ciaffonne no limit question

[jomatty]

i was recently rereading ciaffonnes/reubans pot and no limit book(which i really like) and had some doubts about one of his quiz questions. in the hand he describes playing jay heimowitz in the WSOP. they were co chipleaders at the time and bob check calls AA all the way after a raggedy flop,turn and river. his reasoning was he didnt want to clash with another big stack and that if he got all in with jay he would be in bad shape. while i certainly understand that this seems like perhaps being a little too cautious. it seems like playing a little more aggressively and then getting away if jay moves in or wants to get heavily involved. jay had QQ and while ciaffonne won a nice pot from him i wonder if this is pot was played optimally.
anyways i like all of his books and have found his advice to be very dependable so while i understand his rational im wondering if this sort of play is something im not utilyzing enough as i would have played this pot much harder.
just interested in others thoughts,
matty

[1800GAMBLER]

Read David's tournment book the part about turning hands into 72o. If Ciaffone at anytime reopens the gates for jay and jay comes over the top it's an awful situation for Ciaffone because it's neither an easy call or an easy fold.

He maybe doing it with KK QQ or a set etc.

[AJo Go All In]

i think maybe you need to read it. the passage you refer to is not at all pertinent to the poster's question.

[josie_wales]

I agree with Jay!

My understanding of the "dont make a good hand 72o" statement can pertain to this situation.

I he puts is a sizeable raise with AA and, in turn, gets put all in by the enemy, will he want to put his whole stack on te line with an overpair?

The statement may not be *exact* for this situation, but I certainly feel that it applies well here.

JW

[CrisBrown]

Hi AJ,

[ QUOTE ]
i think maybe you need to read it. the passage you refer to is not at all pertinent to the poster's question.

[/ QUOTE ]

The parallel isn't obvious -- Sklansky is writing about pre-flop decisions, while Ciaffone presents a post-flop case -- I think the underlying NLH axiom is the same: don't bet in a situation where a raise will make you sick.

Ciaffone has an overpair -- the best possible overpair -- but it's only one pair. If he bets at this pot and his opponent comes back over the top, especially all-in, then Ciaffone faces a sickening decision: risk folding the best hand, or risk busting out of the WSOP a very good but only second-best hand.

Depending on the specific texture of the raggy flop, his opponent could be on a connector that's flopped two pair, or a flopped set, or even a straight. Or he could be on some lower overpair. This isn't a routine online tourney vs. some anonymous fish. It's the WSOP and he's facing a known, seasoned tournament professional. He can't count on his opponent making a stupid mistake.

So if he bets AA and he gets a monster raise, he may well turn his AA into 72o. Yuck.

Cris

[jomatty]

whaat everyone has said is basically what i was getting at but in this situation i still think its a close decision between playing the hand how he did and playing it considerably harder. i think the turning a good hand into 72 analogy, while not exactly whats adressed in TPFAP is applicable however i think, like ciaffonne states, that if JAy puts his stack in over the top he dosent have the best hand and he can safely fold. its not impossible but i have a hard time thinking Jay heimowitz is looking to play a big pot in this situation any more than Bob is so i think him putting a big move on him with less than one pair is unlikily. it sounds like everyone else agrees with the play so i guess i need to think more on it. one thing about the turning in to 72 analogy is it refers i believe to reopening the betting in position rather than leading out of position. ciaffonne would have been leading into him rather than reopening the betting which i think is an important distinction.
thank you for youre replies
matty

[1800GAMBLER]

What CrisBrown said.

[JamesPatrick]

I think Ciaffonne's post-flop advice for this situation is correct. My two most recent AA hands palyed just as you described. The first time I bet hard and was burned by two pair. The second time I also bet hard and my opponent came over the top with a set. Keep in mind that AA is a powerful hand, but a lot can go wrong with it. Knowing your opponent really helps in this situation.

[AJo Go All In]

i see the parallel obviously, but the reference to the sklansky passage is a big stretch. i don't think any player needs a book to tell them that you might not want to raise if you'll have to fold if you get reraised. the passage in question is talking about a very specific situation. it just has little bearing on how to play AA after the flop in my opinion. this is because there is a much higher tendency for your opponent to go all in preflop with a worse hand than post-flop. the sklansky passage doesn't apply to those times when are sure that we are drawing very slim.