When throw away Pocket Aces.

[ekky]

If you said "the worst move is to fold" I would definately agree with you.

If you said "the best move is to get your chips in so fast you burn your fingertips on the felt" I would definitely agree with you.

I dont think you understand the definition of huge underdog.

As this is hypothetical, all we can do is assign random values to their hands.

AA vs a full table is about 30% to win.. and you are getting 9/1 on your money.

Lets put it another way. Lets say in the kentucky Derby, the favorite is 3/1. A bookie stupidly offers 9/1. Is it a mistake to take this bet? No.... it is an overlay of preposterously large proportions to turn it down.

The name of poker, like all gambling "sports"... is to take +EV situations. It is very rare that you will ever find a situation as getting all your chips in vs a full table when you are holding AA.

If you dont believe this, post an open letter to David Sklanksy... see what he has to say about it.

[NYCNative]

[ QUOTE ]
AA vs a full table is about 30% to win..

[/ QUOTE ]Is it? Against nine other opponents? I'd need to see the math, really, but that seems high. I just put two aces against just four other players, all of whom have suited connectors except one person with a small pair, and aces is only 41.9% to win. I have trouble believing that adding five more hands here would change it such a small amount, unless the math says that everyone else winds up with everyone else's outs... [ QUOTE ]
you are getting 9/1 on your money.

[/ QUOTE ]This is palpable. But in a tournament you win or you're done. If your tournamet life is at stake what do you prefer, being a 30% favorite (assuming the math is correct) or being no WORSE than a 50% favorite and possibly an 80% favorite with a bigger pair? Hell, two live undercards against a non-pair is still about 40%, still better than the all-in crapshoot.

[AnyTwoCanLose]

Early in a tournament... you should play like a regular ring game... its not until squeeking into the money becomes a factor.

a 30% chance to quadruple your money is fantastic. You need to get lucky to win a tournament... this is as good a chance as you can hope for.

[chopchoi]

I folded them once. We were down to the final 2 tables of a MTT at pacific. The blinds were anout 3,000/6,000 (no antes) I had recently lost an all-in to a player whose stack was a little smaller than mine, and only had about 100 chips left. Then I got AA. I just didn't see the point in calling with them, since I would have to triple up 3 times to be able to pay a single BB anyway. I figured I was better off folding them, and hoping someone else went out before my blind, to improve my finishing position.

As it turns out, the aces would have been cracked. Then I won both hands in the blinds, made the final table, and had 2 players there go out before the blinds got to me again. I finished 6th.

[jojobinks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
AA vs a full table is about 30% to win..

[/ QUOTE ]Is it? Against nine other opponents? I'd need to see the math, really, but that seems high. I just put two aces against just four other players, all of whom have suited connectors except one person with a small pair, and aces is only 41.9% to win. I have trouble believing that adding five more hands here would change it such a small amount, unless the math says that everyone else winds up with everyone else's outs... [ QUOTE ]
you are getting 9/1 on your money.

[/ QUOTE ]This is palpable. But in a tournament you win or you're done. If your tournamet life is at stake what do you prefer, being a 30% favorite (assuming the math is correct) or being no WORSE than a 50% favorite and possibly an 80% favorite with a bigger pair? Hell, two live undercards against a non-pair is still about 40%, still better than the all-in crapshoot.

[/ QUOTE ]

where do you get your numbers?

AA vs 9 random hands is 31%
AA vs two live undercards (T5) is 87%

btw, though, what you fail to mention:
AA vs 9 random hands is a 3-1 shot but is being paid 9-1.
certainly busting out is no fun, but that's a better bet than AK vs T5 heads up.

here's why:
in the former case (AA vs 9 random)
.31(9000)-.69(1000)= 2100 (assuming first hand of a t1000 tourney. what that means: 31% of the time you win 9000. 69% of the time you lose 1000. what you win minus what you lose over time gives you an expected value.

AA vs T5
.87(1000)-.13(1000)=740

the expected value on the AA vs 9 random is quite a bit better. busting out sucks and everything, but so does folding your way into the bubble and busting out of the money when you take a shot with any A.

another point. let's assume that the opponents don't have random hands. let's assume that 5 of them aren't idiots and have hands that range from group 1-3. the other 4 are just bums. then you win about 24% of the hands.

.24(9000)-.76(1000)=1400
uh oh! that still makes it a better bet than heads up against two live undercards!

feel free to argue...

[Snoogins47]

I don't understand why so many people have an idea that in a tournament, not losing chips gets your farther/pays out more than winning chips.

[chopchoi]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand why so many people have an idea that in a tournament, not losing chips gets your farther/pays out more than winning chips.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is because, at the start of a tourney, your chips are worth whatever the buy-in was, minus the fee . If you play in a $10 SNG, and get 1000 chips, those chips theoretically give you a 10% chance of winning $50, a 10% chance of winning $30, and a 10% chance of winning $20. The combined value of these chances is worth $10.
However, although 1000 chips are worth $10, 10,000 chips are only worth $50. So as your stack grows, each individual chip loses value.

[Rasputin]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it is because, at the start of a tourney, your chips are worth whatever the buy-in was, minus the fee

[/ QUOTE ]

But they really aren't. You can't take your chips and sell them back to the house. Once you put your money down your chips no longer have any cash value an only have potential prize winning value. The average of all the potential outcomes may be the same as the buy in but it's a completely different thing.

[Tacjedi]

As I see it if you are in a tournament and UTG goes all-in and there are eight callers chances are that one of the other players has AA why else would they call an all-in with 4 or 5 callers ahead of them? To me this seems like at best you are looking at a split (although a big one) at the risk of losing everything. I would fold the AA and since the table is going to break after this hand you are not likely to even have to sit with the winner and his huge stack. I do however think that I would call if this was a one table tournament.

[Jacob Mandal]

I threw them away once, even when I got a third ace on the flop.
I was on the button and got Ak and Ad.
utg raised big pre-flop. A player in mid position called, and I called.
Flop:
As Kh 8h

Utg raised again, mid position called, I re-raised. Utg called mid called.

Turn:
Jh

utg raised a pot sise.
mid pos called
I re raised again. and they both called.

river:
2h

Utg raised huge.
Mid position all-in and I folded.

They both had hearts. utg had the queen and won