Pocket Rockets... want callers?

[Patriarch]

There is something that confuses me about AA, specifically how many callers you want for it. In WLLHE, Lee Jones says that you would prefer your AA to be against fewer callers, since it only wins about 35% of the time against a full table of random hands. However, in Gary Carson's book, TCBoHP:aCGtPaW (really rolls of the tongue doesn't it?) he states that you want as many callers as possible because poker isn't about winning pots, its about winning the most money. So is it better to win only 35% of pots for a lot of money, or to win 60-70% of pots against only a few callers for less money? Or is there some point in between these two extremes that we should be aiming for?

[Bez]

You're gaining money with each call. Many callers, though it obviously increases your variance.

[uw_madtown]

Exactly. For AA, it would be ideal EV wise to have everyone stay in for four bets pre-flop. You are a strong favorite over any other hand to win the pot (except if you're up against another pair of aces). If you've got a lot of people seeing the flop despite a pre-flop raise, they will likely have odds to call with flush and open-ended straight draws (not to mention the possibility of someone hitting two pair/trips or better ON the flop). Probably best to bet your aces to make the draws pay, while slowing down if you get played back at by a made hand.

Creating a pot that gives draws odds to call down your aces merely means that they made a whole lot of mistakes preflop according to the Fundamental Theory of Poker.

In short, it would be most profitable for all players to call 4-bets against your aces before the flop. But like already mentioned, you will win fewer total pots this way and end up with bigger swings.

- UW

[sfer]

Carson's right.

[turnipmonster]

I guess it depends on which you like winning more: winning pots, or money. me, I like winning money. so I'll take all 9 callers for 800, bob.

--turnipmonster

[DeeJ]

It does matter if you are going all-in in a tourny [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Your penalty for the all-in against few callers is less likely elimination, but against many callers it is likely elimination [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] with the possibility of a huge return [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

On Late Night Poker I saw some guy fold AA once. Bizarre.

[cnfuzzd]

Does the pope [censored] in the woods?

peace

john nickle

[cnfuzzd]

whoops,, forgot my interesting anecdote. I was playing drunken home game micro limit once(i was the only one drunk) and tearing the game up something fierce. Check raising before the even had the chance from putting their chips in the pot and what not. Well, i get dealt JTs, and this horribly sober person raises with AA. He was a somewhat loose player, so i called on the BB. He later said, swear to the god i dont believe in, "i was worried when you called." WTF

peace

john nickle

[Ed Miller]

If you don't want callers with aces, what hand do you want callers with?

If there's no hand that you want callers with, why are loose games better than tight games?

[Tosh]

I never saw the thread but I remember someone saying - might have been ZeeJustin - that running all in scenarios with AA your EV peaks at 7 callers. I'd like to see the thread if anyone knows where it is, to see what the argument was.