raising w/ large pairs, late position

[Rhone]

Please forgive what I'm sure is a very naive question. I'm still quite a poker newbie, and while I'm learning fast, there's lots I still don't quite get. Case in point:

Why, in loose low-limit games, would you want to raise with a large pocket pair in late position?

I understand that large pairs play better against fewer opponents. If I had, for example, AA in early position, I would raise pre-flop to try to thin the field of drawing hands that might beat me later on. But let's say I have AA on the BB, and there are four or five callers, and the play gets back to me. I KNOW that if I raise, not a single one of those callers is going to drop out. By raising, aren't I just giving drawing hands better odds to stay in the hand after the flop by increasing the size of the pot?

I'm confused. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] Please help me out!

Rhone.

[felson]

You're giving them odds to stay in the hand later, but you're punishing them for coming in with worse hands preflop. Let's say you raise, and two guys with 65 suited and KTo come along along with the gang.

Warning: non-mathematical explanation ahead.

The flop is Q93. Okay, now the KTo guy is going to chase you down and try to make a straight. Sometimes he'll make it, usually he wont. But the guy with 65, well, he's hurting, and he really wishes you hadn't raised. So overall, your raise made money (and actually, you even made money from KTo guy I think). Your AA kicks butt preflop, it'll win way more often than its fair sure. So make everyone else pay.

Or let's say the flop comes A94. You'll flop 3 of a kind 11% of the time. When this happens, wouldn't you have wished you raised preflop?

So raise that AA, it rocks. In fact, your dream situation is that everyone just goes all in preflop while you have AA. Usually, you'll lose. But you'll win quite often, and when you win, you win tons. That's much better than having just one opponent.

[cardcounter0]

"But let's say I have AA on the BB, and there are four or five callers, and the play gets back to me. I KNOW that if I raise, not a single one of those callers is going to drop out."

Great. You don't raise with AA to try to thin the field, you raise because you have the best hand. You are going to win against those players more often than you lose, so by raising you win a pot that is 5 SBs bigger than had you not raised, and the times you do lose you are only losing the one additional SB you raised with.

AA wins more often than 20% of the time against 5 callers, so you come out ahead by raising.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
I understand that large pairs play better against fewer opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's your error. You've got a misconception about large pairs.

[Rhone]

Thanks for your responses. By your logic, though, if you had AA in *early* position, wouldn't it be counterproductive to raise if you *did* expect doing so to thin the field? Yet all the advice I see is to raise with this hand regardless of position...

[felson]

Well, four things could happen:

1. you limp, others come in too. that sucks. now they can get lucky and suck out for cheap.
2. you raise, lots of people come in, hooray! lots of opponents to fight, but it's a huge pot and you expect to win it more often than anyone else.
3. you raise, a few people come in. pretty good, certainly better than #1. you built a similar size pot to #1 but have fewer opponents to beat.
4. you raise, everyone folds. that sucks.

in low limit games, #4 is pretty rare, people didn't go to the casino so they could fold all the time. so raise, usually you're happy with the outcome.

[cardcounter0]

Yes, but for every person that does call your raise, more than two people have to fold in order to lose money. So if 3 or more call your raise from early position, you are still ahead money-wise (and for every person that does fold, it improves your chances of winning a little).

It's a trade-off, but I would rather be playing against 5 people calling 2 bets than 10 people calling 1 bet.

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]
By raising, aren't I just giving drawing hands better odds to stay in the hand after the flop by increasing the size of the pot?


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, if you don't raise, you are giving them infitite odds to outflop you.

As far as the 'early position' question. You will tend to lose more when your big hand does get run down and you are in early position, and win less. Start charging the chasers early.

As far as AA 'playing better' against few opponents, I think you are confusing winning percentage with value. An example on RGP a few days ago...
[ QUOTE ]

On Aug 12 2004 2:01PM, Aaron wrote:

> I disagree. Raising from early position with Aces in loose/passive games
> almost guarantees that a number of people are going to call anyway to see
> the flop and try to outdraw you. Maybe you wouldn't have called another
> buck from the BB with 7-2, but I have seen many that will. And then you
> are still screwed, but for a dollar more than you were before.

no, No, NO, NO!

This is the same kind of attitude shared by the whole "How can you
possibly beat Low Limit?" crowd. If you were 8 handed, utg with AA, and
knew everyone of them would call your raise, OF COURSE YOU RAISE. Yes you
will lose more often, but take this random sampling of hands that might
call (72o is BB and decided to cap for the hell of it...)

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=445929
pokenum -h ac as - kh kd - ah ks - 2d 2c - 2s 7d - jh th - 6s 7s -
5c 5d
Holdem Hi: 376992 enumerated boards
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
As Ac 121738 32.29 253808 67.32 1446 0.38 0.324
Kd Kh 36789 9.76 338906 89.90 1297 0.34 0.099
Ks Ah 11605 3.08 363201 96.34 2186 0.58 0.033
2c 2d 21834 5.79 354601 94.06 557 0.15 0.058
2s 7d 402 0.11 366260 97.15 10330 2.74 0.014
Jh Th 75680 20.07 300755 79.78 557 0.15 0.201
7s 6s 44820 11.89 321842 85.37 10330 2.74 0.132
5c 5d 52165 13.84 324270 86.02 557 0.15 0.139

From every dollar that goes into the pot, $.32 is yours. How is getting
more money in the pot a bad thing? Or put another way, you are 3BB + in EV
preflop just by raising and getting 7 calls.

Yes you could get an ugly flop and have to fold them. Of course every time
you have AA and the flop comes A22, someone could have 22.


[/ QUOTE ]
Put another way, if some one is going to try and chase down my rockits, they are going to pay to do it. Now in NL, where you can excercise some real leverage on the flop if someone catches a piece, slow playing preflop has some value.

Similarly those more aggresive limit games where you can be pretty sure someone will raise behind you, limping ep with aces can be nice cause you can either get true dead money into the pot (mp limpers reasonably folding instead of calling 2 more bets cold), or making a huge mistake and putting 3 bets in preflop while way behind.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
Now in NL, where you can excercise some real leverage on the flop if someone catches a piece, slow playing preflop has some value.


[/ QUOTE ]

Except for when you let that 72o catch his miracle flop for free and now you are the one in big trouble with your Aces.

[helpmeout]

This is how I see it in very basic terms.

You have top pair, if the game finished preflop you would win.

Everyone else is playing catch up and they have to pay to beat you. You dont need to hit anything on the flop but they have to get at least two cards to beat you.

The flop might come K72r, odds are that a few people might have 1 pair. They are still behind you, thats why you bet.

We can look at it from another hand, our good friend 72o. You have no flush draw or straight draw. If you get one pair it is pretty useless. Odds are that someone will have a higher pair and they will make you pay to beat them. You have to hit 2 cards minimum to have a chance of winning vs AA who doesnt need to get any.