Playing AA in big multi-player pots

[tvdad]

Fairly early in a $2 NL tourney at Planet, blinds are T15/30. I have A/images/graemlins/club.gifA/images/graemlins/spade.gif UTG. I open for the minimum raise to T60. Two MP limpers, then short stack in LP pushes his last T65 all-in. Cutoff calls. SB goes over the top all-in for T985. BB folds. I call. I meant to push it all-in, but I hit the wrong button, leaving me with T65. Both MPs fold. Cutoff calls (???) Flop comes Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif6/images/graemlins/club.gifQ/images/graemlins/club.gif. Oh crap. Well, I push in my last T65 and pray. Cutoff calls. Turn and river are 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif6/images/graemlins/spade.gif. Short stack flips over 9/images/graemlins/club.gifQ/images/graemlins/spade.gif to take the small main pot. Cutoff unbelievably turns over K/images/graemlins/diamond.gif6/images/graemlins/diamond.gif to take the huge side pot. BB showed 8/images/graemlins/spade.gif8/images/graemlins/diamond.gif to join me in the Loser's Lounge.

Nothing I could have done here. Oh was there? Maybe I'm just on a bad streak, but I have lost AA a lot over the past few years (close to 75%) on multi-player all-in situations like this. It's gotten so bad that I would now consider folding in this situation. With so many players in the hand, there are just too many things that can go wrong to bust me out. Am I just steaming from another bad beat, or can I really get away from AA in situations like this? I've folded it later in tourneys to preserve my stack when money is on the line, but I've always gone for it in the early rounds, figuring I've got the best of it with AA.

Obviously I'm talking about the preflop play, and the possibility of laying down AA preflop when faced with so many callers. If I still had a lot of chips after that flop and someone bet big into me, I'd probably fold.

[tvdad]

Followng up my own post...

According to a table in Ken Warren's "Winner's Guide to Texas Hold'em" for hands that are played all the way to the river, AA is an 88% favorite against one opponent, 76% against two, 68% against three, and only 44% against four. It looks to me like I should definitely fold AA preflop when I will be risking all my chips against four or more opponents. With three or more it's still a bit risky, but I would probably play it.

So my 25% win rate (I originally stated it as a 75% loss rate) is indeed indicative of a bad streak, but not as far out of whack as I thought. Playing against four or more opponents, I am actually expected to lose. I don't want to risk all my chips on less than a 50-50 proposition. Heck, even 68% (three opponents) early in a tournament isn't that great. Maybe I should fold AA preflop whenever I know I will have at least three callers to the river. This actually happens a lot in the cheaper tourneys and satellites.

T

[Smasharoo]

[ QUOTE ]

Maybe I should fold AA preflop whenever I know I will have at least three callers to the river. This actually happens a lot in the cheaper tourneys and satellites.


[/ QUOTE ]

Might as well sit out and go get dinner then, I guess. If you're not going to play AA what are you going to play? I think mainly you got unlucky. The odds of you getting 3 callers who cover your chips early in a tournament can't be very high even at the wildest of tables.

[Nemesis]

RAISE MORE then... what would you rather get your money in with? AA or or J10 suited... no matter how many opponents i have i'd rather have AA.

[Tosh]

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously I'm talking about the preflop play, and the possibility of laying down AA preflop when faced with so many callers. If I still had a lot of chips after that flop and someone bet big into me, I'd probably fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

My advice, and I am not being sarcastic or just trying to put you down, is to quit playing tournaments.

[fnurt]

Let me ask a dumb question of my own. If you want to limit the field with AA, why do you open with only a minimum raise?

[Sundevils21]

Did you mean a limit holdem tourney and not no limit? Your point about folding AA preflop is still rediculous but at least you can justify "min raising" because it is the only sized raise you can make.

[Beavis68]

Opening UTG with a limp or a small raise with AA in not a bad move at an aggressive table, with the thought of going all-in on anyone that re-raises. Actually, limping is probably better than a 2x bet. I would say, either limp, or raise it 4-5x the bb early on, 3x as the blinds increase.

Of course, if you limp, and no one raises you, and a lot of callers see the flop, be prepared to fold. If you cant fold, then open with a raise everytime.

As this turned out, you were a big favorite with awesome odds, you just got unlucky. Don't worry about the result of one hand. With weak tables in the cheap games, it is hard getting people to fold, but when your hand holds up, you will be rewarded handsomely.

[SmileyEH]

early stages of a MTT I'd rather have every player go all in in front of me so I can call in the BB with AA. Who cares if you only win the hand 40% of the time? You're going to have ten times your starting chips and able to run over every table you sit at for a long time.

Obviously an extreme situation - but unless it were a bubble situation I would take AA all in against as many players possible; ring or tourney.

-SmileyEH

[tvdad]

Thanks for all the sarcastic answers. That's what I was expecting, because it's obviously a ludicrous question. If I really ever considered folding AA preflop in any situation other than on the money bubble in a tourney that paid significant money, I would expect someone to take away my card playing privileges.

One point: Raising the minimum (or even limping) UTG with AA (or any big hand) isn't unusual in these cheap/freeroll tourneys. I can practically guarantee somebody will reraise, and then I can make the big reraise to try to get max value out of the hand. Sometimes I'll get unlucky when nobody reraises and I have 6 people see the flop, but that doesn't happen very often. You have to make an awfully big bet to get the really loose players to fold at this stage. I hate to bet T500 into a T30 pot just to take down the blinds with my AA. That's great later when the blinds are bigger, but now I want to build my stack.

Anyway, there was a method to my madness here. I was kind of hoping at least one person would run with it and offer up an actual statistical answer for why you should ever call when you're only a 44% favorite to win, as you are when you've got AA against four opponents who will see the hand through to the river. This doesn't happen often, but when it does anyone will say you'd be a fool to fold. Oh really? If it's okay to call in this spot, then why would you ever fold when you've got one of the "coin flip" hands; a pair against two overcards or vice versa. Well, part of it is because you don't really know for sure that that's the cards you're playing against. But if you can somehow put your opponent on AK/AQ/AJ/KQ/etc and you've got 55 and he just pushed all-in, why would you ever fold? You have better than the 44% chance of winning in the AA situation. Is it simply a matter of the amount of chips involved?

Say it's the first hand of a tourney where everyone starts with T1000. UTG pushes all-in, gets three callers, you look down and see AA and call. If you win, you've now got T4000. Nice quadruple-up on a 44% shot. Now let's say it's much later in the tourney, but still a way to go until the money. You've got T10000. UTG pushes all-in and has you covered. You know he will push all-in in this spot with Ax, and only Ax. You have 55. Do you call? A lot more chips on the line this time, and your odds are better than that first hand when you had AA. So is this an automatic call? If not, then why would you call with the AA for lower odds?

[Tosh]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, there was a method to my madness here. I was kind of hoping at least one person would run with it and offer up an actual statistical answer for why you should ever call when you're only a 44% favorite to win, as you are when you've got AA against four opponents who will see the hand through to the river. This doesn't happen often, but when it does anyone will say you'd be a fool to fold. Oh really? If it's okay to call in this spot, then why would you ever fold when you've got one of the "coin flip" hands; a pair against two overcards or vice versa. Well, part of it is because you don't really know for sure that that's the cards you're playing against. But if you can somehow put your opponent on AK/AQ/AJ/KQ/etc and you've got 55 and he just pushed all-in, why would you ever fold? You have better than the 44% chance of winning in the AA situation. Is it simply a matter of the amount of chips involved?


[/ QUOTE ]

I can't believe you're actually serious. But just think what price you are getting for a 44% chance of winning, its not even close to the same thing as a coinflip hand.

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
But if you can somehow put your opponent on AK/AQ/AJ/KQ/etc and you've got 55 and he just pushed all-in, why would you ever fold? You have better than the 44% chance of winning in the AA situation. Is it simply a matter of the amount of chips involved?

[/ QUOTE ]

The short answer to your question is yes. When you make a bet, it makes a big difference whether you are getting paid off at 3:1 or 1:1 when you hit.

But who cares, you say, I'm going to get busted out of the tournament half the time either way, I don't want to take that risk. Well, try the following experiment. Every time you find yourself making an absurd statement like that, take a sharp object and poke yourself in the eye.

The point is not that you should gamble all your money every time you have a 51% edge. But some edges are so big that you simply have to take them. AA preflop is one of those edges. If you know a strategy that has better than a 44% chance to quadruple your money, post it here; but it better be something more concrete than "fold and wait for a better opportunity." This is a game based on mathematics, and you generally won't get ahead by passing up huge advantages.

The other point of this experiment is that when the rest of us go to live tournaments, we will know that we can always push the one-eyed players off a hand by betting all-in, because they won't take the risk no matter how good the situation.

[tvdad]

Okay, now we're getting somewhere. You call with AA in the 4-opponent all-in situation because the pot odds are so high. Fine. Then you would also call in this spot with KK, QQ, JJ, TT, 99, and 88 because they all have winning percentages of 40% or better, right? You shouldn't even have to think about it. Actually, with those high pot odds you could go all the way down to 55, or even hands like K9 and QT because they all have at least a 30% winning percentage, right? I mean, who wouldn't take a 30% chance at quadrupling your money?

This is where I was going with my question. At what point do you discount the pot odds and concentrate on survival? How close does it need to be in order for you to fold, even if you have the advantage? It might take a lot of thought when deciding to call an even money proposition with a 51% edge. But do you even have to think about it when you're getting 4:1 with a 30% edge?

[pzhon]

You go too far when you talk about entering a 4-way all-in with something like K9 or 55. JJ does very well against 3 random hands. However, it doesn't do well against 3 hands that have decided to move in, particularly after seeing other hands move in. If 3 people move in before me, I don't think JJ will win 25% of the time, so I fold it. AA still does well against good hands, particularly AKo.

Survival is overrated. You lose in most tournaments anyway. Get your chips in when you are a clear favorite, and you will win more.

[Michael Davis]

"but I have lost AA a lot over the past few years (close to 75%) on multi-player all-in situations like this."

I don't think you should make judgments about four tournaments in a few years.

-Michael

[HUSKER'66]

[ QUOTE ]
According to a table in Ken Warren's "Winner's Guide to Texas Hold'em" for hands that are played all the way to the river, AA is an 88% favorite against one opponent, 76% against two, 68% against three, and only 44% against four.

[/ QUOTE ]



[ QUOTE ]
I was kind of hoping at least one person would run with it and offer up an actual statistical answer for why you should ever call when you're only a 44% favorite to win, as you are when you've got AA against four opponents who will see the hand through to the river.



[/ QUOTE ]

Incorrect.

tvdad, you need to go back and reread Warren's research. You will win 44% of the pots against six opponents holding random hands and playing all the way to the river.(a situation that you will very rarely see in NL)

You would probably have a much greater chance in a NL tourny situtation of facing three and then the % of pots won is 68%. Given the oppurtunity to either triple up, knock out three other players, or both with a 68% success rate....you'd be a fool not to take that proposition.

Husker

[tvdad]

Who said anything about four tournaments in a few years? It's not that rare in the cheap tourneys.

Thanks to Pzhon, who hit me over the head with a fact that I was ignoring: In a multi-player all-in situation, you're not up against random hands. You're probably up against very good hands. So those random hand stats can be thrown out the window. I get it, I get it. Although in these cheap tourneys those non-random "good" hands can be as weak as Ax, Kx, or even Qx. I see it all the time. So I understand why those lesser hands like K9 and 55 have much less than a 30% chance of beating a group of non-random all-in hands.

It's also pretty obvious that if there are three all-ins before you, you can probably bet one of them has AA. So you'd fold anything other than AA in this spot, right? Just out of curiousity, what are the odds that KK can beat three very good starting hands, one of which is AA?

[Michael Davis]

AA does better against non-random than random hands.

-Michael