($11 Pacific) Fold KK pre-flop?

[SammyKid11]

There is so much wrong with this post.

[ QUOTE ]
Let's assume for the sake of argument we can narrow his hand holding down to two possibilities: AK or AA.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a bad and largely useless assumption. First of all, he could have the other two kings. Second of all, at an 11 there is NO reason to exclude legitimate possibilities that he would play QQ-TT, AQ (and maybe worse hands) in the exact same manner.

[ QUOTE ]
He has 12 possible AA combinations and 8 possible AK combinations so 60% of the time he'll have AA and 40% of the time he'll have AK.

[/ QUOTE ]

As noted above, this is incorrect. There are 6 combinations of AA (or any pocket pair except, in this instance, kings).
1) AcAs
2) AcAd
3) AcAh
4) AsAd
5) AsAh
6) AdAh

[ QUOTE ]
Now, in that 60% of the time, you'll triple up ~18% and bust out 82%.
In the 40% you'll triple up a whopping 55% of the time and bust out 45%.

[/ QUOTE ]

Notwithstanding the fact that you miscounted the combinations of AA (and thus your 60%-40% is totally off), you've also made yet another error. The presence of a third hand (which is required in this case for tripling up) must be factored into the equation as well. You can't just say "let's assume you've got the third hand beat." In fact, unless BOTH players have AA or one has AA and the other KK, your KK MUST be beating one of the two hands...PREFLOP. However, you're forgetting about the fact that the third-best preflop hand ALSO has a chance of winning. Now, if primary villain DOES have AA, the presence of the third hand does not significantly change your odds unless the third hand includes a K. However...if primary villain has AK and secondary villain has a range of QQ-99, AJs+, AJo+...you're actually winning over 63% of the time with your KK.

[ QUOTE ]
So the ev in the first instance is .18*3000 - .82 * 1000 = -280
And the ev in the second is .55*3000 - .45*1000 = +1200

(-280)*.6 + (1200)*.4 = a total ev of +312 chips. That's a lot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Making this calculation inaccurate, as well.

I think it is a good thing that you're thinking through hands in this manner. And I am by no means the greatest expert on this site in the math department (or any other department, really). But I would ask you to please know what you're doing before you give authoritative-sounding mathematical advice to a new player who's trying to find his way.

In this case, your faulty math at least still has you arriving at the right overall answer.....call. However, in the future it may not (plus you're teaching a new player erroneous ways to figure out when he's ahead, behind, etc.).

Best of luck.

[SammyKid11]

[ QUOTE ]
I was running on a hot streak in the $5.50 STT's, had 25 buyin's for the $11 and thought I'd give them a go. As soon as I drop below the 20 buyin-mark (for the $11) I'll step back to the $5.50's.

[/ QUOTE ]

20-25 buyins is not a proper bankroll even for the 11's. Playing with an inadequate bankroll is dangerous, puts strain on how you play, greatly increases your Risk of Ruin (chances you break your entire bankroll and have to start over completely). You need minimum 30 buyins at the 11's. And with your relative inexperience (I ain't judging, I'm just saying from your post it's obvious you're new to this), I would say more like 50 buyins. I'm a fairly experienced player from the 11's to the 33's and I just had a 40+ buyin drop over the last couple of weeks. If I'd only had 20-25 buyins, I'd have to grab a job to get some bankroll seed money and cover me while I built it back up to an acceptable level. Thankfully, I ascribe to a 65+ buyin typical bankroll theory...and I drop down when I get below 40 (and there are some on this site who would say I play it too low).

[ QUOTE ]
The level of players is a little better than at the $5.50's, that combined with my run of bad luck has kept me out of the money.

[/ QUOTE ]

The level of players at the $5.50's are really only marginally worse than at the 11's...at least at Party (where the best SnG action on the net lives). But since you're underbankrolled for the 11's and since these aren't 5+1's but rather 5+.50's, just play the 5.5's until you get to more like 50 buyins...may be a drag for the moment but long-term you'll be very happy you did.

Also, if you're looking for a safe way to to build your bankroll...you might try bonus whoring. Go to bonuswhores.com if you need help learning how to do that.

Thanks Sammy. I know my BR (at Pacific anyway, which is not my complete roll) is too small for the $11's. I just thought I'd give them a go over the weekend to see where I stand. If I'd drop down to 20 buyins for the $11's, I still would have 36 buyins for the $5.50's.

Also, it's not like I would never invest more money if I was broke, or that I need my poker-roll to eat & pay rent. But I share your overall concern that I need a proper bankroll for the level I'm playing.

Also, I agree with you that Party is the place to be for SnG's at the moment, but I don't want to play the $5+$1's there. So I am doing some serious thinking today as to whether I stay at the $5.50's at Pacific, or to move my roll to Party for the $11's. My initial thought is to stay at Pacific at the moment, that's where I feel comfortable and I have the proper bankroll for the $5.50's.

But, as already mentioned, thanks for your input [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[SammyKid11]

If you don't mind/have the means to re-invest into your bankroll...then no worries. This is especially true since poker's not paying your bills (it is for me). In fact, if you do end up losing your roll (which isn't a huge percentage possibility if you work hard), you can always look at it as tuition money.

Good stuff -- keep it up, man.

Thanks again. I really quit the $11's if I reach the 20 buyin mark (if I try them again that is). Then I try to rebuild at the $5.50's and then try again. I think it's a good way to grow as a player. The money I'd loose would be tuition money.

[EnderW27]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a bad and largely useless assumption. First of all, he could have the other two kings.

[/ QUOTE ]

I made two initial assumptions at the begining. 1) the button ONLY does this with AA or AK. 2) you're beating the caller.

I think #2 is a reasonable assumption to make. Yes, it's possible he's twice-called with the other AA or KK. But the low liklihood of that occurring shouldn't significantly skew the results. Besides, when both players have AA your chances of winning slightly increase over AA and another pocket pair.

As for #1, I only did it to simply the following equations and to show later on that if the Button's range is even wider than AA or AK it makes the ev of calling even greater.

[ QUOTE ]
He has 12 possible AA combinations and 8 possible AK combinations so 60% of the time he'll have AA and 40% of the time he'll have AK.
[ QUOTE ]

As noted above, this is incorrect. There are 6 combinations of AA (or any pocket pair except, in this instance, kings).


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
On this point I can only plead absolute stupidity. Seriously, I know it's 4*3/2 and yet my crack addled brain at 2:30 last night made me stop at 4*3. I'll admit that screwing up this screws up everything that comes after it...but it screws it up for the better. The lower liklihood of AA occuring only makes the ev of calling greater.
[ QUOTE ]
Notwithstanding the fact that you miscounted the combinations of AA (and thus your 60%-40% is totally off), you've also made yet another error. The presence of a third hand (which is required in this case for tripling up) must be factored into the equation as well. You can't just say "let's assume you've got the third hand beat." In fact, unless BOTH players have AA or one has AA and the other KK, your KK MUST be beating one of the two hands...PREFLOP. However, you're forgetting about the fact that the third-best preflop hand ALSO has a chance of winning.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I said above I was using simplified, reasonable, starting hands for the villians. I've already addressed the fact that, yes, they could both have AA or one could have KK. But I will tell you that my initial assumptions DID factor in the third hand. I gave third hand JJ. Yes, he could have another AK or T9 or 83. Again, the ev of calling is only going to go up in those cases. I gave him JJ to simplify the scenario. But I did factor the third hand into the % of winning calculations.

[ QUOTE ]
But I would ask you to please know what you're doing before you give authoritative-sounding mathematical advice to a new player who's trying to find his way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good advice. Thanks.

[splashpot]

I didn't read your post or any of the replies. Just the title. And I can say with 100% certainty that you should not fold.

[Hornacek]

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't read your post or any of the replies. Just the title. And I can say with 100% certainty that you should not fold.

[/ QUOTE ]