Math question about AA.

[Eccco]

Hi

Last night I played a SNG. Got lucky and had AA.
Blinds 50/100. Small stack raises to 200 (had 550). Big stack reraises to 400 (had 2,5k). Me with 2000 make it 1000 to go. Both fold. Entire Chips 8k (Party 20+2)

I'm sure I could have smooth called or mini raised - and for sure I thought the small stack would be committed - but I just took it down without a flop.

So I win 50+100+200+400= 750 .
That's a 37,5% increase in my stack - so I am not unhappy. But it made me think:

Is there a point where u are just satisfied with taking down the pot without a flop when u have AA?
How much chips would it need to bee in the pot - in relation to your stack / your opponents stack / before u are happy to just take it down?

Is there a mathemathical solution to this? Some kind of "flux point" where taking it down immediately is more profitable than playing them out for either your or your opponents entire stack.?

And I'm not talking about when u are a desperate shortstack, but say when u are already among the top 2-3 in chips and are facing another big stack for your tournament life.

And yeah - I like my AA enought to go all in against anybody, but they do loose on occasion. So there has got to be a point where there is enough chips in the pot that u would be happy to take it down without a flop. How could one determine this?

Anybody with some math knowledge?

Ty

[bigredlemon]

you are at least 80% to win it, and thus a 4-1 favourite.

the raise to 400 looks like he's saying he has a hand that can take the desperate small stack all in with; likely a middle pair.

Your re-re-raise screams a monster hand that wants to win it right there, likely QQ-KK and AK.

Calling would be very bad here because no one bluffs into a dry pot since the small stack will be going all in there. If you bet the big stack will fold unless he hits.

Raising to 750 would pot commit the big stack to call as a huge underdog.

[spentrent]

[ QUOTE ]
Raising to 750 would pot commit the big stack to call as a huge underdog.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really like this advice. Thanks!

[Eccco]

yes I understand - about 80% against one opponent. Less against two - probably about 65%.

And again my raise is big enough to take them out of action - and I could probably have gotten more money if I'd raised less.

Maybe i played it to hard - but the question is still. Is there ever enough chips in the pot so that u want to take it down without a showdown when u have AA?

Double up 80% of the time - (or 65%) contra winning immediately and increasing your stack with 35%.

The increase of 35% may not be enough to say that I did the correct thing - but maybe an increase of 40/50 or 60% would be a better "no risk" thing than an 80% or 65% double up or broke scenario? Especially when u are already among the top 2 or 3 chippies.

And I know the question is a bit "on the side" since u normally would love to just double up any time - but surely there has to be occasions where there are either so many involved or so much chips in the pot that u think of taking it down immediately - or if really lucky get one caller along on your overbet.

[spentrent]

I feel like my ability to put opponents on a hand decreases as the number of opponents increases. I'd rather play AA against one or two villains.

In a cash game, I'd be willing to see a flop holding AA with the whole family a small percentage of the time... especially if I know that one of them is a tricky LAG who likes to pounce on perceived weakness. I can always dip into my bankroll if something ugly happens.

In a tournament, I'm more inclined to shoot for the safe route most often. I don't mind taking down a pot pre-flop with AA with a standard raise if it has to happen. I'd rather knock out dangerous hands like small pocket pairs or freak blinds when my bankroll IS my stack.

[Insty]

[ QUOTE ]

So there has got to be a point where there is enough chips in the pot that u would be happy to take it down without a flop.


[/ QUOTE ]

1 chip. Or would you rather lose to QJ when 2 Jacks flop? Don't be greedy.

[BradleyT]

You're playing wrong if you're happy to just take it down preflop with AA.

[Eccco]

Lol - yeah right. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

U have the best preflop advantage ever - u want to win the most, but risking as little as possible. Now u might go all in if there is 1 chip in the pot - but I rather like my odds and will try to extract some more from my opponents.

But somewhere there has to be a crossingpoint of how much u stand to win 80% of the time by getting some body into the pot with u - contra an overbet that shuts everybody out - but gives u the amount already in the pot. In this example 750 chips, which was a 35% increase of my stack.

How to figure out this number - and then to make a bet that in relation to this gives you the best advantage - and at the same time induces mistakes by your opponent is what I'm talking about.

If the amount preflop is big enough in relation to stack u might want to shut others out - or at least make a costly mistake by calling youre overbet. On the other hand, risking 20% loss (and ruin) is ok when there is not much in the pot to be won in the first place and if u want to win some chips I see no better hand to do it with.

But here we are discussing the fact that there is already a substantial amount in the pot. Now how much does it need to be in relation to stacksize and the incentive to take it down immediately - as opposed to win more chips but still have that 20% (or 35% against two players) loss figure looming just around the turn ( pun intended).

Now i might have gotten hung up on an obscure idea - I mean whats there to think about.... AA - I'm all in!!! (Take down the blinds 15/30) or I'll slowplay - (and get 5 callers....) and so on - but at least it must be better than the "folding AA preflop" threads......

Consider what amount there has to be in the pot already - in relation to your stack - before u want to make an overbet that shuts the others out instead of inviting them in. Where u then win more chips - but also risk extinction at least 20% of the time.

Anybody with some sensible thoughts on the subject?

[Eccco]

Ty for your answer -

and yes I agree - but here there is already a lot in the pot.

Do u keep the same raising standards at all time totally disregarding pot size? When is there enough chips in the pot so that u would want to take it down immediately - according to u - never??? But I think there must be a point where the amount in the pot is big enough that u would want to take it down immediately - instead of risking the 20% loss. Now if you overbet and still get a call - that's not really a problem anymore...... that's a dream scenario come true.

[shaneisme]

I think your reraise was fine, in my opinion.

The first low stack guy who raised 200 with 550 in chips... ALMOST tells you that he wants to go all in... then a raise from another position probably ment he wanted to go heads up with the guy with a pretty good hand, QK/A10 ect. but raised only to get other people out of the hand who wanted to play their mediocre hands(suited connectors/J10, a drawing hand)

I am a new player kinda... so im going to give my opinion on what happenend.

Now, i believe what happenend was when you reraised.. and it went back to the small stack... he prolly figured he was beatin horribly and wanted to release his hand not only because it he was prolly holding high cards/med pocket, he didnt know if the next guy was going to call... making him release his hand. Now the next guy having been reraised is now facing some very good cards he realized and not the small stacks effort to move all in with something "ok". So he folds as well. I personally like the way you played this hand.

I understand the math answer you are trying to get here... but poker isnt only about math... as you are sure well aware of. If you had been getting pushed around or you saw loose play, and wanted someone to pay to play their decent hand... then you just put more pressure on them, kinda "scared" them. or w/e... and other varibles that im sure u know as well... but overall i give this play an A- [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]