Getting Value from Aces

your math is off. you have not included the main pot in your EV.

[stevepa]

[ QUOTE ]
your math is off. you have not included the main pot in your EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

My math is from the last decision point. Calling is +EV when you look at the whole hand, raising has a higher EV by about 460 chips.

Steve

[adanthar]

I like how there have been 21 replies to this thread, most of them dealing with when villain has a pocket pair, and not one of them points out that when villain has KQs and a Q flops he is not 'bluffing' into the dry sidepot at all.

[stevepa]

[ QUOTE ]
I like how there have been 21 replies to this thread, most of them dealing with when villain has a pocket pair, and not one of them points out that when villain has KQs and a Q flops he is not 'bluffing' into the dry sidepot at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not 100% sure of what you're saying, but I repeatedly said that most villains will commit their entire stack (or a lot of it) with a top pair type of hand. That's why I would usually just call the raise even though it would be correct to reraise if he had a pair.

Steve

If we think our opponent is decent, we have to consider the greater likelihood that he calls raises in position with hands where he knows where he is at (pocket pairs, suited connectors), than hands where he doesn't when he CALLS a raise (non AK/AQ broadways like KQ/KJ/QJ/KT/QT, where he could be crushed by AK/AQ).

Think about when you get someone's whole stack with top pair, good kicker...its when you think your opponent is on some sort of bluff/semibluff...which is far, far less likely when there is an all in player with a main pot...and you'll have to show your bluff and likely lose the main pot.

I think this is a clear situation of win a little or lose a lot with your AA. Your opponent has a hand where he knows where he's at the vast majority of the time, he has position, and he has a situation where you aren't likely to be bluffing if you bet. Ideal situation for him, crappy situation to you...don't price him into it. You know where you are at now...take position away from him.

[ QUOTE ]
I like how there have been 21 replies to this thread, most of them dealing with when villain has a pocket pair, and not one of them points out that when villain has KQs and a Q flops he is not 'bluffing' into the dry sidepot at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

FMP:

[ QUOTE ]

There are also hands like KQ that may find a fold if Hero smooth calls and then three-bets or check-raises a Q-high flop. If Hero juices the pot before the flop, KQ may well stick around anyway, and then will have a much harder time getting away from top pair.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying smooth calling is best if Villain has KQ? Do you think KQ folds if Hero re-pops?

[adanthar]

Yeah, I suck at reading. But if he has KQ, of course a call is best and of course he'll fold to a reraise.

Personally my line here would be a sizeable re-raise preflop. Im not so concerned with winning the extra 480 from the villain as I am not getting stacked if I let him hit a set or two pair. In a tournament you're looking to survive, and I think calling is just giving him correct odds to hammer you if he really hits.

And I think occassionally you will find him calling your re-raise or pushing into you and in that case you're probably getting maximum value from aces than you would if you just called and bet the flop.

If you're going to call and see the flop then make a sizeable bet on the flop to shut him out, a check-raise can possibly let him see a free card if he checks behind you.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
In a tournament you're looking to survive

[/ QUOTE ]

sigh

[HoldingFolding]

Yes, well I wasn't really looking to survive; what I should have tried to do is get maximum value out of the hand. What I did instead was whizz my slider across and raise another 1000. My opponent saw the writing on the wall and folded.

In retrospect what I should have done is prevaricated for a while before calling, he'd have called, then I could bet out hoping he caught a bit of the flop (but not too much).