Take a look at this its nuts

[FlyWf]

Yeah, the second hand was played fine. It's a gamble to induce an allin, but you don't want to push anyone out with AA preflop.

[King_Striker]

[otnemem]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, the second hand was played fine. It's a gamble to induce an allin, but you don't want to push anyone out with AA preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right. You never want to lose limpers when you're first to act on the flop with aces. The more limpers you have the better, because you don't want your odds to win the pot to be good - you want them to be lessened by three or four limpers who are calling with a wide range of hands, including a BB who's seeing a free flop with two random cards so you can never put him on a hand. That's why I never raise with aces.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
Probably rigged

[/ QUOTE ] For an appropriate response to this post, please click HERE

[Rah]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, the second hand was played fine. It's a gamble to induce an allin, but you don't want to push anyone out with AA preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right. You never want to lose limpers when you're first to act on the flop with aces. The more limpers you have the better, because you don't want your odds to win the pot to be good - you want them to be lessened by three or four limpers who are calling with a wide range of hands, including a BB who's seeing a free flop with two random cards so you can never put him on a hand. That's why I never raise with aces.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're still a huge favourite. What you say if there are 8 people seeing the flop, capped pf? Would you still prefer one opponent? What if you knew that everyone agreed on capping all streets blind?

You're thinking about this the wrong way. You should be maximizing profits, not worrying about always winning with aces. It's still correct to raise, but not for the sake of "winning odds" or whatever you call it.

[otnemem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, the second hand was played fine. It's a gamble to induce an allin, but you don't want to push anyone out with AA preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right. You never want to lose limpers when you're first to act on the flop with aces. The more limpers you have the better, because you don't want your odds to win the pot to be good - you want them to be lessened by three or four limpers who are calling with a wide range of hands, including a BB who's seeing a free flop with two random cards so you can never put him on a hand. That's why I never raise with aces.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're still a huge favourite. What you say if there are 8 people seeing the flop, capped pf? Would you still prefer one opponent? What if you knew that everyone agreed on capping all streets blind?

You're thinking about this the wrong way. You should be maximizing profits, not worrying about always winning with aces. It's still correct to raise, but not for the sake of "winning odds" or whatever you call it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're not a huge favorite. And the more limpers you get, the less of a favorite you become. Against eight limpers, I would NEVER cap every street blind with aces. Are you crazy? This would be the absolute opposite of maximizing profit. Even if you are a favorite against each individual hand, you're a huge dog to a group of random hands.

[sinfulslick18]

[ QUOTE ]
It's your first post so I'll give you a break, but fyi no one is going to be symapthetic or care. Bad beat posts are frowned upon here. Secondly, I don't really like the call in the first hand with the blinds that small.

[/ QUOTE ]

welcome to the forums at least... no more bad beat posts unless if u have questions on how you played

-sinful

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
You're not a huge favorite. And the more limpers you get, the less of a favorite you become. Against eight limpers, I would NEVER cap every street blind with aces. Are you crazy? This would be the absolute opposite of maximizing profit. Even if you are a favorite against each individual hand, you're a huge dog to a group of random hands.

[/ QUOTE ]


If every player at the table agreed to cap every street blindly, not capping every street with AA is a HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE mistake

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, the second hand was played fine. It's a gamble to induce an allin, but you don't want to push anyone out with AA preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right. You never want to lose limpers when you're first to act on the flop with aces. The more limpers you have the better, because you don't want your odds to win the pot to be good - you want them to be lessened by three or four limpers who are calling with a wide range of hands, including a BB who's seeing a free flop with two random cards so you can never put him on a hand. That's why I never raise with aces.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're still a huge favourite. What you say if there are 8 people seeing the flop, capped pf? Would you still prefer one opponent? What if you knew that everyone agreed on capping all streets blind?

You're thinking about this the wrong way. You should be maximizing profits, not worrying about always winning with aces. It's still correct to raise, but not for the sake of "winning odds" or whatever you call it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're not a huge favorite. And the more limpers you get, the less of a favorite you become. Against eight limpers, I would NEVER cap every street blind with aces. Are you crazy? This would be the absolute opposite of maximizing profit. Even if you are a favorite against each individual hand, you're a huge dog to a group of random hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you could arrange to have this scenario occur everytime you got aces you would be a rich man.

Against 8 random hands, AA figures to hold up a bit over a third--lets just call it a third. If its capped on every street you will put in 12 big bets. The rest of the field puts in 96 big bets. So out of every three times you get aces you expect to lose twice (24 BB's) and win once (96 big bets). 96-24= 72 big bets. Divide by 3 and your expectation per pocket aces is 14 BB's per hand. Check on poker tracker and see what your winrate for AA is.

In ring games I've had pocket aces just over 200 times this year. If I followed this "crazy" strategy I would be up 2800 BB's on my pocket Aces alone. No, I don't consider this to be the "absolute opposite" of maximizing my profit.

Feel free to check my math, even if I'm off somewhere I'm pretty sure the idea holds.

--Zetack

edit: I would be really concerned, if I were you, that you display a fundamental misunderstanding of one of the key concepts of winning poker: expected value. Or as some much smarter people than me have said, its all about winning money, not pots.

[Greg J]

I hope you heed the advice of the other poster and admit you are wrong on this point. Badly wrong.