HOH, Vol. I on opening with AJs in early position

[zeitgeist]

So I'm on my second read-through of Harrington on Hold'em, Volume I, and I agree that it is phenomenal. However one small thing is nagging at me.

In the Basic Strategy chapter, where no one has entered the pot yet, Harrington recommends playing AJs thusly:

[ QUOTE ]
In early position with ace-jack suited, use a mixture of half raises and half calls, with your raises being three to five times the big blind...

[/ QUOTE ]

So far, so good. He also makes it clear that he recommends this strategy when the five conditions listed at the beginning of the chapter are applicable (e.g. early in the tournament, solid, conservative opponents, etc.). I get that.

Then I get to Hand 5-6 in the Problems section, where the hero is opening in early position with AJs. Here Harrington describes raising with AJs as a mistake unless the game is so tight that there is a good chance of stealing the blinds.

As far as I can tell, the type of game in Hand 5-6 appears to accord with the preconditions set out in the opening of the Basic Strategy chapter.

I'm probably missing something obvious here but I'm curious as to what it is.

[SNOWBALL138]

Whenever I get AJs UTG, I cry a little.

[splashpot]

[ QUOTE ]
Whenever I get AJs UTG, I cry a little.

[/ QUOTE ]
This would be a pretty reliable tell.

[thesharpie]

[ QUOTE ]
Whenever I get AJs UTG, I cry a little.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like this line.

[Webnasty]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Whenever I get AJs UTG, I cry a little.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like this line.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too.

[tpir90036]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm probably missing something obvious here but I'm curious as to what it is.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, you are. It's to stop worrying about pre-flop so much.

[Komodo]

Main point I think is, this is one of the really first hands in this major tournament. I also think he migth be a bit affected by the result. Hero 1500 villain 2000
BB on 15$. Hero raised 4xBB, a bit too much. Villain reraised to 460. Hero called (mistake) flop J [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 8 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 5 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] . Hero check. Villain bet 820$.Hero call (mistake).
fourth street 2 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] .Check. Villain put you all-in for last 220$. Hero calls. Villain shows Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Q [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] and takes the pot.

[2ndGoat]

I think the problem is that the blinds are so miniscule that they're not worth getting in trouble over. Fast forward two rounds and it's still early in the tournament, and now H will probably let you play.

2nd

[ckessel]

Well, no, that's just not right. Or at least too simplistic. Harrington has a couple examples where someone made the right post flop plays and got nailed because they simply shouldn't have been in the hand in the first place. They got hooked by a top pair with mediocre kicker, a situation they wouldn't be in if they played more discplined preflop.

That said, I noticed a couple spots where the hand quizzes didn't seem to match the advice, the AJs situation was one of them. I'm guessing there's a good reason they differed, but I don't really understand the nuances that make them differ.