Pocket Aces: Dump that Trash

Why is this true?: When you hold pocket aces against three or more opponents who hold drawing hands, you will lose virtually every time.


A pair of Aces is the hardest hand to play in any form of poker. It requires you to maniputlate most of your opponents into folding. It must be played agressively or folded quickly.

I have read that pocket aces unhelped wins only 33% of the time....cant remember where...think it was TOP. However hands like that you want to play against as few players as possible. 1 or 2 3 max. the more people in the more likely that someone will flop a set, 2 pair or a str8/flush draw and draw out on you.

And with two opponents, you lose more than 2/3 of the time.

No, you don't actually.

You have AA.

Show me the two other hands your opponents have where you'll lose more than 2/3 of the time? Show me two hands where you'll lose even HALF the time against them.

I have read that pocket aces unhelped wins only 33% of the time


Isn't that figure for AA against 8 or 9 random opponents?

With 2 opponents you lose more than 2/3rd of the hands you play???? No Way! That would require one of every 2 players to have 2 pair or better on a typical hand. Not the hands that I play.


Also, If you raise the aces from early position, the callers will typically have an ace in their hands or a smaller pocket pair, both of which you have crushed.

A drawing hand has typically 8 to 9 outs plus the outs giving your opponents two pair or three of a kind. This is 9 + 6 = 15. 15 X 2 = 30. This leaves you with 16 outs, one card better than 1 in 3. If you opponents also have an inside straight draw, as often happens, that's an extra four outs each. Translates into 38 cards making your two opponents hands compaired to 11 outs for you. 11/49 = 22%. You're a big dog to two opponents with good draws. The only thing justifying the call are the blinds, which will not make up for the money you lose rasing and raising just to get yourself heads up against two players post flop.

I forgot to add the most simply answer to your question. Your opponent floped a set, flush, straight, or full house. You are virtually drawing dead.

I see we're going to be re-hashing THIS debate again... OK. Here we go!


"When you hold pocket aces against three or more opponents who hold drawing hands, you will lose virtually every time. "


"virtually every time" is NOT an accurate description of how aces will fare in this situation. True, they will not win a MAJORITY OF POTS in this situation, but they will still be a MONEY FAVORITE EVERY SINGLE TIME, which is FAR more important than the percentage of pots won. NO hand will EVER win a MAJORITY of pots in this situation. Which would you rather have in a five way pot, AKs or AA? I'd rather have the AA. AKs will still likely be a significant money favorite over three loose limpers, but AA will be a BIGGER money favorite against the same three limpers. The same will apply if there are more or less.


"A pair of Aces is the hardest hand to play in any form of poker. "


I find this one very hard to swallow. Perhaps playing pocket nines in a typical 15-30 game at the mirage would have been a better guess. Aces are pretty EASY to play pre-flop IMO, you simply RAISE, RERAISE, OR CAP IT in almost every time. IN VIRTUALLY EVERY CONCEIVABLE SITUATION, YOU WANT TO DO WHAT YOU CAN TO MAKE YOUR OPPONENTS PAY THE MAX TO DRAW AGAINST YOUR HAND, WHICH IS ALWAYS THE NUTS PRE-FLOP. Post-flop, Big pairs CAN be tricky SOME OF THE TIME, but when you get a nice flop like Q 8 3 rainbow, there isn't much about the play of aces here that can be considered "the hardest hand to play in any form of poker."


"It requires you to maniputlate most of your opponents into folding. "


This statement doesn't cover the play of aces adequately. It only confers what you might do in certain situations, but the situations are not specified. Getting people to fold WILL increase your chances of winning the pot, this is true. However, if I had the choice of raising pre-flop with aces and getting 1) no callers and stealing the blinds), or 2) three cold-callers, I would much rather have choice #2, as I would like some action on my hand, even if I will sometimes lose the pot because I got action.


"It must be played agressively or folded quickly. "


Played aggressively, yes. This is not in doubt. Folded quicky, perhaps, but perhaps not. It's a classic case of "it depends." Against some opponents, I would call them down to the river, and against others, I would fold it early. It depends on the board and the action, plus my assessment of the players in the hand and my read on them.


Dave in Cali

You are assuming your opponents are drawing at two mutually exclusive cards each and do not have an ace. ALso you are assuming that your opponents have a pair too. Last, your hand can still improve (say a pair of twos hit the board, killing 6 of their outs)


I would agree that if:


1. Your opponents are holding two exclusive cards

2. They both have paired the board

3. Neither hold an ace

4. The board has not paired a card that neither of them hold.


If the conditions above exist, your assessment is beginning to approach accuracy. However, I believe those conditions to be rare, especially when a raise is made from early position.


Typically, I would expect that when you have two callers to the river, they both are probably holding top pair, one is holding top pair and another is on a draw, or one is holding top pair and another is shooting at his overcards. Also, a pocket pair is always a possibility.

You're right, Dave in Cali; here we go again.


Playing in a small HE tournament in ABQ this weekend, this topic came up (again!), with the accompanying story. John, a local who's better at whining about his bad beats than he is at playing, was griping about AA. He told the player next to him that the next time he got AA, he was folding them preflop. A couple of hands later, he got AA, showed them to said player and, to show how macho he was, he folded them.


Flop came A-A-x !!! Table was told about John's hand and gave him grief the rest of the night.


Give 'em to me every hand; I'd give my left personal jewel to win one hand in three !!

That didn't answer my question. Assume you have AA. Now give two of your opponents any two cards you wish. Any two.

Now, what four cards are you choosing that will be better than AA over any given flop? Not just the hands where you flop a set. Not just the hands were you flop a draw to a straight flush. Any flop.


Overall, AA will do better than any given hand. Overall, AA will do better than any group of hands AS COMPARED TO HOW THOSE HANDS WOULD DO AGAINST THE GROUP.


Of course AA will not win against JJ when the Jacks have floped a set. I mean...duh. But that wasn't your original problem. Your problem was how AA will do overall. Overall, they will win. Raise.

What a bunch of crap. Even against 9 random hands aces still win 30% of the time. That's a MASSIVE percentage.


You're the same guy who posted the other day that you shouldn't raise with aces preflop because it gives drawing hands odds to call postflop. That might well be true but it doesn't mean you shouldn't raise preflop. That's THEIR MONEY that gives them odds to draw on the flop. In other words, they pile all their money in preflop when you are 80% to win vs each of them, and then spend the rest of the hand desperately trying to get it back.


Chris

My question is this:


How often, when you're against two draws, are you really against two separate draws or two variants of the same draw? You're never going to be up against two separate flush draws, and almost always when you're up against two straight draws your opponents are either holding some of each other's cards or hoping for some of the same cards. In other words, just because each of your opponents has 15 outs does not mean that there are 30 cards that will beat you. Chances are there are a lot of cards that will make both hands, and the guy who makes the lower hand is going to loose a lot of money.

With all due respect, you keep feeding us this trash. Whenever you have Aces, you most often must win with that single stupid pair. You might flop a set or you might flop a full house, but those are unlikely and you will need those to win. One problem with Aces is that it's difficult to improve them. You either have to pair the board, which will often give someone else trips, hit a set, or full up. You just can't "raise, reraise, and cap" every hand hopeing for a set or full house.


I'll rather have AKs. This has better drawing potential, and if you don't hit, you can easily dump.

I'm not talking about tournament play here.

Wow!


A more absurd analysis would be hard to find. I am sorry dude but you need to understand one thing: Aces are the best hand in hold 'em by a long country mile. And no...you don't raise to limit the field...you raise to build the pot. If 7 guys call the raise, you ought to be happier than if only 2 guys call.


How you can like AKs better than AA is beyond comprehension.

not to mention, how many times you get almost dead$$ in the pot from loose players who call your raises with AA when they are badly dominated, and the times when YOU flop a monster, or at least a strong hand. having a hand like TT call a raise along with JJ and KJ and KQ and the flop coming ATx rainbow. you're gonna get a lot of action, especially if the straight draws are loose. you could get squeaked out on, but their draws and hole cards all overlap each other. JJ is virtually dead, TT is dead to 1 card, KJ has the best draw here, next to your aces... but thats not saying much because he has only 4 Q's to hit his straight (more outs than anybody but you...) its even money between a J,T, or A falling, and you are leading until then. (J, and T are really the only cards that can hurt you here.) not to mention that you have outs to a boat... this is all hypothetical, of course, but these are the hands bad players are calling you with (or worse, like A6o and 44), and you stand to beat them a whole lot... if the better players play their straight and flush draws against you here, they most likely won't have pairs, but if they do, you have a better one, and have the same amount of outs of getting the 3rd that they do. plus, your 2 aces could find themselves at the top of a 4-flush board in their suit, and that's another way to win. (plus they make 2 straights, if that helps. )

I thought I was going to have to come up with a reply, but you have said it so eloquently that it's no longer necessary.


Rich: I'll tell you what. You can have the AKs and I'll take the AA. Whatever floats your boat. This debate is really getting old though, I gotta tell you. Aces are clearly the best and most profitable hand in hold'em, despite your somewhat sketchy reasons for hating them so much. I'll take them every time. It's a mathematical certainty that simply cannot be denied. The only thing I play for in this game is a mathematical edge over my opponents. The very first place this edge comes from is my playing hands that are mathematical favorites over those played by my opponents. This is the most important place you can gain an edge. And when I have such an edge, I like to get more money into the pot. Therefore I raise, reraise, or cap the pot, whatever I can do to get more money into the pot while I have the nuts and they are drawing to beat me. It's the only way to play them. Other edges can be gained in other ways, but the pure undeniable mathematical certainty of AA being a money favorite over any other hand is a great way to start things off.


Despite the sometimes interesting posts this subject has generated from time to time, it's gone far beyond the AQo debate in how much it's been re-hashed to death. The difference is that the AQo debate is actually DEBATABLE, it's actually a close call, while the "Raise with aces?" debate is a closed case from moment one. Sometimes there is one move which is clearly superior to all others, and getting more money into the pot when you have AA BTF is one of these cases.


Dave in Cali

Keep dreaming.

Finally, an admission!

I only hate them because they lose too often, and when the lose, they cost a lot.


By the way, I'm on a campaign to challenge you ninnies who insist that one hand is always better than another regardless of the situation, i.e., a lose game with multiple opponents verses a tight game with one or two opponents. To say that aces is always the best had regardless of how many opponents are in the pot is just absurd misinformation, incrediably harmful to a player's bankroll. I bet all of you are those players who once a big pair raises can't wait to get in a reraise with your drawing hand so that you can suck out the most money possible when that draw hits knowing that one of your draws will hit and that lonely pair of Aces is going to be cast into the muck in disgust.


It's the misinformation I oppose.

"I only hate them because they lose too often, and when the lose, they cost a lot. "


but when they win they win more than they lost all those times they lost and cost you a lot.


"By the way, I'm on a campaign to challenge you ninnies who insist that one hand is always better than another regardless of the situation, i.e., a lose game with multiple opponents verses a tight game with one or two opponents. "


The value of a hand is measured several ways, two in particular. The most important way, and the way I am most interested in, is the equity a hand has at the time you must make a decision regarding it, and which action will maximize the equity of said hand. Aces simply have more equity pre-flop than any other hand, an undeniable fact. They have even MORE equity when more money goes into the pot. Another way of measuring the value of a hand is the % of times a hand will win the pot. Aces dominate this category also. This percentage will rarely be anything close to 50%, let alone more, yet in any given situation, the percentage wins category will always find aces sporting the highest numbers.


If the game is loose, aces have the best numbers in both of these categories. If the game is tight, aces have the best numbers in both of these categories. This takes into account the times you play them and lose. While it is true that AKs might be somewhat easier to play, especially in a loose game, this is not what tops my list of concerns. AK will flop top pair, top kicker as its primary money winning hand, straights and flushes are only a small % of the total number of boards that make this hand a winner. Most of the time, if you win with AK, it's with top pair. When this happens, it's really no easier to play than aces would be. Aces always flop at least top pair. While aces might be more difficult to play in a loose game, I'm only concerned with the bottom line. I'd rather have to think harder about playing aces, because they win the most money.


"To say that aces is always the best had regardless of how many opponents are in the pot is just absurd misinformation, incrediably harmful to a player's bankroll. "


Rich, can you really be serious about this statement? Are you just playing devil's advocate to no end? I mean you're not an idiot, you obviously think about this game, but where your thinking comes from on this subject escapes me. Please DO point out a situation where aces are NOT the best hand pre-flop. I'm waiting. I don't think I'll hold my breath though.


"I bet all of you are those players who once a big pair raises can't wait to get in a reraise with your drawing hand so that you can suck out the most money possible when that draw hits knowing that one of your draws will hit and that lonely pair of Aces is going to be cast into the muck in disgust. "


This is for the loose aggressive players who like to make pointless pot building raises six times per orbit, but it's not for me. Why anyone would RERAISE aces with ANY hand is beyond me. If I could always know when another player had AA, I would fold almost every time. On occasion, it might be profitable to enter a multi-way pot with a drawing hand even if you knew someone had AA, but you would still be a money DOG to the aces, and would still win the pot FEWER times than the aces would. The thing that your statement does not take into account is that PAIRS ARE DRAWING HANDS. PAIRS ARE GETTING IMPLIED ODDS FROM A BIG FIELD. Add to this the fact that aces will sometimes win unimproved, and their value is irrefutable.


"It's the misinformation I oppose. "


Please make sure to be specific about who is misinforming who, and exactly what that information happens to be, and why.


Dave in Cali