My thoughts on going all in with AA preflop, would like feedback.

When I first began to learn poker, I liked to go all in with AA preflop. People kept telling me that was wrong and I asked why. They said "Because you'll most likely make other people fold and you would make much more money if you played your AA out instead of scaring the opponents to fold like that"

And now, I would like to challenge that seemingly consensus thought.

If you go online and google "Poker starting hands by EV", you will see many charts documenting the power of AA in a 9 handed game. Such as this one. http://www.flopturnriver.com/poker-strategy/texas-holdem-expected-value-hand-charts-9-players-19149

AA's EV is 2.35-2.81 BB depending on your position.

Here's why I challenge the conventional thinking

Let's say you're dealer, you're looking at the 2.81 EV.

In a typical game, I'd say there is an average of 2 callers before you.

Shove all in, and if they fold, you get the calls of those 2 people + SB + BB = 3.5BB total!

If you shove all in and somehow someone calls, you get even more BB!

Play it out and you only get 2.81 BB

And did you forget rake? Most poker rooms have a no flop no rake policy. If you play it out you're also vulnerable to rake, futher killing your 2.81BB profit that you wouldn't be if you just shoved and collected your 3.5 BB.

Feedback on this?

The answer is obviously "It depends"

Depends on how the table is playing, depends on position.

So if the question is, should you always go all in with AA, my answer is no. If the question is, can it be the right play to go in with AA, my answer is yes.

Fins has the right answer. There is no hard and fast rule. You don't want to run your bullets into a crowd you won't even be above 50% with 3 or 4 other players. You want to try and get heads up so you likely still have the advantage. Of course anything can happen, my own pet peeve is when I get 4 flushed.

Quote: kenarman

Fins has the right answer. There is no hard and fast rule. You don't want to run your bullets into a crowd you won't even be above 50% with 3 or 4 other players. You want to try and get heads up so you likely still have the advantage. Of course anything can happen, my own pet peeve is when I get 4 flushed.

This kind of answer is completely unacceptable on a math based forums. Seriously...

Ah Yes "The Curse of the Pocket Aces" I generally try to get heads up. I have been sucked out with flushes, straights, trips two smaller pairs and full houses. That's why they call it gambling.

Quote: Neutrino

When I first began to learn poker, I liked to go all in with AA preflop. People kept telling me that was wrong and I asked why. They said "Because you'll most likely make other people fold and you would make much more money if you played your AA out instead of scaring the opponents to fold like that"

And now, I would like to challenge that seemingly consensus thought.

If you go online and google "Poker starting hands by EV", you will see many charts documenting the power of AA in a 9 handed game. Such as this one. http://www.flopturnriver.com/poker-strategy/texas-holdem-expected-value-hand-charts-9-players-19149

AA's EV is 2.35-2.81 BB depending on your position.

Here's why I challenge the conventional thinking

Let's say you're dealer, you're looking at the 2.81 EV.

In a typical game, I'd say there is an average of 2 callers before you.

Shove all in, and if they fold, you get the calls of those 2 people + SB + BB = 4.5BB total!

If you shove all in and somehow someone calls, you get even more BB!

Play it out and you only get 2.81 BB

And did you forget rake? Most poker rooms have a no flop no rake policy. If you play it out you're also vulnerable to rake, futher killing your 2.81BB profit that you wouldn't be if you just shoved and collected your 4.5 BB.

Feedback on this?

The units on that table are in Big Bets. So you need to double them to get it in big blinds. Second, are those stats from Limit or No Limit? or Both?

Quote: endermike

The units on that table are in Big Bets. So you need to double them to get it in big blinds. Second, are those stats from Limit or No Limit? or Both?

Good observation, this is embarrassing, let me do more research on it

Quote: Neutrino

This kind of answer is completely unacceptable on a math based forums. Seriously...

Good thing that's not what this is. And, good thing poker isn't a completely math controlled game. Would you play the cards the same way if Ivey is to your left one time, and I'm to your left the next time?

Personally, I don't like the all-in play on AA. You're best off making a bet that only brings along people with inferior premium hands. You want to find the bet level that brings along the unlucky sap with JJ but sheds the guy with suited connectors.

Basically rdw or Mr. President as I like to call him are in agreement. The next time you get dealt (AA) ask yourself this, How expensive can I make this and still get action.

is this a troll thread?

If you are seriously asking this question you should just quit playing poker.

Although I really hope you are joking unless you have only been playing poker for a few weeks, I will answer your question as if it were serious.

First of all the link you gave is giving the figure of 2.81 BB as 2.81 BIG BETS, not big blinds. At the bottom it says "The unit for EV is average profit in big bets."
A big bet is double the big blind in limit poker. This study therefore obviously combed through data in limit poker, which is a much more straightforward form of poker where many more hands go to showdown. (and they don't even say what stakes they looked at, which is going to be significant if you were looking at no limit).

On to why just moving in with aces is an absolutely horrible play. To be honest, it is one of the worst plays you could ever make. Nobody is ever going to call you with a hand that is not extremely strong like kings or queens and for some bad players ace king or jacks (again depending on the stakes and how deep the stacks are). Any hand they have that is that strong, they would most likely reraise you with themselves and the money is going to get all in anyway.

The goal of the game is to win money, not a few big blinds at a time.

Example:

You are playing 2/5 NL if, as in your example two guys call and you shove you won 17 dollars. If you make it 30 or 35 (in my experience, and again this is why poker is so complicated and such a beautiful game, it totally depends on your table, the players, and the stakes what type of play is good in what situation, but I digress) one of them will probably call you. going to the flop you are automatically at least a 3.5:1 favorite. If he has something like AK or AQ you are a 10:1 favorite. so now there is 70-80 bucks in the pot. Say your opponent has any nonpaired hand pre flop like kq or kj or qj. If he flops a pair with any of those hands, he is going to call you again on the flop and you are still a 3:1 favorite. Most of the time you are going to be a big favorite. If he flops nothing and just folds you picked up an extra 25 bucks (or 50 if you get both of them to call, which is also pretty standard). If he flops something decent and pays you off on the turn and maybe even the river you have won an extra 75 - 200 bucks depending on how much you are betting.

If he flops huge and beats you, well then you will probably lose the same amount you would have gained had he flopped top pair and payed you off twice. This is where the skill in the game comes from. If you bet the flop and get check raised on the turn you are probably beat and it can be an easy laydown. But this also depends on your image and if the guy thinks you are bluffing he might check raise you with nothing because you have been raising a lot. The tighter you play, the more I would be inclined to agree with you in your strategy because if you are tightest player on the planet, you are never going to get any action on the flop unless they out flop you. So in that sense, you are right it doesn't make sense to even play aces because you will only get action if you are beat. You might as well just shove and win pre flop. In the real world, no one should ever play that tight where the only action they are getting is from really good hands. If you are, you are playing an overall losing game and should quit or loosen up. You should be playing loose enough to where there is a chance (in your opponents mind) that you would bet all three streets with nothing or a weak top pair.

Say you have aces and raise and someone calls with KQ. if the flop is k93 and you are a 4.5:1 to one favorite. Depending on the opponent you can get three streets of value out of him as a big favorite. If you shove pre flop you have destroyed that chance. Even if he gets lucky and turns a K or Q, will you really have difficulty folding if he check-raises you or bets huge into you on the turn? You shouldn't but plenty of bad players do, and that is why they don't like aces cause they misplay them (and nearly every other hand they get).

I know I am a random internet stranger to you but I played professionally for 6 years before online poker got shut down in 2011. I still play, but I also do "legitimate" work like a true sucker! so you can safely listen to me.

I'm also the guy who won this :)

http://www.pokernews.com/news/2009/05/ftops-xii-main-event-pocketownage420-captures-title-6579.htm

1. Pocketownage420 - $432,400
2. azzabentonaces - $262,500
3. iDubDeuce - $170,000
4. Julian “Hartwith” Adamson - $132,500
5. nickeltwenty - $100,000
6. -NinG- - $75,000
7. RonFezBuddy - $57,500
8. baDONKaD0NK88 - $43,750
9. oiltrader - $32,500

If you play predicatbly, such as always and only going all-in with AA, your opponents will figure you out eventually (quickly?). Then the play will lose all of its advantage.

You are young and good at math, like me a few years ago. Poker can be beat, but you must take a probabilistic view. Study some game theory, read Sklansky's 'Theory of Poker', and start acting somewhat randomly at the table. It's the correct way to play.

Quote: dwheatley

If you play predicatbly, such as always and only going all-in with AA, your opponents will figure you out eventually (quickly?). Then the play will lose all of its advantage.

You are young and good at math, like me a few years ago. Poker can be beat, but you must take a probabilistic view. Study some game theory, read Sklansky's 'Theory of Poker', and start acting somewhat randomly at the table. It's the correct way to play.

I agree with the getting into the theory and LOGIC of poker. I disagree with being good at math, the better guys seem to be at math, the worst they are at poker. Only basic math is needed to play poker successfully as long as you have the other stuff down.

Quote: AxelWolf

I agree with the getting into the theory and LOGIC of poker. I disagree with being good at math, the better guys seem to be at math, the worst they are at poker. Only basic math is needed to play poker successfully as long as you have the other stuff down.

I constantly calculate my equity and I can't imagine what would happen to my bankroll if i got lazy on that.



I do apologize for the mixup of Big Bets and Big Blinds, that voids my entire calculation on why going all in on AA is good. I'm re-researching and re-calculating that now.

Quote: Neutrino

I constantly calculate my equity and I can't imagine what would happen to my bankroll if i got lazy on that.



I do apologize for the mixup of Big Bets and Big Blinds, that voids my entire calculation on why going all in on AA is good. I'm re-researching and re-calculating that now.

Not sure why you are trying to find a One way, one play for AA pre flop, this just sounds crazy unless you are somehow multi tabling online and don't want to think.

Aces should be making you a ton of money at a NL table, if you are really playing good poker.

To me it sounds like you are miss playing AA and then getting sucked out on, or you are making bad calls when its almost certain you are beat but you cant lay them down and now its making you want to find a mechanical way to play them.

Quote: Neutrino

This kind of answer is completely unacceptable on a math based forums. Seriously...

There are four words I often say to those in the BS forum (and elsewhere) who every so often insist they've "beaten math," which seem to apply equally well here, although you've approached from the other direction:

GIGO.

You can do all the math you want, but you need to have parameters that reflect reality. To wit, you're not playing VP - you need to take into account the strategies of the other players, and these are going to vary. So no, there are no hard and fast rules.

Frankly, I would say you should stay the hell away from NL. NL is exciting to watch because it's very dramatic, and it's dramatic in part because it's much less analytical and more intuitive than most poker, which is what hoi polloi like, but which you seem resistant to even acknowledging as possible. Poke around a bit at those other games, the ones with all the old men.

As to your original question, you don't just need to recalculate for big bet vs. big blind; if you're staying in NL, throw those numbers out completely, because they're for a different game. If your question is about limit, then I'll say, yes, always get all in on AA preflop when the opportunity presents itself (better yet, always have 12 BBs in front of you so it never does). You should almost always raise with AA preflop in limit (at least, I can't think of a situation where you shouldn't). I think you'll find the EV for pocket aces in NL is considerably higher. And you'll only get the blinds, unless you luck into aces often enough to get a reputation as a maniac.

Quote: 24Bingo

There are four words I often say to those in the BS forum (and elsewhere) who every so often insist they've "beaten math," which seem to apply equally well here, although you've approached from the other direction:

GIGO.

You can do all the math you want, but you need to have parameters that reflect reality. To wit, you're not playing VP - you need to take into account the strategies of the other players, and these are going to vary. So no, there are no hard and fast rules.

Frankly, I would say you should stay the hell away from NL. NL is exciting to watch because it's very dramatic, and it's dramatic in part because it's much less analytical and more intuitive than most poker, which is what hoi polloi like, but which you seem resistant to even acknowledging as possible. Poke around a bit at those other games, the ones with all the old men.

As to your original question, you don't just need to recalculate for big bet vs. big blind; if you're staying in NL, throw those numbers out completely, because they're for a different game. If your question is about limit, then I'll say, yes, always get all in on AA preflop when the opportunity presents itself (better yet, always have 12 BBs in front of you so it never does). You should almost always raise with AA preflop in limit (at least, I can't think of a situation where you shouldn't). I think you'll find the EV for pocket aces in NL is considerably higher. And you'll only get the blinds, unless you luck into aces often enough to get a reputation as a maniac.

The one situation in which you should NOT raise, ever, in low limit hold em with aces if there are a "Cracked Aces" promotion going on. Usually they give away 75-100 for this.

I'm not a seasoned poker player.
(i) I sense poker is not only playing the odds but also setting out your stall over what range of hands you do certain actions - I'm guessing game theory comes in.
(ii) I suspect one of the things with good hands is to make a consistent raise (i.e. they can't tell anything from the value of the raise) within a range (your choice) but include some curve balls such as suited connectors.
(iii) On a mathematical basis, there was a puzzle set on the forum a while ago, and the result was you raised with some absolute rubbish (your only chance of winning was a bluff) or with good to very good hands. While your bluff element probably cost money, it meant worse hands tended to call your good raises.

Quote: charliepatrick

I'm not a seasoned poker player.
(i) I sense poker is not only playing the odds but also setting out your stall over what range of hands you do certain actions - I'm guessing game theory comes in.
(ii) I suspect one of the things with good hands is to make a consistent raise (i.e. they can't tell anything from the value of the raise) within a range (your choice) but include some curve balls such as suited connectors.
(iii) On a mathematical basis, there was a puzzle set on the forum a while ago, and the result was you raised with some absolute rubbish (your only chance of winning was a bluff) or with good to very good hands. While your bluff element probably cost money, it meant worse hands tended to call your good raises.

It's all about the idea of balance. You need to be able to raise with "tricky" stuff(NOT garbage, just tricky stuff like a suited connector) to be able to get action from thinking players and or regulars. If you fold the world and STILL get action on your big hands, you found a gold mine.

In cash game holdem you either win a small pot or lose a big pot with pocket Aces.

Quote: mickeycrimm

In cash game holdem you either win a small pot or lose a big pot with pocket Aces.

This is idiotic. By this logic you should just fold them preflop. How about you raise them to a decent number, see if you get callers, and play out the hand?

Quote: Lemieux66

This is idiotic. By this logic you should just fold them preflop. How about you raise them to a decent number, see if you get callers, and play out the hand?

mickey's post is a common saying about AA. It's not 100% accurate, but it's also not idiotic. If you win a small pot a large % of the time, and lose a big post a small %, it's still +EV. You are supposed to raise them and see if you get callers, that's the whole point. And then it leads to the saying. Give me a break.

Quote: dwheatley

mickey's post is a common saying about AA. It's not 100% accurate, but it's also not idiotic. If you win a small pot a large % of the time, and lose a big post a small %, it's still +EV. You are supposed to raise them and see if you get callers, that's the whole point. And then it leads to the saying. Give me a break.

Yeah but that means you're just under betting or over betting them preflop. If you under bet, you either get drawn out on pre and can't fold and lose a big one. Or you bet the flop and everyone folds and you win a small pot.

Quote: Neutrino

When I first began to learn poker, I liked to go all in with AA preflop. People kept telling me that was wrong and I asked why. They said "Because you'll most likely make other people fold and you would make much more money if you played your AA out instead of scaring the opponents to fold like that"

I'm not too sure about it but I can say if you go all in you will probably scare too many people off.

Quote: petro

That's the right advice. You want to slowplay a pair of aces. If you go all in you will scare too many people off.

"It's better to win a small pot than to lose a big one."

The truly correct advice is it depends. Are you at a crazy table where people are "normally" going all in pre-flop and getting called? If you can get away with it the best thing to do is to get your money in pre-flop when you have a guaranteed mathematical edge. The reason they told you not to is if there's $5 in the pot and you shove all in for $300 then why on earth would anyone want to call?

Slow playing Aces is usually the death of aces. Look at the mass majority of pro's today... When they flop a set/etc, they press with it like it's Top Pair. Everyone is used to seeing the check raise trap which typically indicates a very strong hand. Bet what you think you'll get one or two callers with. You DON'T WANT 5 other players going to the flop by "slow playing" and just calling, etc. If you have AA, and there's 5 other people in the hand going to the flop... you are NOT the favorite. You have the highest edge out of everyone, but the other 5 "combined" will have a higher percentage... meaning the majority of the time your hand will not win.

Ex.
1) A-A (47%)
2) K-Q (10%)
3) 5-5 (18%)
4) 10h-9h (20%)
5) A-J (5%)

It doesn't matter if #2, #3, #4, or #5 win the hand... If you don't win, you lose... So you are 47% to win while the table as a whole will win 53% of the time. Thus, you will LOSE more than you'll win when you play soft and let others see the flop.

I'll reiterate "It's better to win a small pot than to lose a big one."

Quote: Neutrino

When I first began to learn poker, I liked to go all in with AA preflop. People kept telling me that was wrong and I asked why. They said "Because you'll most likely make other people fold and you would make much more money if you played your AA out instead of scaring the opponents to fold like that"

And now, I would like to challenge that seemingly consensus thought.

If you go online and google "Poker starting hands by EV", you will see many charts documenting the power of AA in a 9 handed game. Such as this one. http://www.flopturnriver.com/poker-strategy/texas-holdem-expected-value-hand-charts-9-players-19149

AA's EV is 2.35-2.81 BB depending on your position.

Here's why I challenge the conventional thinking

Let's say you're dealer, you're looking at the 2.81 EV.

In a typical game, I'd say there is an average of 2 callers before you.

Shove all in, and if they fold, you get the calls of those 2 people + SB + BB = 3.5BB total!

If you shove all in and somehow someone calls, you get even more BB!

Play it out and you only get 2.81 BB

And did you forget rake? Most poker rooms have a no flop no rake policy. If you play it out you're also vulnerable to rake, futher killing your 2.81BB profit that you wouldn't be if you just shoved and collected your 3.5 BB.

Feedback on this?

As others have mentioned, it all depends on the circumstances.

I never go all in preflop with pocket aces (unless under obvious conditions). It's like a huge neon sign that scares everybody away.

Hide the strength of your hand, especially when playing against a table of mostly tight players.

If it makes you feel better, make a good bet preflop but resist the urge to excitedly go all in.