why does 33 come off so well against AA in this situation?

[vector]

Here is a hypothesis that 33 is worth playing against AA heads up NL. Please prove it wrong!

$100 NL holdem, 1-2 blinds.

Hero has $100
Villain has $100

Stack sizes are important in discussion below.

Hero: AA
Villain: 33

Hero raises to $10
Villain calls, blinds fold, pot is $23.
Its heads up for the flop.

Hero will raise pot on *any* flop whether he is first or last to act (yes/no why?).

Villain will fold to any bet unless hits set or better.

Villain hits set about 1 in 8 times.
Villain flat calls the flop pot bet ($23) after hitting set, otherwise folds.

Hero makes $13 profit here when Villain doesn't hit set.

Villain calls with set.

After turn card pot is $69, both Hero and Villain have $67 left.

Hero now has choice of betting again or checking, if checked to Villain always checks behind.

On river bet, if Hero checked the turn, he can now go all in or check. Usually go all in.

If checked too Villain will always raise all in. Hero will always call (yes/no why?)

Results over same situation repeated 8 times:

Hero wins $13 * 7 = $91
Villain wins $103 * 1 = $103

This looks +EV for Villain to play 33 to preflop raise heads up, with stacks as described. Help me out, this can't be right.

Ignored case of making better hand even when Villain makes set, is this the difference that makes Heros play profitable? Or is the betting of the Hero wrong on flop and turn? Ignored flush/straight wins, guess Hero will be ahead for flushes having an A, but Villain has more straights to make (A-5 through 3-7, hero A-5, T-A only).

I always thought smaller pair is huge dog to larger pair, now not so sure. Is the problem that the Hero can't get away from the hand? The stack sizes are important, exactly $100 each. Larger stacks would probably help the Hero to get off the hand. If Hero had a smaller pair, but larger than 33 he would get off the hand more often the smaller it gets (say Hero wouldn't raise less than TT preflop). Does this mean if you have a choice to play heads up with 33 you want AA of all possible opponent large pairs?

I'm not about to start playing 33 heads up to a raise but I want reassurance that I will make plenty of money from those that do.

And yes, this post is the result of having AA cracked in exactly that situation not once, not twice, but three times in a session (33 everytime).

Comments?

Thanks,
vector

[Jon Matthews]

Nice post. The problem with the situation is that it's very specific.

The stack sizes are small here, 50BB, only a few places run games like that so it's not really generally applicable. 50 BB is just about the smallest stack size you want to be calling a 5BB PFR with 33, and at that it's a marginal decision.

The times you're most likely to get AA's stack with 333 the stack sizes are such that you probably shouldn't be in the hand on the flop in the first place, any bigger and AA has more chance of getting away from it.

I think you answered your own questions though. It's pretty much 100% stack size related. So don't play these tables then (party?) play somewhere with a 100BB buyin. You won't lose 50BB in a AA, 333 matchup, you'll lose a PFR and a flop pot bet more often (and sometimes a turn bet if you're not suspicious yet) which is much less.

So you could say that at party AA is not worth playing against an underpair but at pokerstars etc it is. Since this is one of the power hands of NL, are the good players losing money overall when facing other good players in a hand? Probably.

AA is a 4:1 favourite I think over 33 but only if you get it all in preflop, much more often the case in tournaments when the blind/stack size ratio is much smaller.


Jon

[nicky g]

"So don't play these tables then (party?) play somewhere with a 100BB buyin. You won't lose 50BB in a AA, 333 matchup, you'll lose a PFR and a flop pot bet more often (and sometimes a turn bet if you're not suspicious yet) which is much less.

So you could say that at party AA is not worth playing against an underpair but at pokerstars etc it is. Since this is one of the power hands of NL, are the good players losing money overall when facing other good players in a hand? Probably."

Surely all you have to do at Party is get a larger hunk of your stack in preflop, which is not that difficult given that people call silly overbets there all the time. I'd have thought AA would play better here; after all it's a much stronger hand pre-flop, when it can't be losing, than postflop, and it's a lot easier at party to get a larger percent of your stack in preflop that anywhere else.

The analysis also ignores the times that both players hit a set - admittedly rare.

[vector]

[ QUOTE ]
Surely all you have to do at Party is get a larger hunk of your stack in preflop, which is not that difficult given that people call silly overbets there all the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe thats how I should be playing it. One problem with that though is I always raise 4*BB or the pot (if larger) whenever I raise preflop, for cover. Raising bigger with AA will be a giveaway to observant opponents, and raising AK and AQ to $15 isn't something I want to be doing. (At least I don't think it is...)

But within the parameters I defined ($100 stack) I probably could raise AA bigger only then and not give too much away. I have considered just going all in and hoping for an idiot caller but it seems unlikely this strategy would pay off enough.

[ QUOTE ]
The analysis also ignores the times that both players hit a set - admittedly rare.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and possibly this makes all the difference?.

[Ray Zee]

you can always set up a scenario where one hand gets the better of the other. in a real game you dont know the opponents cards so the play of the hand changes.
the aa hand is often another higher pair and the 33 is another one at that, and loses alot after the flop if over cards dont come. and even in the first case many times the board comes bad for either hand and the action stops or changes.

but in general if you have a small pair and are sure your opponent has a very large one and will go for his stack. then a call for 10% of your stack is a bargain. what tends to happen alot is he has two big overcards and you hit your set and get no action. or it comes j,q,t or something like that and you must fold or just check along and win no more.

[nichtgut]

Hi
Another thing noone else mentioned is that in this situation described: "On river bet, if Hero checked the turn, he can now go all in or check. Usually go all in." I don't think going all-in is always the alternative. Say you have AA and the board is KJ943, pot is $69, you might want to sell your AA for like $20 or so instead of going all-in. Now the villain will always raise all-in of course, but there are players that still can fold AA here, especially if they know the opponent would play flopped trips this way.
Usually, AA will shut down when the flop bet is called and will not go all-in on the end, that's my experience from the Party 1/2 NL.

And of course, there are other scenarios. The board could be QJT93 or a four-flush or whatever and the 33 many times will not bet all-in but check. And of course, could even be bluffed out by AA.

/Nicht Gut

[Shaun]

You'd be surprised by the pre-flop raises that you will get called when you have AA on Party. I play my big pairs all kinds of ways, but my main rule is that if I am going to make huge overbets pre-flop with AA, i need to do this with KK, AK, and occasionally QQ and other medium to high pairs too.

I seem to make the most with AA when I overbet it, as usually players only pay off after the flop when they have you beat or have a decent draw unless the flop comes ragged and they have an overpair as well. As your AA vs 33 example proves, often the raises we put in pre-flop with AA aren't big enough that our opponents are making a mistake to call, therefore it keeps things simpler for you if you can make them make a mistake by calling your pre-flop raise. Very solid players won't make this mistake unless they too have a big hand, but the others will. Actually I play the Party Poker games much differently than I do my live game or Stars or UB, because of the stack sizes and the level of play.

[MrOmaha]

The answer to your post is that your are getting value in a No Limit situation when you are not charged alot to see the flop with any pair. However, while the times that you hit your set of 3s you will get a large profit in most instances there will be a great number of boards that will have no help for either hand. Obviously, with AA vs. 33 you both have 2 outs to make your set. However, if no set is made the Aces will crush you with a board with no help. I would much rather play small pairs vs. a larger field in the sense that you get more value when you hit your set. AA is the Best possible hand preflop and will play well in virtually every sitution. When you pit 33 vs AA you have to either hit a 3 or bluff the other player out which is not likely. Conversly, when you hit your set of 3s you will get paid. I dont want to pay very much heads up when I know that I basically need to hit a two outer to win. Much better to lay down smaller pairs in heads up situations and live to fight another day unless you are getting good value I.E. in the big blind for a very small raise. In this spot I will call and hope to hit my set on the flop.

[Ignatius]

The error in your reasoning is that even if you flop a set with your treys, you will still lose the hand 1/5 of the times, so instead of a net EV of +3, the villain will score a net loss of
.
EV = 165/188*(-10)+23/188*(4/5*103-1/5*100) = -1.14
.
and dramatically more if Hero manages to even occasionally get away from his aces when beaten.