[chesspain]

So now we have it--the Poobah Poo-Poos the pabulum! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[rkiray]

Fairly close :

1) You save money if the flop misses you

2) You usually get more action if the flop hits you than you would have if you showed strength preflop

3) It's good to have the reputation of a slightly tricky player. This is a good play for that.

[rkiray]

Yes, thank you for the clarification. I admited in a previous post it wasn't clear to me in the discussion how many limpers you needed, so I made a bad assumption. Now I know.

[rkiray]

OK,

I missed this the first time. Are you suggesting you don't think Mason Should play for money? I'm willing to put up $5000 bucks to go 1/2 and 1/2 with Mason against you head's up. Mason puts up 5k, and we split the profits.