The answer should be obvious, but lets just make sure

[maxpowers21]

[ QUOTE ]
from the co no, from the button yes

[/ QUOTE ]

I would assume nothing other then weak tightness. But, do weak tighties of this nature check fold unimproved, or check call unimproved, must know more about this opponet. But,ovbiusoly we must assume passiveness, because a terribl passiv weak tight bitch that hand.

I would raise with the majoity of any two cards there against such an opponet from the BB, assuming the Sb is not a tough opponet

yes of course i raise A3o on the button folded around, and raise A3o on the cutoff if the button is weak tight, otherwise i fold.

[maxpowers21]

Ps, now i read comments on threads, this is good discussion. Let's continue.

[fyodor]

I'm making the assumption because of the forum that this is 6 handed. Therefore when you were in LP and he was SB this means you were CO and now that he is BB you are button. SB is tight so he folds all but good hands and is therefore not much of a factor. BB is loose defender so he can be expected to call most of the time.

If Nikla says fold I would like to know the reason. The title of the post says it's obvious but I don't get it.

Any Ace is probably a slight favourite agains most of his hands and we know we will not run into much aggression, plus we have position. What am I missing?

[MAxx]

I would raise this against most players from Button, even if BB was loose in his pf defense. If both SB and BB are loose in their PF defense, then I don't raise... but probably limp.

The pf raise would be good to get SB out of the way since he is tight. However, I don't raise against this player with A3o b/c of his post flop aggression/ play. You will have a tuff time playing this hand against him and will not like showing it down unimproved on a lot of boards. He will test your hand and/or make you pay by getting value from his hands that hit. I would wait for a better hand to steal with against this BB.

Edit: I would also like to point out that villain decided to not 3bet you with AJ out of the BB... but instead elected to c/r a flop that would appear to not help you... while thinking he likely had the best hand anyway. A solid but more straightforward opponent would have 3bet you without blinking preflop... and would be correct to do so on the avg.

Under that thinking (and throwing bravado out the window for a second) from a money making perspective... I don't think you want to steal w/ A3 on this BB.

Now this is just one hand, and perhaps I am reading too much into it.... but one hand is all I have to go on thus far.

[fnord_too]

And Schneids obvious answer is.....

[naphand]

I would like to know Nikla's reason as well.

Just to throw some math into the equation...

A2o-A4o are marginal mathematical favourites to win against 2 opponents. I classify them as marginal as the difference is small enough to be neutralised (or nearly so) by the rake making them close to neutral EV-wise. Against a tricky opponent or one you do not feel you have a significant advantage over post-flop, skipping these hands makes sense.

However, both A4o and A3o improve to >5% net (in terms of % over "fair-share" of wins) heads-up, so with a tight SB who is very likely to fold you not only get dead money in the pot, but have significantly improved your mathematical position. A3o improves from p=0.359 3-handed to p=0.556 heads-up. A 5.6% mathematical advantage (from 2.9%) is quite significant, you have position and there is dead money in the pot (if called or 3-bet by SB then situation is very different).

From the math perspective, you are not only the favourite to win against 2 opponents, but improve significantly when you raise and kick SB. Not raising here is a mistake from this perspective, you have the advantage and position.

[rory]

Fold from the CO, raise from the button.

[fnord_too]

[ QUOTE ]
I would like to know Nikla's reason as well.

Just to throw some math into the equation...

A2o-A4o are marginal mathematical favourites to win against 2 opponents. I classify them as marginal as the difference is small enough to be neutralised (or nearly so) by the rake making them close to neutral EV-wise. Against a tricky opponent or one you do not feel you have a significant advantage over post-flop, skipping these hands makes sense.

However, both A4o and A3o improve to >5% net (in terms of % over "fair-share" of wins) heads-up, so with a tight SB who is very likely to fold you not only get dead money in the pot, but have significantly improved your mathematical position. A3o improves from p=0.359 3-handed to p=0.556 heads-up. A 5.6% mathematical advantage (from 2.9%) is quite significant, you have position and there is dead money in the pot (if called or 3-bet by SB then situation is very different).

From the math perspective, you are not only the favourite to win against 2 opponents, but improve significantly when you raise and kick SB. Not raising here is a mistake from this perspective, you have the advantage and position.

[/ QUOTE ]

My problem with this is it is looking at things run hot and cold. In practice, I think if you get to a showdown you are beat except the times you hit 2p, a straight, or trip 3's. Maybe you river your ace or maybe you catch someone with a draw, but by an large you are only going to get action when behind.

Now, a lot of times you will win the pot uncontested (because a lot of times you will be ahead on the flop), but you are going to win those hands with any two (disregarding the negligible bunching effect). So if it is right to try to steal with this hand, it is right to steal with any two by my reasoning. I don't believe in raising any two in the CO here, so I cannot really advocate raising A3o.

On the button I mix it up with A3o, depending on how much pre flop folding equity I think I have. In the cutoff it is no good I think.

[naphand]

[ QUOTE ]
So if it is right to try to steal with this hand, it is right to steal with any two by my reasoning.

[/ QUOTE ]

My point is it is not a steal situation, you are the favourite to win and you have position. This is a value raise.

Nate's post of a while back fits almost exactly with the mathematical expectations, the differences being almost exclusively among hands like 97s, 78s etc. otherwise the steals Nate was making conform with the mathematical expectation.

The mathematical expectation is the place to start, once that is clear we can consider such things as position and how easy hands are to play post-flop, and your point here about getting little action from an Ace flop except when behind. I do not agree with the notion that if you raise with this you can steal with any 2 cards. You can steal with any two cards, but some "steals" are in fact "value raises" and to confuse the two is not correct at all.

If this hand is a mathematical favourite, then a good player should be expected to be profitable with it, no?

The question is not whether this hand is profitable (I agree from CO its not good), but are there situations where is is better not to play it? It is marginal 3-way, but has a distinct advantage HU, esp. with position. Why would betting AQo through devalue this hand? If Hero is worried about getting CR on a raggy flop perhaps he should play A-rag more readily, he can also take a free card on the flop if he wants/needs. Against a better/tricky player, this becomes much more of a HU contest between the two and I cannot think of a situation where I would not want to play A3o with position in a HU contest.

[MAxx]

do you ignore playability of the hand and the agressive/tricky nature of your opponent's characteristics postflop?

Shouldn't playing a hand like A3o with a raise from LP have higher expectation against some player types than other player types when you actually consider the playability of the hand and their folding or lack of folding tendencies?

Intuitively, I think so.