AA in mutliway pot theory
 

AA v. KK & QQ, where all three players hold the same suits, AA wins 67.47% of the time, when his fair share is only 33.33%. That's 102% +EV.

AA v. KK/QQ/JJ, AA wins 54.82% of the time, giving him a 119% +EV.

AA v. KK/QQ/JJ/TT, AA wins 44.50% of the time, giving him a 123% +EV. Even if you give KK the two other suits, so it can make 2 flushes that AA cannot, and distribute the suits evenly amongst, QQ/JJ/TT, AA wins 44.6% of the time.



So, why is it, that on page 22 of HEPFAP, 2nd paragraph, it says that AA loses value as it becomes multiway?

Re: AA in mutliway pot theory
 

You're quoting preflop odds, and AA will certainly hold its value if you're all-in preflop against any number of people (of course you won't be >50% when several opponents are out there but you'll make up for it in EV). But once you take a flop against 4 opponents it becomes more tricky to play your overpair as you'll often pay someone off who outflops you.

Re: AA in mutliway pot theory
 

[ QUOTE ]
So, why is it, that on page 22 of HEPFAP, 2nd paragraph, it says that AA loses value as it becomes multiway?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, I didn't even notice it said that until you brought it up, and I've read it over a dozen times.

Anyway, I hate it when authors use that "lose value" wording without more explanation because it leads exactly to the misconception you described; AA gains EV with every caller whether they have smaller pocket pairs or random junk.

When people say "lose value" what they really mean is "become less likely to win unimproved and harder to play postflop because you won't know exactly what draws are out against you". Or that's what they should be saying, anyway, especially since six-handed pots are usually caused by bad players with trash.

Re: AA in mutliway pot theory
 

QQ open/raises, KK re-raises and you cap it with AA. the blinds fold and 3 see the flop with 15.5 SB's in the pot.

Flop: KQ9 rainbow.

QQ bets, KK raises. Now what? Are you up against AK & AQ or AK and KQ, or JTs & AK. You're not going to say: "Chits! I'm up against two sets."
If you're up against one of the hands above, instead of two sets, do you have sufficient pot equity to call? If you call and it gets capped back to you, you gotta call now and then what?
Against KK/QQ/JJ/TT you have 8 cards that can give someone a set.
Since we know where 10 of the cards are, there are 42 remaining; 42*41*40 = 68,880/3*2*1 = 11,480 possible flops.
There are 32*31*30/6 = 4960 flops that won't give your opponents a set. 11,480/4960 = 2.31 or 1.31:1 in favor of you not being up against a set after the flop.

Re: AA in mutliway pot theory
 

I would think that this situation would be based entirely on feel. Because yes you are getting justified to call the bet with theory, but it's hard to justify a call when the bettin was capped preflop and if it's capped on the flop with that board it does not look good for you. So depending on the game this would be a situation where theory could not help you i think. Or you just check/call it down to the river if you like.

Re: AA in mutliway pot theory
 

<font color="red"> So, why is it, that on page 22 of HEPFAP, 2nd paragraph, it says that AA loses value as it becomes multiway?
</font>

If I were you I wouldn't paying to much attention to that book. This is one of the major mistakes.

Re: AA in mutliway pot theory
 

[ QUOTE ]
So, why is it, that on page 22 of HEPFAP, 2nd paragraph, it says that AA loses value as it becomes multiway?

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with another responder that this is an error in the book. You have to keep Sklansky's writings in perspective. Unless otherwise stated, he writes with the assumption that the game is relatively tight/aggressive. IN a game like this, the Aces do lose value as the pot gets multiway. I think between that book and ToP, he explains it all quite clearly.

Re: AA in mutliway pot theory
 

A multiway pot is not likely to consist solely of top pairs. Chances are you're playing against some suited connectors and smaller cards. AA wins 36% of the time against, say, JT, 98, 76 and 54, each suited in different suits. That's extra EV of only 80%. Of course, that's extreme, but against a variety of hands, not just top pairs, someone is very likely to improve.

However the real loss in value comes because only one of those hands will bet after the flop (unless one has a straight draw and another has a flush draw, or maybe someone flops a set). So the pot collects five preflop bets, but only 2 post-flop bets. When AA wins, it will often collect no post-flop bets. When it loses, it will often lose to someone with nuts who can raise all the way, and bluff as well.

Out of 100 hands, the 36 pots AA wins will probably be not much larger than if it went heads up against KK, they may even be smaller. But the 64 pots it loses will cost it as much or more as the pots it loses heads up. So multiway it wins half as often, wins only a little more when it wins, and loses more when it loses.

Re: AA in mutliway pot theory
 

[ QUOTE ]
AA v. KK &amp; QQ, where all three players hold the same suits, AA wins 67.47% of the time, when his fair share is only 33.33%. That's 102% +EV.

AA v. KK/QQ/JJ, AA wins 54.82% of the time, giving him a 119% +EV.

AA v. KK/QQ/JJ/TT, AA wins 44.50% of the time, giving him a 123% +EV. Even if you give KK the two other suits, so it can make 2 flushes that AA cannot, and distribute the suits evenly amongst, QQ/JJ/TT, AA wins 44.6% of the time.



So, why is it, that on page 22 of HEPFAP, 2nd paragraph, it says that AA loses value as it becomes multiway?

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you have any idea what you are saying? I certainly don't have any idea what it is you are saying. How did you get over 300 posts? Reread what you posted, and then repost a reasonable question.

Dogmeat [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

Re: AA in mutliway pot theory
 

As more people are added to the pot, the amount you win with AA goes up, but so does the variance.