Why not to limp w/ AA (No Real Content)

Piper Tim · #1 11-20-2005, 02:07 PM

No real content here folks. It is a good example of the dangers of slow-playing a monster. Bad suck out on my part.

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $ Hero (9 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

SB ($39.90)
Hero ($4.75)
UTG ($5)
UTG+1 ($8.60)
MP1 ($22.45)
MP2 ($23.90)
Limper ($23.65)
CO ($24.65)
Button ($58.40)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]. SB posts a blind of $0.10.
4 folds, Limper calls $0.25 with A [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 2 folds, SB (poster) completes, Hero checks.

Flop: ($0.75) T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (3 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $2, Limper calls $2, SB folds.

Turn: ($4.75) 3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero calls $2.50 (All-In), Limper calls $2.50.

River: ($9.75) T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 players, 1 all-in)

Final Pot: $9.75

pzhon · #2 11-20-2005, 02:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
It is a good example of the dangers of slow-playing a monster. Bad suck out on my part.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, that hand argues for limping with AA, not against it. In fact, if I know you will always overplay TPNK but will fold trash when I raise, I'm confident that it would be more profitable to limp with AA in front of you rather than to raise with it. You had less than a 5% chance to win when you put in most of your stack. Your poor play justified slow-playing AA.

Examples that argue for raising with AA include hands in which

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] The raise forces out hands that would have outflopped AA.
[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Someone would call a raise and then fold after missing the flop.
[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Someone would call a raise, then lose extra money postflop because the pot is larger and the bets are larger than they would have been in a limped pot.

By the way, you should have bet less on the flop. After your overbet was called, you should know you are far behind, and you should check-fold the turn.

Piper Tim · #3 11-20-2005, 04:52 PM

Reverse the situation. If I had had the AA, what would the advice have been? Raise preflop. Not raising was a mistake. Limping in with a monster at that point was not justified by my poor play b/c other than posting a blind I hadn't played yet. There was no way to guess how I would play.

I am not saying I played well by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, I got really lucky.

pzhon · #4 11-20-2005, 05:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Reverse the situation. If I had had the AA, what would the advice have been? Raise preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]
Of course. Raising preflop with AA tends to cause more net mistakes than limping. However, you suggested this hand was an example of that, and it wasn't. Your hand shows that limping will sometimes let you get more money in as a huge favorite when someone goes crazy with TPWK. Contrary to your title, your hand showed the benefits of slow-playing.

Whether you hit your 2 outs on the river after all of the money goes in on the turn is irrelevant. That part was just luck. Change the river card to any non-10, and it doesn't change whether this hand argues for raising AA.

AKQJ10 · #5 11-20-2005, 08:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, if I know you will always overplay TPNK but will fold trash when I raise, I'm confident that it would be more profitable to limp with AA in front of you rather than to raise with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you know that the preflop-postflop delta of your opponent is high, then I agree. But this hand is a bit of an anomaly, because even huge fish know that a bad offsuit ten isn't playable.

Give Hero a hand that some people would play against a raise, like T9s, and have him play it the same way postflop, and I don't think the limping is profitable because he's likely going to overplay his top pair the same way. There's a small chance that your preflop raise makes him think, "Danger! Overpair!" but probably not. People who want to overplay a hand will "put you on" Ace-king if it suits them -- believe me, I've done it many times.

But I understand that your point wasn't that limping with AA is profitable in general, just profitable for a particular class of hands such as this one. I agree -- but only because this is a class of hand that wouldn't make it to the flop without the aces' slowplay.

bholdr · #6 11-21-2005, 12:28 AM

I feel that one loses a lot more by limping with AA (or KK) as opposed to open-raising, re-raising, etc... BUT, like with everything else in poker, there are situations that could make a limp correct. Sometimes, in tourneys, esp deep in them, against LAGs... or for metagame reasons, or going for a limp-re-raise. To generate action against tight players, and so on- but even if everything's just right, a limp is probably only marginally superior to a raise, mostly for one big reason and some small ones:

you have ACES.you are way ahead, and should push that edge. Aces have such a huge equity advantage pre-flop, 3-1 or better when HU, and passing that up costs A LOT. this means the advantage one gains by limping has to overcome that loss, long-term, and that's HARD to do.

so i raise my bullets, almost every time, unless i have a VERY good reason to think that limping is much more +EV.