![]() |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() play both AKo and KQo in a loose-aggressive game(many players staying in pre-flop,on the flop , and on the turn; capping on pre-flop ,flop and turn). Which hand would you rather have: AK or KQ? Why? Thanks Happy pokering, Sitting Bull |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Sometimes, like in Paradise heads-up, against an opponent I am acting after at some point who obviously doesn't have an ace, or against an opponent who puts a certain kind of read on me, KQo gives me more outs. There are just rare situations where I know I will be able to use the ace if it hits the same as if I am holding it when I am not. Plus, I have the queen out, if the board comes QT762. Like, if the ace hits I win, but if it doesn't and he figures me to be over-representing a high card, he may overbet his pair of tens. Sometimes deception is worth more bets than cards? eLROY |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Deception is worth more than cards headsup. Yup, sometimes. No doubt. But Larry's question was against a full field. I think your point is valid in its stated context, but not for the question at hand. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() I would have thought AKo to be much better, but looking at http://www.gocee.com/poker/HE_Val_Sort.htm KQo wins almost as often as AKo. Interesting. Even in terms of pot equity heads up (where I would think AK would have the biggest advantage), AKo is only slightly better. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() I think your point is valid in its stated context, but not for the question at hand. You should just be thankful he didn't start talking about his stock picks. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() This is one area where the computer simulation results are flawed. The simulation is unable to account for all the extra bets KQo is going to lose when it makes a second best hand- which is a common occurance. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Paraphrased from HEPFAP: You'd rather stay in with KQ overcards than AK on a ragged flop because a bunch of people will play any Ace but not any king. Hitting your Ace might give some other moron a second pair, hitting your K or Q is less likely to do that. Not saying KQ is more valuable, just showing one instance where you'd rather have it. 2ndGoat |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() That's not the point. AK is only dominated by 6 hands, while KQ is dominated by 36 hands, making it 6 times a likely to run into serious trouble (at a full table, about 1/4 of the times) - plus you're a still a dog over any ace. Also, while AK and KQ dominate almost the same number of hands (132 vs. 120), the chance of your opponent playing a lesser ace is much higher than him playing a lesser queen. Also AK has some showdown value, even when unimproved, and will always give you 6 outs against top-pair which often allows you to make a move for the pot when you missed the flop in heads-up situations. All this together makes AK much more profitable than the small 4% difference in all-in pot-equity against a random hand suggests. cu Ignatius |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
|
|