Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
 

Very big possibility that I'm bias. That's why i edited my post to ask for the same data you are asking for. Also, let me restate that I normally call here....

Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
 

Oh yeah, and many of my obsevations are also from MTT's. I think that makes a big difference and you will be shown AA-KK more often in MTT's.

Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
 

Just random observation here, but tonight in the 11s I saw two players all-in preflop. There hands were KQs and J5o respectively. J5o won the hand, of course, but donked off all their chips before level one was even over.
Les

Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think he's talking specifically about the limp-push line taken here by the villain. But I've seen it often enough by mid-pairs to say it's probably not AA/KK 80%.



[/ QUOTE ]

I think the BB pushed so this is not a limp-push.

If UTG limps and then pushes to a raise.... I am seriously concerned. BB push ... less concerned. UTG strong hands are concerned about not getting any callers so they limp with monsters, once raised they push.

I posted some first round all-in data about a week ago. My sample was small but it did show some really low hands going allin in level one.

here they are...
I did not have all that many SNG's in my Pokertracker DB. From what I did have I grabbed the hands from all the times that players went all-in and were called by another player in level one on party.

Here are they hands. They are paired or tripled for hands that are from the same all-in event. These are what they are pushing or calling a push with in level one.


[ Ac, Ah ]
[ Ks, Qh ]

[ Ad, Ac ]
[ Qs, Jc ]

[ 9s, 9c ]
[ 3s, 3c ]

[ Kc, Ks ]
[ 9s, 9c ]

[ Ad, Qh ]
[ 9s, 9c ]

[ Jc, 8c ]
[ 7d, 7c ]

[ Ks, Ts ]
[ Tc, Ad ]

[ Th, Td ]
[ Qs, Ad ]

[ As, Qs ]
[ 8c, 8h ]

[ Qs, Qd ]
[ Th, Ts ]

[ Kc, Jh ]
[ 7c, 7s ]

[ Ks, Ac ]
[ 9s, 9d ]

[ 6h, 6d ]
[ Ah, Ad ]

[ Qd, Kh ]
[ Kc, Ks ]
[ As, Ah ]

[ Jc, Jh ]
[ Kh, Ac ]

[ Ad, As ]
[ Ks, 4d ]

[ Qd, Qs ]
[ Td, Ad ]
[ Jh, Js ]

[ Jh, Ks ]
[ 7d, 7h ]
[ Jc, As ]

Looks like a coinflip more often than KK or AA.

I would bet that first hand stats are even crazier than level one in general.

First level deserves some special consideration, they are crazy then.
--
tjh

Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think the BB pushed so this is not a limp-push.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, I was mistaken. Makes it easier as you say, now you'll see a much larger range of hands then when someone limps-pushes.

Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
 

It is an insta push. Double up or fire up a new one. If you lose it was an easy $4.

Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
 

No it isn't. Taking gambles early means more early bustouts, which can raise your hourly rate. Continuous play means more per hour, sets mean less tables running = better decisions.

Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
 

I play the 11s, but I call, I see so many mid/low pairs, and crap like AJ, doing this that I don't hesitate to call this.

Will

Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The question I ask is, do we call this 100% of the time?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes. You are getting 2:1 odds with AKs. You'll win far more often that that. Folding this is clearly -EV especially in the $22 where BB could be pushing any decent hand. He'd have to show me AA or KK before I folded this. Besides, you want to fold here and be essentially starting the tourney with $600?

Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
 

Complete in the SB and play for flush value.