Before anyone goes getting sick, let me clarify what I meant. I simply meant that based on the math, AK is a drawing hand. I didn't say that I'd rather play a 22-JJ than AK. I simply said that heads up AK vs PP, PPs have the advantage. When discussing AK being a drawing hand or not, what should I compare it to except those hands that are accepted as non-drawing hands? Otherwise, we could argue that AQ is not a drawing hand, unless it's up against any PP or AK, and KQ is a non drawing hand unless up against an Ace or PP.

In response to Exit's post yes JJ is behind AA-QQ, but it doesn't mean that its a drawing hand. It is only behind 3 hands. AK is significantly behind 2 hands and moderately to slightly behind 12 more. I am calling AK a drawing hand because it is mathematically less likely to win a heads up showdown than aany pocket pair. Thus, yes, heads up, all in, with AK vs PP, give me the PP, but otherwise (with 4+ players), I'd rather have AK. In fact, while writing this I just folded 44 to a 3x UTG raise. I can promise that I wouldn't have folded AK. I suppose the real question is how to define a drawing hand. How many hands can a hand be behind without be considered a drawing hand, and how behind can it be? It seems that most people here want to argue that it can be a little bit behind PPs, as long as it is ahead of every non PP. I'd say that because it is behind the PPs (which I'm assuming most consider non-drawing hands because they're already pairs), it's a drawing hand. It's a better hand, but it's a drawing one. An important point that I made in my initial post is that AK needs to see the entire board to be ahead of a PP. To me, this is key to it's being a drawing hand. It's way behind a PP if it only sees the flop.

Will

Note: please let me say again, that I didn't say AK is worse than pocket pairs. I said that it's a drawing hand and PPs are made hands. Made hands are not necessarily better than drawing hands.