couple of basic questions

[bodie]

First let me say I usually play Omaha & limit Hold em, and am trying to learn the "language" of no-limit betting. Last night I sat down in a B&M $100 1/2 NL table. I only got to watch two rounds before my first hand and the only information I got in that time was that the player on my left had the largest stack and appeared to be running over the table. Another players comment to him as I sat down was, "The rich keep getting richer".
I was in the cut-off position for my first hand and found pocket Aces. There were about 4 limpers, I raised to $15.00, the player to my left called and everyone else folded. Flop: 8, 4, 2 rainbow
I raised again to $20.00 - he reraised me all-in.
What would you do?
Let me add that I am female and that men often will test me because of that.
I will post the Results in a following email.
Second hand:

The very next hand I was dealt A, K.
A couple of limpers to me, I raised to $12.00. Only got one caller, about whom I had no information.
Flop: K, 8, 3 rainbow.
I raised to $20.00. He reraised to $60.00.
What would you do?
The table had just seen me raise with pocket Aces.
Again, I will post results.
I appreciate any thoughts or comments.

[beavens]

i would definitely go allin with both of those hands.

Need some info, how much does player to the left have approx.? how much do you have approx?

Let's see, about $50 in the pot and he moves all in? If he has you covered by a big margin in chips, then i see two things:
1. He might want you to commit your entire stack right there, for all we know, he may have had A8. Not sure how tight/loose he has been playing.
2. He is probably bluffing, he might have put you on AK and the flop did not help you.

In any case, I call here.

[KowCiller]

In the first hand, I'd call. 50BB stacks + overpair = ARRRR-IN!

If you doubled up the first hand and the villain in the second hand has you covered, I would consider a fold her as you're OOP and he's showing big strength on a real dry board.

KoW

[amoeba]

typically both of these will be allins assuming you are still at 50xbb stack size in both.

you might be able to get away from number 2 if you think the players are good enough to adjust to your preflop tightness.

please post stacksizes to give a better picture.

[Ghazban]

I'm definitely all-in on both hands (even if the second hand is a $200 stack). Those boards are both pretty drawless and live players at this level will slowplay flopped sets close to 100% of the time (two pair seems unlikely in either case due to the disjointed nature of the board). In hand 1, I suspect a smaller overpair and in hand 2, its AK, KQ, KJ, or KT most of the time (and sometimes AA but oh well).

[bodie]

Thanks so much for the replies. In answer to the question about stack sizes in Hand #1 - I had just bought in for $100.00 and the player on my left had about $800.00 at least, so he had me well-covered.

Hand #1 - I felt that it was impossible to know if he was pushing at me, bluffing or actually had a set (which was the only possiblity I could think), so I felt it was better to be aggressive and I went all in. It would have been easy for him to just be pushing me around as he had such a big stack. He turned over pocket 8's for a set. The whole table was rooting for an Ace, but unfortunately one didn't come (they must have all been pissed at him). So I lost and rebought. Didn't feel too bad about that one because I was OOP and felt I handled it the only way I could at that point.

Hand #2 - I had the weaker hand here of A,K. Again I was OOP - however I did call and he had the one hand I was afraid of: K, K.
I feel I misplayed this hand, should have thought about it a little longer. However to pair my K with the Ace kicker wasn't a "bad" hand, and then be so new to the table, I also felt that it might be better to play aggressively. Of course I was essentially drawing dead as the only thing that could have helped me was two Aces. Oh well.
Do you all agree at all that playing aggressively when you're new to a table can be important? (When you get involved in a hand, that is?)

[bodie]

Hand #1: I had $100.00
Opponent had: > $800.00

Hand #2: I had $100.00
Opponent had: approx $500.00

[bodie]

I have to say I'm feeling a little better about it after reading these replies, where the majority seems to be saying they might have done the same thing.
I felt sort of shell-shocked for a little while after that - got called to the Omaha table (which seems so much easier!) and thought about it there.
I really like NL, just want to make sure I'm understanding. I know it depends alot of the players and the rhythm of the table, but I hadn't been there long enough to get a feel for them.

[Ghazban]

[ QUOTE ]
Hand #1: I had $100.00
Opponent had: > $800.00

Hand #2: I had $100.00
Opponent had: approx $500.00

[/ QUOTE ]

Just a quick note about stack sizes. If there are only 2 people left in the pot, you can just use the phrase "effective stack size of X" where X is the shorter of the two stacks. If A has $1000 and B has $200, the most A can win or lose on that hand from B is $200 so it is immaterial how much more than that he has. Of course, large stacks in live games sometimes can give you a read where you didn't have one before (usually, a big stack is either a good player who has been there a while or a maniac who has been running hot-- as these player types are so different, it is usually easy to quickly figure out which is which).