Big blind, AA, everyone all in 1st hand...
Quote: GWAEObviously all in., if this is a real scenario only bad thing is you are going to be up against another aa, kk, IQ, maybe a few suited cards. While you will be a favorite you are not a huge favorite so I honestly wouldnt fault anyone for folding it. It would be an insanely tight fold.
Totally incorrect.
If there are 8 players all in on hand one of a no rebuy/no re-entry tournament then this is a fold every time. Against 8 random hands you have between 25-30% chance of winning the hand. Yes you are the favourite against any one hand but you are roughly a 3-1 underdog against 8 other hands. You are going to be knocked out of the tournament with AA 3 of every 4 times. Yes I know you’ll end up with a huge stack the 1/4 you win the hand but that’s not enough to justify calling. If you are a winning player in the field than this is an easy decision.
Edit: even worse I misread op, there are NINE other players not 8.
Quote: winningwizard$500 buy in tournament 500 people.....you table has 10 seats. very first hand of the tournament, you are big blind and you have AA....entire table is all you call or fold? its obvious call for me, but is there anyone out there that would fold?
Understand, you are a big underdog to win the hand. If you are the winner you will be a monster stack, but most often you will be out.
Quote: PokerGrinderTotally incorrect.
If there are 8 players all in on hand one of a no rebuy/no re-entry tournament then this is a fold every time. Against 8 random hands you have between 25-30% chance of winning the hand. Yes you are the favourite against any one hand but you are roughly a 3-1 underdog against 8 other hands. You are going to be knocked out of the tournament with AA 3 of every 4 times. Yes I know you’ll end up with a huge stack the 1/4 you win the hand but that’s not enough to justify calling. If you are a winning player in the field than this is an easy decision.
Edit: even worse I misread op, there are NINE other players not 8.
Would need to know what your probability of winning is before the hand is dealt, what it would be after winning this hand, and what it would be after folding. Simplest analysis would be a 10 person, winner-take-all tournament. You really think a good player would have a better than 25% chance of winning being behind by that many chips?
The other side would be tournament with 10,000. In those tournaments, what shot would a good player really have? It really wouldn't improve much if given 10-times the starting chips?
An average to below average player should always call. An above average player would seem to need to be way above average to fold
PG stole the words out of my mouth... Your aces are a HUGE DOG to "the field" which is the rest of the table.Quote: PokerGrinderTotally incorrect.
If there are 8 players all in on hand one of a no rebuy/no re-entry tournament then this is a fold every time. Against 8 random hands you have between 25-30% chance of winning the hand. Yes you are the favourite against any one hand but you are roughly a 3-1 underdog against 8 other hands. You are going to be knocked out of the tournament with AA 3 of every 4 times. Yes I know you’ll end up with a huge stack the 1/4 you win the hand but that’s not enough to justify calling. If you are a winning player in the field than this is an easy decision.
Edit: even worse I misread op, there are NINE other players not 8.
The thing I'd add is if you're not a pro, then I'd take that gamble. If you are a pro, then I'd rather actually play against the field (especially a table willing to do that).
One specific concern is that it is virtually certain that both other aces are in other player hands; probably AA is in someones hands but, if not, then there are two other A-X. In either case, my chances of improving AA are almost zero, and the chances of at least one of the ten players making 2 pair or better is really pretty high. In the case where another player is AA, then I am unlikely to win more than 1/2 of the chips even when I do win.
I don't understand what is going on and would be concerned that the other 9 players have some kind of agreement (collusion) that I am unaware of. The hand is going to attract attention from the tournament director and stinketh like hell. I came to play poker, and don't want to risk busting out on a first hand in which something crooked may be going on. I FOLD.
Quote: gordonm888I am struggling with this, because I really can't construct reasonable ranges for the other 9 players.
Perhaps one of those free to enter tournaments online, where the prize is an entry into a $10 tournament. I used to try those. A lot of people are going all-in the first couple hands without even looking at their cards.
Quote: PokerGrinderTotally incorrect.
If there are 8 players all in on hand one of a no rebuy/no re-entry tournament then this is a fold every time. Against 8 random hands you have between 25-30% chance of winning the hand. Yes you are the favourite against any one hand but you are roughly a 3-1 underdog against 8 other hands. You are going to be knocked out of the tournament with AA 3 of every 4 times. Yes I know you’ll end up with a huge stack the 1/4 you win the hand but that’s not enough to justify calling. If you are a winning player in the field than this is an easy decision.
Edit: even worse I misread op, there are NINE other players not 8.
I have never looked into this situation so I kinda figured aa would be strong but boy am I wrong. Just used my hand analyzer and AA is crushed against 8 other strong hands. I was assuming 8 other decent hands like aa, kk, kk, qj, TT, 77, JJ, and even a random 47. TT wins 22% and even 47 wins 20%.
There are other psychological factors that come in to play if you win a hand like that.
Time and size of tournament are obviously a factor. If it’s like the WSOP, then fold. A big early stack isn’t all that helpful AFAICT. If it’s a smaller tournament where you need to run it up and perhaps winner take all, then I’d think shoving is probably the right play.
Also how good you are compared to everyone else. If you’re way better than everyone else, then folding is going to lean towards the smarter play, because you can grind your way up. If you’re a trash can player (like me), then shoving is closer to the better play because your only hope is by getting lucky.
As the Ancient Hawaiians used to say, “If you’re playing Michael Jordan at basketball, you want the winner to be whoever scores first. If you’re playing some retard, you want it to be a full length game.”
Quote: AxelWolfIf you are a pro poker player isn't time a factor? If you bust out immediately, you can use that time to play other tournament or cash game. A tourney player should be looking to enter as many good tournaments as possible, assuming hes playing well. Also, given a bigger stack like that if you win the hand, you should be able to amplify your skill and even have abetter chance to win.
There are other psychological factors that come in to play if you win a hand like that.
Yeah you can enter other tourneys if you bust out.
The biggest problem with this ridiculous scenario is you're very likely to be against the other AA. But if both the AAs hold you'll have the 5X the starting stack.
If somehow you KNEW you had the only AA, i definitely call. Otherwise, it's close. Im not sure how much more likely an immediate 5X stack lets you cash.
And what are the odds that two people have pocket aces in that situation? It's much more likely people have Ace King Suited. I guess there's no way to calculate the actual odds, because the fact that people are going all-in makes it much more likely someone does have Aces as well.Quote: tringlomaneYeah you can enter other tourneys if you bust out.
The biggest problem with this ridiculous scenario is you're very likely to be against the other AA. But if both the AAs hold you'll have the 5X the starting stack.
If somehow you KNEW you had the only AA, i definitely call. Otherwise, it's close. Im not sure how much more likely an immediate 5X stack lets you cash.
As chump change mentioned, now you're going be up against somebody with a big stack. That would certainly negate some of the, "I'm a better player" theory. Unless, you have a significant proven track record, I don't know how someone can reasonably say how much better they are than the rest of the field especially when you haven't even played two hands yet. Sure you can get a feeling by looking around at the people playing in the tournament. Since you don't really have that information, I would believe it's best to rely on the the information that you do have and that's if you fold you will likely be up against a much bigger stack.
FYI I'm not saying what one is better, I'm just talking about the situation and other factors, it may not be as clear-cut as many might believe. I mean, we don't even know what the structure of the tournament is. I would also have to think it would depend on what your goal is.
p.s. someone was saying how we don't talk about poker and various other games around here, where is he at?
Quote: AxelWolfAnd what are the odds that two people have pocket aces in that situation? It's much more likely people have Ace King Suited. I guess there's no way to calculate the actual odds, because the fact that people are going all-in makes it much more likely someone does have Aces as well.
As chump change mentioned, now you're going be up against somebody with a big stack. That would certainly negate some of the, "I'm a better player" theory. Unless, you have a significant proven track record, I don't know how someone can reasonably say how much better they are than the rest of the field especially when you haven't even played two hands yet. Sure you can get a feeling by looking around at the people playing in the tournament. Since you don't really have that information, I would believe it's best to rely on the the information that you do have and that's if you fold you will likely be up against a much bigger stack.
FYI I'm not saying what one is better, I'm just talking about the situation and other factors, it may not be as clear-cut as many might believe. I mean, we don't even know what the structure of the tournament is. I would also have to think it would depend on what your goal is.
p.s. someone was saying how we don't talk about poker and various other games around here, where is he at?
Facing EIGHT all-ins? About 99.99999%.
AA vs AA all-in has happened to me multiple times online. I don't think it ever happened 4 way, let alone 9 way...
This is sort of like the question of would you bet on a yo after 17 yo's in a row. The premise is so outlandish you can't rationally answer the question.
I'd say a better question to ask a more realistic question, like would you go in first hand of WSOP main event if two people shoved first hand and you have AA in big blind? A novice like me would call. Negreanu, Chan, Hellmuth instafold. They know over time they can beat most tables. I know over time I get beaten.
If you fold the AA you wouldn’t be up against one player with a 8x stack they would fill your table with players from other tables or more likely they would break the table with only two players and move both of you to open seats on other tables.
Axel mentioned the ability to enter more tournaments. Just because there are more tournaments where you think you’re a winner doesn’t mean that you should punt this one. Getting it in with 25% chance of winning is just wrong.
A couple people have mentioned that you will likely be up against someone with the other two aces. This is very unlikely as it is very hard for someone to have AA when you hold two of them already. Honestly if 9 people ever went all in on the first hand it wouldn’t be because they all have all in hands it would be more logical that they are all just going all in as part of a pre arranged decision to go all in on the first hand. It is more likely that everyone has two random cards then that they all have good hands.
The last point was that it would be smart to fold if during the first hand two players went all in during the WSOP main. I disagree completely because there first off would have been multiple raises and you would have chips in the pot already. Also against two most likely top end hands you are about 70% to win the pot. Against exactly two suited connector hands where you have neither of the suits in your hand the other two players suited connecters don’t overlap each other you are still 58% in this ridiculously unlikely scenario. To sum up you are going to be about 70% to have a 3x starting stack, I call in this scenario 100% of the time.
I hope I’ve explained this well.
So let's say it goes fold/fold/fold/all in/all in/all in... where is your calling point in a decent sized tourney. I.e how many all ins would you call?
Quote: SOOPOOI think I like Gordon's response. Something fishy must be going on for the 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th guys going all in.
This is sort of like the question of would you bet on a yo after 17 yo's in a row. The premise is so outlandish you can't rationally answer the question.
I'd say a better question to ask a more realistic question, like would you go in first hand of WSOP main event if two people shoved first hand and you have AA in big blind? A novice like me would call. Negreanu, Chan, Hellmuth instafold. They know over time they can beat most tables. I know over time I get beaten.
There are a lot of unbelievably bad players in the WSOP. But there are also way more excellent players than there used to be.
I'm speculating, as I don't follow these things well. But I'd guess at least the top 1,000 players are not separated by all that much.
So, even as a top player, you still need to beat a lot of people who either you have a small edge against, or who have an edge on you. You can't really pass up big edges, in my estimation. Though I dislike tourneys and don't know the strat very well.
I'd be disinclined to ever fold AA pre myself. While I'm better, even at tourneys, than some rando, those top 1,000 would all be better than me by a decent margin.
Also, I think Axel's point is valid. Tourneys consume, not only a lot of time but a lot of mental, emotional and physical energy. If you fold AA, then play the tourney for 2 days, then bust out, you've lost 2 full days of work and really 3 or 4 probably because you'll likely need a day off.
I'd be much more likely to fold AA in a scenario like this on the final table if I was short. Like, if I was pretty much guaranteed to jump 4 spots in the pay table or something.
A factor in that is that I give zero effs about winning or getting a bracelet or whatever.
Mathematically yes, its unlikely when dealing with random hands. At this point we are no longer be dealing with just mathematics. It's no longer just a random hand, everyone actually has the information about their hand. It's much more likely if somebody's actually willing to put all their chips in on their first hand that they do in fact have the other Aces. The question may no longer be is it mathematically probable they have the other aces, but does it make logical sense if someone has the other aces. Does this not make sense?Quote: PokerGrinderThis is very unlikely as it is very hard for someone to have AA when you hold two of them already.
Quote: RigondeauxAxl was saying it might be like a sit n go. What if it was a 2 table SnG? 3?
So let's say it goes fold/fold/fold/all in/all in/all in... where is your calling point in a decent sized tourney. I.e how many all ins would you call?
There are a lot of unbelievably bad players in the WSOP. But there are also way more excellent players than there used to be.
I'm speculating, as I don't follow these things well. But I'd guess at least the top 1,000 players are not separated by all that much.
So, even as a top player, you still need to beat a lot of people who either you have a small edge against, or who have an edge on you. You can't really pass up big edges, in my estimation. Though I dislike tourneys and don't know the strat very well.
I'd be disinclined to ever fold AA pre myself. While I'm better, even at tourneys, than some rando, those top 1,000 would all be better than me by a decent margin.
Also, I think Axel's point is valid. Tourneys consume, not only a lot of time but a lot of mental, emotional and physical energy. If you fold AA, then play the tourney for 2 days, then bust out, you've lost 2 full days of work and really 3 or 4 probably because you'll likely need a day off.
I'd be much more likely to fold AA in a scenario like this on the final table if I was short. Like, if I was pretty much guaranteed to jump 4 spots in the pay table or something.
A factor in that is that I give zero effs about winning or getting a bracelet or whatever.
About 3 weeks ago on a 1/3 cash game I had QQ and it went something like this fold, fold, fold, raise to 10, I raise to 40, all in for about 100, fold, all in for a few hundred , big stack of the table calls the 250ish in big blind. $10 raiser called his last 70 or so. Action on me, I am looking at these bets. It is a 6 way pot with multiple side pots. I am like WTF and muck my QQ. turns out it was AA, vs AK suited, vs small pocket pair, vs garbage like 8 ten, and JJ. the 8-10 won part of the pot with a straight and JJ in the big blind won most of it with flopped trips.
Hands like this happen occasionally but never seen a 9 way all in.
Quote: AxelWolfIt's much more likely if somebody's actually willing to put all their chips in on their first hand that they do in fact have the other Aces.
But then you’re also saying 7 other people all were willing to put all their money in the pot, and none of them had even one ace.
That's a good point. I guess it would really depend on how the action went down. Somebody mention the odds of the aces winning in a multi-way hand. Is that number based off random hands? Was anybody thinking that in a situation like this you're going to be up against hands like 9:10 suited. I would certainly like to have somebody calculate a situation with probable hands that could come up where everybody would go all in. In that case you might be in a situation where people are practically drawing dead. We can start to assume everyone's holding combinations of Aces, Kings , Queens, and Jacks.Quote: michael99000But then you’re also saying 7 other people all were willing to put all their money in the pot, and none of them had even one ace.
The entire hand seems mathematically improbable for everybody willing to risk all their chips on the first hand.
If it is a cash game, and you felt like gambling for the big pot, then it would be a huge gamble, but you could make the case for it, still probably fold.
I can't see any good logic for doing this in cash game. I guess if you're short on bankrolling this is going to bust you and you can't play anymore it might be the right thing.Quote: GandlerFolding would guarantee that you stay in while at least 8 others get eliminated. Easy fold for a tournament.
If it is a cash game, and you felt like gambling for the big pot, then it would be a huge gamble, but you could make the case for it, still probably fold.
Quote: AxelWolfI can't see any good logic for doing this in cash game. I guess if you're short on bankrolling this is going to bust you and you can't play anymore it might be the right thing.
Yeah, I don't really have to get into any sophisticated (or unsophisticated) math to know the pot odds are on my side with this one. No matter how you cut it, if everyone has an equal amount of money and I have AA, I would be expected to profit.
As far as the tournament is concerned, I would still call it, but that's probably why I'm not a poker player. I like the potential advantage that such a stack early on would give me in being able to shove other players around.
Quote: Mission146Yeah, I don't really have to get into any sophisticated (or unsophisticated) math to know the pot odds are on my side with this one. No matter how you cut it, if everyone has an equal amount of money and I have AA, I would be expected to profit.
.
By “expected to profit”, do you mean just that your odds of winning are better than the other 8 people? Or that you think your odds of winning are greater than 50% ?
In my mind, expecting something to happen means there’s a greater than 50/50 chance of it happening . In this case, your odds of winning are better than everyone else’s but still less than 50%
Quote: winningwizard$500 buy in tournament 500 people.....you table has 10 seats. very first hand of the tournament, you are big blind and you have AA....entire table is all you call or fold? its obvious call for me, but is there anyone out there that would fold?
You are getting better than 9-1 for your all in call. You will win more than 31% of the time against 9 random opponents who showdown to the river. I would make this call.
Quote: michael99000By “expected to profit”, do you mean just that your odds of winning are better than the other 8 people? Or that you think your odds of winning are greater than 50% ?
In my mind, expecting something to happen means there’s a greater than 50/50 chance of it happening . In this case, your odds of winning are better than everyone else’s but still less than 50%
Expectation refers to the long term. If you were in this situation over and over again, would you expect a net win or net loss? Mission is saying he’d expect a net win.
Quote: RSExpectation refers to the long term. If you were in this situation over and over again, would you expect a net win or net loss? Mission is saying he’d expect a net win.
I understood that.
So yes, if you call over and over again in this situation than in the long run you’ll win often enough to make it a good play.
But how about when you’re in a very unusual situation, like this one, that will probably never present itself again. Doesn’t that have to be taken into account? This is a one time event, with about a 26% chance of winning. You’ll never have the chance to play it out enough times to see the expected profit. So you have to consider do you want to make a play that has a 74% chance of knocking you out
Quote: beachbumbabsSo, if you fold, someone else is going to knock out 8 or maybe 7 others. Unless there's a big bounty, why not let them all kill each other? I'd fold.
Even if there is a big bounty, against 7 or 8 other hands Aces cannot be a favorite to win. There are simply too many possibilities. Think of it like playing Omaha; the more cards are in play the more likely it is that something will connect to make at least a five card pat hand if one is possible. Roughly 2 in 5 five card boards pairs. With 16 cards in play it is almost assured someone will have three of a kind if the board pairs.
Also, the bounty doesn't matter for the tournament position. Yes, it is nice to collect the cash bonus but if I am a decent player I would rather get heads up against a deep stack that got lucky than grind my way through a field to face two or three good players at the end.
It doesn't matter if you are ever in the exact same situation agian. It's all the unusual situations added together over your lifetime that count. If you are gambling there's lot's of unusual situations that come up(they may not look unusual but they actually are). Are you going to keep tossing away value because you think it's an unusual situation? It's a slippery slope. Next thing you know you are not holding unusual VP hands that you should, playing unusual hands on table games wrong, and so on, and so on.Quote: michael99000I understood that.
So yes, if you call over and over again in this situation than in the long run you’ll win often enough to make it a good play.
But how about when you’re in a very unusual situation, like this one, that will probably never present itself again. Doesn’t that have to be taken into account? This is a one time event, with about a 26% chance of winning. You’ll never have the chance to play it out enough times to see the expected profit. So you have to consider do you want to make a play that has a 74% chance of knocking you out
Win or lose it's nice knowing that happened while making the correct play.
Quote: michael99000I understood that.
So yes, if you call over and over again in this situation than in the long run you’ll win often enough to make it a good play.
But how about when you’re in a very unusual situation, like this one, that will probably never present itself again. Doesn’t that have to be taken into account? This is a one time event, with about a 26% chance of winning. You’ll never have the chance to play it out enough times to see the expected profit. So you have to consider do you want to make a play that has a 74% chance of knocking you out
I'm basing my response on the assumption shoving with AA pre is +EV.
So what happens when you're in some other unusual situation? Do you think, "Ah, I can only do this once, maybe twice, then never again. I shouldn't do it!" No, of course not. Every situation is an isolated event, but it's the culmination of all events that matter. I don't remember the exact situation, but once on 100-play VP (or maybe 50-play? I don't remember), I got dealt 4 to the royal and I said, "Watch, I bet I'm not gonna hit any royals!" My friend offered odds on that giving me an advantage and I took it. Am I ever gonna have that situation come up again? That particular situation, no.
But a few years ago, I was playing some single line VP and my (other) friend came over to me and I said how horribly I'd been running and that I hadn't converted 2 pair into a FH in what seemed like forever. He offered me good odds (I think 11-to-1) on my next 2pair not turning into a FH. I'm clearly the underdog (less likely to win) but it was +EV for me, so I took the bet. I actually took the bet I think 10 times or so....and lost each one. :(
Remember when Mayweather was fighting that retard from Ireland? Again, once in a lifetime situation. That specific situation, or any situation similar to it, isn't too likely to come up again. Even though I was betting on the favorite (Mayweather), do you think I thought, "Well shoot, if I lose this bet, then it's unlikely that I get more bets like this. So I just won't bet it!" ? No, of course not. I bet a decent amount on Mayweather.
I'm sure I've made a bunch of different bets that were all very unique and unlikely to come up again. But that's no reason to not make the bets (assuming they're +EV). If I had a 25% chance to win 9x my bet, or whatever the case is in the poker example (assuming cash game), then yeah, I'm gonna make that bet. This time it might be some poker hand, next time it might be some team wins the super bowl, or whatever else. If it's +EV, then you should bet it (assuming it's within your risk tolerance).
A caveat, of course, is if this is a tournament, where strategy and EV are very different.
If that’s how you analyze poker situations, then you will be a long term poker loser. Hella +EV spot and its an insta call in a cash game.Quote: michael99000I understood that.
So yes, if you call over and over again in this situation than in the long run you’ll win often enough to make it a good play.
But how about when you’re in a very unusual situation, like this one, that will probably never present itself again. Doesn’t that have to be taken into account? This is a one time event, with about a 26% chance of winning. You’ll never have the chance to play it out enough times to see the expected profit. So you have to consider do you want to make a play that has a 74% chance of knocking you out
Quote: michael99000By “expected to profit”, do you mean just that your odds of winning are better than the other 8 people? Or that you think your odds of winning are greater than 50% ?
In my mind, expecting something to happen means there’s a greater than 50/50 chance of it happening . In this case, your odds of winning are better than everyone else’s but still less than 50%
I mean that, on average (probably barring another AA) you have a greater probability to win the pot than any other individual person. You should have the best probability to win the pot, but it is under 50% in almost all cases.
Suppose your probability of winning is 20% and there are nine people in the pot (yourself included) and each has $1,000 in the pot. That’s $9,000 total, so you either profit $8,000 or lose $1,000.
(8000 * .2) - ($1000 * .8) = $800
Ergo, an expected profit of $800.
Quote: Mission146I mean that, on average (probably barring another AA) you have a greater probability to win the pot than any other individual person. You should have the best probability to win the pot, but it is under 50% in almost all cases.
Suppose your probability of winning is 20% and there are nine people in the pot (yourself included) and each has $1,000 in the pot. That’s $9,000 total, so you either profit $8,000 or lose $1,000.
(8000 * .2) - ($1000 * .8) = $800
Ergo, an expected profit of $800.
Yes, but if you are not playing for cash (tournament like this example), the most likely event is to be knocked out of the tournament. Whereas folding keeps your stack, and keeps you in the game while many others get knocked out (making you last longer, and getting better prizes).
Also, even though this is hypothetical, if everyone ahead of you went all in, there is a good chance that they all have good hands (very little chance of a bluff after maybe the first spot), so there are at least 7 very strong hands (possibly another AA). For a whole table to go all in, there would be maybe one bluff, followed by all very strong hands, or all very strong hands. I can't see how in a tournament it would ever be worth calling.
I have never seen 9 players all go all in, but for that to happen, everyone would have to be very confident with their hands (meaning you are going against many strong hands, possibly another AA).
Quote: GandlerYes, but if you are not playing for cash (tournament like this example), the most likely event is to be knocked out of the tournament. Whereas folding keeps your stack, and keeps you in the game while many others get knocked out (making you last longer, and getting better prizes).
Also, even though this is hypothetical, if everyone ahead of you went all in, there is a good chance that they all have good hands (very little chance of a bluff after maybe the first spot), so there are at least 7 very strong hands (possibly another AA). For a whole table to go all in, there would be maybe one bluff, followed by all very strong hands, or all very strong hands. I can't see how in a tournament it would ever be worth calling.
I have never seen 9 players all go all in, but for that to happen, everyone would have to be very confident with their hands (meaning you are going against many strong hands, possibly another AA).
Isn't this really one where it depends on the size of the tournament? If it's a one table, 'Tournament," with the Top Three getting paid, then yes, insta-fold. If it's the Main Event, then weighing the potential costs and benefits, I like the advantage that having a relatively big stack gives me early in the tournament and feel like that advantage outweighs the high probability of being immediately knocked out of the tournament.
Of course, much of that is because I very much expect to get knocked out without cashing if I fold, anyway.
The big stack would give me the ability to weather the storm of blind increases and play conservatively, at times, while using my stack to attempt to aggressively push other players off of their blinds and into folds at other times.
I agree with your position that they all likely have good hands, except maybe the first to shove. My counter to that position is that, barring another AA, I likely have the best hand.
Quote: Mission146Isn't this really one where it depends on the size of the tournament? If it's a one table, 'Tournament," with the Top Three getting paid, then yes, insta-fold. If it's the Main Event, then weighing the potential costs and benefits, I like the advantage that having a relatively big stack gives me early in the tournament and feel like that advantage outweighs the high probability of being immediately knocked out of the tournament.
Of course, much of that is because I very much expect to get knocked out without cashing if I fold, anyway.
The big stack would give me the ability to weather the storm of blind increases and play conservatively, at times, while using my stack to attempt to aggressively push other players off of their blinds and into folds at other times.
I agree with your position that they all likely have good hands, except maybe the first to shove. My counter to that position is that, barring another AA, I likely have the best hand.
AA is always the best starting hand for Hold Em. But, still the most likely event is to lose, especially going against 8 hands (at least 7 of which are also very high value hands, not far behind AA, and possibly another AA).
I don't think we are going to agree. In tournaments I think the best answer is to be conservative in the scenario. If I was last to act, I would fold without giving it a second though. Yes, it sucks folding good hands, but that is sometimes what it takes to stay in.
Quote: Mission146Isn't this really one where it depends on the size of the tournament? If it's a one table, 'Tournament," with the Top Three getting paid, then yes, insta-fold. If it's the Main Event, then weighing the potential costs and benefits, I like the advantage that having a relatively big stack gives me early in the tournament and feel like that advantage outweighs the high probability of being immediately knocked out of the tournament.
Of course, much of that is because I very much expect to get knocked out without cashing if I fold, anyway.
The big stack would give me the ability to weather the storm of blind increases and play conservatively, at times, while using my stack to attempt to aggressively push other players off of their blinds and into folds at other times.
I agree with your position that they all likely have good hands, except maybe the first to shove. My counter to that position is that, barring another AA, I likely have the best hand.
https://ibb.co/MVfGzq0
I am not sure if the image is displaying properly, but that link shows one very real possibility.
I use
https://wizardofodds.com/games/texas-hold-em/calculator/
Its a good way to calculate different possibilities.
Quote: GandlerAA is always the best starting hand for Hold Em. But, still the most likely event is to lose, especially going against 8 hands (at least 7 of which are also very high value hands, not far behind AA, and possibly another AA).
I don't think we are going to agree. In tournaments I think the best answer is to be conservative in the scenario. If I was last to act, I would fold without giving it a second though. Yes, it sucks folding good hands, but that is sometimes what it takes to stay in.
I'm afraid your first sentence is incorrect, using this:
https://wizardofodds.com/games/texas-hold-em/calculator/
Do the following hands:
Hand 1: Aces
Hand 2: Aces
Hand 3: 5h6h
Hand 4: 10sJs
Hand 5: JcQc
Hand 6: 6d7d
Hand 7: 3s4s
Hand 8: QdJd
Hand 9: 9h9s
Hand 10: KsKc
In this scenario, every single hand has a greater probability to win than two the two hands of Aces combined, so Aces are far from the best hand in this scenario. In fact, KK, 99 and 5h6h (!?) all have a better probability than either of the two hands of aces do individually of winning OR tying. This remains basically true even if you eliminate the 3s4s hand entirely! That's true mostly because it improves the probability of a straight for most of the other hands.
I even found a scenario where AA doesn't have the highest probability of winning even absent another AA hand, though both of the other two aces have to be somewhere. I don't feel like typing it out, but it looks pretty easy to replicate if you want to call me on it and I will type it out.
Oh, hell, let's type it out...it's probably one of the most conceivable ways it could happen anyway:
Hand 1: AcAd
Hand 2: 5h6h
Hand 3: 10sJs
Hand 4: JcQc
Hand 5: 10hJh
Hand 6: AsQs
Hand 7: QdJd
Hand 8: 9h9s
Hand 9: AhQh
Hand 10: KsKc
KK and 5h6h both have it better than AA in this scenario. Let's call 5h6h the bluff hand and the rest of this at least becomes theoretically possible, but in a different order, of course. The key is no other kings are out AND there are few low cards (just the Ace) cutting off potential straights for 5h6h. 5h6h would be even better if they weren't being punished by the pair of nines! The two J-10 hands cannot win, they can only tie.
The pair of aces cannot turn into a straight, the queens and jacks are all out, so it's impossible. Interestingly enough, things could actually be worse for the aces because I inadvertently left the aces the most cards that could result in a flush! The ace of hearts to be in the pair would be worse for the aces.
Like I said, it would depend on the size of the tournament and how I felt folding would impact my probability to win or cash. There's no way I would fold it in the Main Event, I'd be looking at that kind of stack as my best chance to make it to the money.
Quote: Gandler
https://ibb.co/MVfGzq0
I am not sure if the image is displaying properly, but that link shows one very real possibility.
I use
https://wizardofodds.com/games/texas-hold-em/calculator/
Its a good way to calculate different possibilities.
Nicely done! I think my win probabilities were higher, but my tie probabilities were WAY lower on the ones I did.
Quote: Mission146I'm afraid your first sentence is incorrect, using this:
https://wizardofodds.com/games/texas-hold-em/calculator/
Do the following hands:
Hand 1: Aces
Hand 2: Aces
Hand 3: 5h6h
Hand 4: 10sJs
Hand 5: JcQc
Hand 6: 6d7d
Hand 7: 3s4s
Hand 8: QdJd
Hand 9: 9h9s
Hand 10: KsKc
In this scenario, every single hand has a greater probability to win than two the two hands of Aces combined, so Aces are far from the best hand in this scenario. In fact, KK, 99 and 5h6h (!?) all have a better probability than either of the two hands of aces do individually of winning OR tying. This remains basically true even if you eliminate the 3s4s hand entirely! That's true mostly because it improves the probability of a straight for most of the other hands.
I even found a scenario where AA doesn't have the highest probability of winning even absent another AA hand, though both of the other two aces have to be somewhere. I don't feel like typing it out, but it looks pretty easy to replicate if you want to call me on it and I will type it out.
Oh, hell, let's type it out...it's probably one of the most conceivable ways it could happen anyway:
Hand 1: AcAd
Hand 2: 5h6h
Hand 3: 10sJs
Hand 4: JcQc
Hand 5: 10hJh
Hand 6: AsQs
Hand 7: QdJd
Hand 8: 9h9s
Hand 9: AhQh
Hand 10: KsKc
KK and 5h6h both have it better than AA in this scenario. Let's call 5h6h the bluff hand and the rest of this at least becomes theoretically possible, but in a different order, of course. The key is no other kings are out AND there are few low cards (just the Ace) cutting off potential straights for 5h6h. 5h6h would be even better if they weren't being punished by the pair of nines! The two J-10 hands cannot win, they can only tie.
The pair of aces cannot turn into a straight, the queens and jacks are all out, so it's impossible. Interestingly enough, things could actually be worse for the aces because I inadvertently left the aces the most cards that could result in a flush! The ace of hearts to be in the pair would be worse for the aces.
Like I said, it would depend on the size of the tournament and how I felt folding would impact my probability to win or cash. There's no way I would fold it in the Main Event, I'd be looking at that kind of stack as my best chance to make it to the money.
Let me rephrase, not knowing any other hand at the table, AA is the best starting hand. But, I agree, that is a great tool for measuring different possibilities, which is why folding with AA is also not always a terrible choice if you have an idea of what other hands may be out there (and in this scenario, it would mostly be strong hands).
Quote: Gandler
Let me rephrase, not knowing any other hand at the table, AA is the best starting hand. But, I agree, that is a great tool for measuring different possibilities, which is why folding with AA is also not always a terrible choice if you have an idea of what other hands may be out there (and in this scenario, it would mostly be strong hands).
Fascinating either way.
I would suggest that poker is largely about knowing one's abilities; I know that my abilities are very limited, particularly compared to who I would be facing in the Main Event. If I had a seat at the table, it would be because I won it for free somehow. Dead in the water. Take the number 1, divide it by the number of entrants, and my probability of cashing (much less winning) is substantially less than that going in. My chances are too infinitesimal to be worth guessing a probability for.
However, busting out an entire table with the first hand (or splitting with one other hand) is part of that probability and greatly increases my overall probability, in my opinion. If I fold in that situation, I'm screwed anyway. I'm going to lose and I'm going to fail to cash. If I win in this scenario, I've got a chance. I've got an automatic advantage over at least some of the other players at future tables.
AA is the only hand that truly concerns me. Even if all of the aces were out (but not another AA) I think I'm giving myself the best chance by shoving.
I don't think we automatically disagree with one another. I would probably agree that for some exceptionally skilled players, they give themselves a better chance to win the tournament (or cash) by folding and living to fight another day. I'm just saying I'm not one of those players.
Quote: Mission146Fascinating either way.
I would suggest that poker is largely about knowing one's abilities; I know that my abilities are very limited, particularly compared to who I would be facing in the Main Event. If I had a seat at the table, it would be because I won it for free somehow. Dead in the water. Take the number 1, divide it by the number of entrants, and my probability of cashing (much less winning) is substantially less than that going in. My chances are too infinitesimal to be worth guessing a probability for.
However, busting out an entire table with the first hand (or splitting with one other hand) is part of that probability and greatly increases my overall probability, in my opinion. If I fold in that situation, I'm screwed anyway. I'm going to lose and I'm going to fail to cash. If I win in this scenario, I've got a chance. I've got an automatic advantage over at least some of the other players at future tables.
AA is the only hand that truly concerns me. Even if all of the aces were out (but not another AA) I think I'm giving myself the best chance by shoving.
I don't think we automatically disagree with one another. I would probably agree that for some exceptionally skilled players, they give themselves a better chance to win the tournament (or cash) by folding and living to fight another day. I'm just saying I'm not one of those players.
I don't disagree, actually that is pretty close to what I said in my first reply post. I personally would fold (and would advise others to do so). However, it could be argued that for a riskier player, there could be justification for shoving and going for the payout or going bust. I personally would not, and I would not advise it, but I do understand where you are coming from, especially if you are talking cash games.
Everyone has a play style, and to each their own. But, as a matter of personal play, and giving advice to the OP, I still would have to insist on folding in this situation. But, you are making solid defenses for your strategy so I can respect that, at the end of the day it is all about having fun (most likely you are going to lose eventually anyway in a tournament, there will almost always be better players, and even if you are a great player, you can very easily have some bad beats at any point, or just draw dead all night), so if shoving with a good hand is what is best for you, I can respect that.
of course, depending on the other players hands, 6 7 suited could be sitting with like a 22%+ chance to win.Quote: RSWouldn’t suited connectors be getting good enough pot odds to make a call if there are like 6-7+ before you? (I’m assuming cash game.)
