Preflop Aggression: More or Less Luck?

[Mempho]

I've been thinking about this for a while now. First and foremost, before anybody gets the wrong idea, I understand the merits of each and every preflop raise that is made in that we PFR for many reasons: including but not limited to raising for value, to thin the field, to gain fold equity, for postflop leverage, to define our hands, and for metagame purposes. I'm sure there are more, but since that is not the overall point of this post, I won't dwell on it. Now, I use all of these reasons and combinations thereof to make my raises and my PFR % falls in line with the normal standard at each limit I've played.

I've been thinking, however, that the wealth of preflop raises found in today's midlimit online game creates an environment in which there is much more luck than in games with lots of limping. Before you say it, yes, I fully know that passive games are easier to beat than aggressive games. I'm quite aware of that. That is generally thought to be because the preflop raises and reraises by your opponents can put you in particularly difficult situations pre and postflop.

Most of those difficult decisions are found postflop but there are a few times that preflop when this happens (AQ anyone?)

I have been thinking about what this does, however, to the amount of luck involved in the game. It is no surprise to anyone on this board that there is a lot that is dependant upon the flop itself. So, the more money that is dumped in before the flop, the more luck that is involved in comparison to the money that is in the pot. It's like one of that tables on Paradise when they dealt their 250,000.000th hand a long time ago. Each player seating and actively playing at the table got like $5,000; but the winner of the pot got $25,000...who in the hell is going to fold anything here? If I've got even a chance in hell of winning, I'm going to the showdown. (Needless to say, I actually saw someone fold on the flop here...and it was dealt on a 1/2 table or something like that).

My point is that a wealth of preflop raises creates a situation in which postflop skill is negated. Many times there is just too much money in the middle to fold. In other words, it doesn't matter what your opponent reasonably holds, the size of the pot has already made your decision. A typical example is this:

You have AKo on the button and a LAG raises UTG. MP2 (who is relatively tight on preflop raises) reraises. You cap and both call.

The flop comes K 8 3 rainbow. LAG checks, MP2 bets, you raise, LAG reraises, and you cap...all call.

Turn is a blank..both check and you bet...LAG checkraises (LAG has a turn aggression of 0.6 through 400 hands). Anyway, you know this checkraise is probably bad news and you calculate that you have a 90% sure that you are beat and are likely up against a set.

How much is in the pot? I count 13.5 SB preflop and another 12 on the flop...25.5 SB going into the turn or approximately 13BB. Add 3 more BB so far on the turn and we have 16BB. So you're going to have to call 2BB to get to showdown....and you realize that you are better off calling because the biggest mistake would be laying down inappropriately here.

Now...remove all of the preflop raises...so we would have 4.5SB going into the flop. If we replicate the flop action, we have 16.5SB going into the turn (the BB check-folded). This gives us approximately 8BB. The action on the turn is identical and now it is 11BB to you and you know it will be 2BB once again to get to the showdown. Once again, you calculate that it is 90% certain that you are beaten. You are effectively getting 5.5 to 1. Assuming that you are a good reader, your 90% just won't cut it here.

In the first example, you are not able to make a mistake by calling the turn and the river (even though you are about as sure as you could ever be that you are beaten here) whereas the second example makes it a mistake to call down.

Your reading skills have just been negated in the first example...yes? So that would mean that the greater the volume of preflop raising in a game, the higher the luck factor, correct?