limping with AA...

Gholimoli

Just wondering about some situations where ppl consider limping with AA.
Apart from the obvious UTG or EP open limp, would you consider limping with AA after a limper in EP and if so under what circumstances?
For example say UTG limps and you are UTG +1 .would you consider limping here with AA?if so why and what are you hoping for?
Do you consider what stage of the tourney you’re in?
How about if UTG makes a standard raise and your UTG+1 .would you consider just flat calling the raise? obviously the bigger the raise before you, the less you have to worry about people behind you just calling the raise with crap so you can just flat call the raise to trap UTG or hope that some one will try the squeeze play on you.
Any other suggestions, comments about this?

Culchie

Gholimoli wrote:

Just considering some situations where ppl consider limping with AA.
Apart from the obvious UTG or EP open limp, would you consider limping with AA after a limper in EP and if so under what circumstances?
For example say UTG limps and you are UTG +1 .would you consider limping here with AA?if so why and what are you hoping for?
Do you consider what stage of the tourney you’re in?
How about if UTG makes a standard raise and your UTG+1 .would you consider just flat calling the raise? obviously the bigger the raise before you, the less you have to worry about people behind you just calling the raise with crap so you can just flat call the raise to trap UTG or hope that some one will try the squeeze play on you.
Any other suggestions, comments about this?

I think we talk too much about AA, it would be great to have a discussion on suited connectors or pocket pair strategy in relation to position, table image etc... (not having a pop Gholi, just an general observation)

I won't comment on cash play as I need to put on my L plates soon, but in tourneys, it's definitely about getting maximum value.

I love Nicky's example of limping with AA at a certain point on the tourney he described on the other thread. Blinds were high, couple of limpers, he knew that one, if not two shortstacks were going to have a go at this pot with an all in move. If the time is right I'll sometimes limp UTG+1 as well if the pot has been opened...if you're sure someone is going to make a move at the pot.

You need to know the table dynamics to limp, you'll rarely being making a mistake raising every time.
You need to able to interpret what the rest of the table thinks your raise or limp (or call) will mean.

If they get raised or re-raised in a tourney, I will always re-raise again. I don't care at this point of I've got AA stamped to my head, there's a nice pot in the middle at this stage, if he folds to the re-raise so be it.
I'm sure in a deep stacked tournament, this always re-raise theory can be contradicted, but in your Joe Soap, 6 hour tourney 90% of us play, that's my move.

NeVeR

I would never limp with AA because when i have done in the past people have hit big on the flop and beat me 2 examples

1st Me AA. Other guy K3 I limp and he was BB so he just called.

Flop 3J3 i bet he calls. turn 8 and river 3.

2nd,
Me AA other guy 10 5
i limp he again was BB checks.

Flop 2 4 10 , i bet he calls. turn 5 , i bet he moves all in , ..

---

But there are some cases where win when limping. But you never remember them.

ntlbell

I have to agree I'd love to hear more on meduim to low pocket pairs position vs blinds etc as I have alot of trouble playing 22-77

Gholi if you search there should be a ton of threads on limping with AA

ianmc38

I would raise from UTG and UTG+1 85% of the time.

The one time i would limp is if I was at a table of super aggressive players that were raising every hand preflop. I'd then come back over the top of their raise. It's never advisable IMHO to limp from UTG/UTG+1 as if th whole table limps then you're no longer a big favourite to win the hand and everyone in mid-late position will be getting good pot odds to see a chepa flop.

In cash games I always raise as the nature of thsoe games is that people will often call with any 2 face cards, any 2 suited connectors etc.

Late tourney play I may also limp in as well.

ionapaul

Last night in the Fitz double chance I was WAAAAAAY off my A-game and had a terrible night, capped off by this display....

I was down to 1650 chips, blinds were 150/300. I had pushed all-in twice during the last 1 1/2 orbits, the first time with K8 when button+1 and the very next hand with 88, which I showed. Picked up the blinds both times. A few minutes later Richie dealt me AA UTG+1, UTG folds and I thought about pushing, then for some reason decided to raise to 900 (stupid move, very obvious I had something, should've decided to push)...however, my brain not working properly I flung the 1000 chip in WITHOUT saying raise...just a call, but everyone knew I had something! Three other limpers, all smirking at me. Flop of 7 5 4 with two hearts, BB bets 400 and I know he has a piece of it and will probably call me, I push my remaining 1350, others fold, he calls with 7 6 and gets an 8 on the turn for his straight and another 7 on the river for good measure! I didn't deserve to win the pot, playing so badly and not thinking properly about my actions. I should have pushed with the AA in that spot and hoped for a single caller.

slegs

surely limping with AA is not advisable in almost all circumstances except the one outlined above with Nicky maybe where you are shrotstacked out of the game.

even utg do you not want some info as to who has a hand so you can see how to play the flop....

the information received may mean a bigger return or even more importantly a saving on say q or k sets or flushes from the flop

id always like to have that information even if I may decide to discard it

charlesanto

Limping with a strong hand is a great move when playing against aggressive players. Firstly you're gonna get raised so you get your chance to re-raise. But just as important, assuming that you get to show your hand you will notice that the agg. players are less likley to raise you when you limp into future pots. Obviously once is enough to make this move. You may sarcrife some chips early tournement to gain lots more as the blinds go up !

padser

The only time I would consider limping with AA would be in the situation where you are sure (or 85% sure) someone will take a stab at the pot. If you flat call with AA and end up in multiway pot you are effectively turning what was the nuts into a drawing hand.

As culchie said you can never go far wrong with AA in a tournie by raising big with it.

*also a point that I often think is missed about AA is that people often moan about 'raising with AA and not getting any action'. AA will get cracked a significant portion of the time when you do get action, so stop moaning when you pick up the pot (albeit smaller) with zero risk.

Degag

I always limp with AA unless there was been a moderate raise where i'll go over the top or 3 or more callers.....

Culchie

Tackle69 wrote:

I always limp with AA unless there was been a moderate raise where i'll go over the top or 3 or more callers.....

I'm on tenderhooks.

jd

Surely you would have to limp x% of the time with AA, otherwise someone can think well he limped, therefore he dosn't have AA (x could be very small)

5starpool

Tackle69 wrote:

I always limp with AA unless there was been a moderate raise where i'll go over the top or 3 or more callers.....

I bet you have a lot of 'Some idiot cracked my aces with xx' stories to tell. Always limp with Aces? Mother of suffering Chr... (etc).

Personally I hate limping with Aces, but there is a time and a place for it. Usually when you are fairly sure there is going to be a live raise, or when there are shortstacked players, or when you know player X cannot resist a button raise with all those limpers in the pot. When none of these circumstances are likely I always raise. How much I raise depends on a number of factors, but raise I do. It is usually a calculated risk not raising, and if your calculations are out or based on a too-clever policy of 'always limp' then you are liable to get outdraw more often than not.

5starpool

Culchie wrote:

I'm on tenderhooks.

Tenderhooks

Surely you mean tenterhooks? Unles they massage, carress and love your back....;)

Hectorjelly

NeVeR wrote:

I would never limp with AA because when i have done in the past people have hit big on the flop and beat me 2 examples

1st Me AA. Other guy K3 I limp and he was BB so he just called.

Flop 3J3 i bet he calls. turn 8 and river 3.

2nd,
Me AA other guy 10 5
i limp he again was BB checks.

Flop 2 4 10 , i bet he calls. turn 5 , i bet he moves all in , ..

---

But there are some cases where win when limping. But you never remember them.

Both of those hands the main problem was you overplayed your hand post flop. Hand 1 dont bet that flop. Hand 2 fold to the all in on the turn.

Culchie

5starpool wrote:

I bet you have a lot of 'Some idiot cracked my aces with xx' stories to tell. Always limp with Aces? Mother of suffering Chr... (etc).

Personally I hate limping with Aces, but there is a time and a place for it. Usually when you are fairly sure there is going to be a live raise, or when there are shortstacked players, or when you know player X cannot resist a button raise with all those limpers in the pot. When none of these circumstances are likely I always raise. How much I raise depends on a number of factors, but raise I do. It is usually a calculated risk not raising, and if your calculations are out or based on a too-clever policy of 'always limp' then you are liable to get outdraw more often than not.

We're of similar thinking methinks. We'll have to wait and hear the great story about never raising with aces now.

DeVore

I rarely limp with aces. In a cash game yes perhaps. On a highly volotile table where my EP limp (and probably my reraise push) wont be respected or noticed even, then yes but otherwise, no. Alternatively on SB or Button when its folded to me, but even then I'd prefer to represent a steal unless the player is very passive.

Limping with aces takes a lot of skill imho. Once the flop comes down you have a wide range of possible hands out against you. You need to be able to drop them on the suspicion of someone having a hand which is beyond a lot of players. You need to be able to read the "texture" of the flop and strongly base your decision on that imho.
a flop of Q 6 3 rainbow is lovely. A flop of JT8 all hearts is a disaster and you need to drop the Aces there and then most likely (presuming you had a moderate number of limpers). Too many people simply can't do that.

Culchie, I agree with you in the sense that I think we discuss AA too often and not more marginal hands. Though you are free to start threads on those yourself you know

DeV.

Culchie

DeVore wrote:

Culchie, I agree with you in the sense that I think we discuss AA too often and not more marginal hands. Though you are free to start threads on those yourself you know

DeV.

OK ... I shall do that, it will be a limited range though;)

Jaden

AA can be your best friend or worst enemy, depending on how you treat them. Aces are not a magic key to the pot. Accept that sometimes they will get cracked, and sometimes all you are going to get are the blinds. If everyone else has muck, you won't get action.

The great thing about AA is that 8/10 players stop thinking when they see them. Of all the hands you can be dealt, it is the one that is easiest to spot a pattern with. How a player plays AA is often a good indicator of how they play in general.

What is is that you would wish to happen when you pick up AA? Ideally, you want to be all in pre-flop with one other player. The worst you can be in this situation is a 4:1 favourite. If you get beaten (and 19 times in a 100 you will), then take the pain like a man. So, how do you go about achieving this situation? Here are my somewhat random thoughts.

At a loose table, push, regardless of position or stack. Some muppet will call. If I get 2 callers, I'm still OK, if I get 4, ah well, at least the times I win, it will be big.

At a tighter table, a standard raise might be in order, particularly in mid or late position. This will thin out the 8,9s or J,10s type hands, and hopefully keep in the A,10+s and large PP hands.

Anyone who checks the BB with AA should be CCed (Copiously Clattered).

Unless really short stacked, and desperate to triple or quadruple up, don't limp with AA. Even then, be prepared to jam in the chips post flop as soon as possible. You've got the limper money, now don't get greedy. If someone has caught a piece of the flop, you probably don't have enough to push them off anyway.

With a big chip lead on a tight table, you may want to mix it up a bit with AA, maybe min raise. The tricky bit here is knowing when to let go of them. God, it hurts.

Heads up, against an agressive opponent, I might be tempted to limp, if I'm sure he would jam with any part of the flop hitting him.

RoundTower

Jaden wrote:

What is is that you would wish to happen when you pick up AA? Ideally, you want to be all in pre-flop with one other player.

This is only ideal if you are playing heads up, otherwise there are better situations to be in.

Jaden

I would dispute that, unless you play AA for set value. For me the risk vs reward scale is set to 2 players.

RoundTower

Jaden wrote:

I would dispute that, unless you play AA for set value. For me the risk vs reward scale is set to 2 players.

OK I set mine to win more money, not just to win this pot.

NickyOD

At a table where lots of pots are being raised and your oponents are unaware of your table image limping with Aces in EP is much better than open raising. In other positions I would moist likey make a standard raise unless I was shortstacked and needed to get cute with them. I think the trickiest spot to play aces is when its folded to you on the Button or SB. I would often limp in here which makes it dificult to play the hand post flop since you have no idea what your oponents cards are.

loosecannon

All this talk of limping with AA and no-one seems to have gone into in detail, your image at the table, i think that allied with the blind structure (presuming tourney play) and ur position should all help to make your decision about the AA.

loosecannon

oops, looks like nicky beat me to it! lol

Culchie

Culchie wrote:

I

You need to know the table dynamics to limp, you'll rarely being making a mistake raising every time.
You need to able to interpret what the rest of the table thinks your raise or limp (or call) will mean.

Image?

ahem .. post #2

DeVore

RoundTower wrote:

OK I set mine to win more money, not just to win this pot.

And in that answer lies one of the most interesting questions about tournament play (particularly versus Cash play). Not that I have an answer for it!

RT is correct, the more players in the more value for the AA player. Short of some pretty contorted hand-selections he'll always be the favourite. It might be a 20% favourite against 8 other players who are all on a range of chances from 0 to 18% or something (I havent even looked at those odds, its not very helpful nor interesting so these are my approximate %'s guesses).

However this is a tournament, if you flat line, you are dead. Bye bye. Now if you play this supposed 9-way hand a hundred times, AA comes out as the clear leader so the move is +EV (by definition). However the variance is so high that on many occasions you may find yourself crippled or out of the tournie. Should this affect your considerations?
For me it does. I want 1-2 players headsup and get them all in preflop if I can. This is the equivalent of getting them in the corner and battering them for their lunch money.

So am I a coward for not pushing my edge? Why not try and get 4 players in? I'm likely to lose to ONE of them (from my experience 4 players is where AA goes seriously underwater, 3 well chosen hands have it at 50% for sure), but long term (over the course of say 20 tournies) I'm going to quadruple up in about 8 of them. Sounds nice eh? But I'll exit the other 12 there and then (if stack are equal).

I don't have a maths answer for any of this and it really depends on how much you value your continuing survival in the tournie. The more you value it at 0 the more you head towards RT (and past him, since he says he optimally prefers 3-4 players). The more you value it highly, the more you head towards Jaden, who prefers a fairly sure win but less chips.

I don't have an answer beyond what I feel and I already know I'm a cautious tournament player. I think the levels will have a lot to do with it too (ie in a 20 minute tournie I might be less cautious then a 2-hour level tournie).

This is all just my speculation and I would love to hear what others think...

DeV.

Degag

5starpool wrote:

I bet you have a lot of 'Some idiot cracked my aces with xx' stories to tell. Always limp with Aces? Mother of suffering Chr... (etc).

Personally I hate limping with Aces, but there is a time and a place for it. Usually when you are fairly sure there is going to be a live raise, or when there are shortstacked players, or when you know player X cannot resist a button raise with all those limpers in the pot. When none of these circumstances are likely I always raise. How much I raise depends on a number of factors, but raise I do. It is usually a calculated risk not raising, and if your calculations are out or based on a too-clever policy of 'always limp' then you are liable to get outdraw more often than not.

I said i limp with aces unless......i've had too many experiences of raising with aces only for no one to call you... its not a nice feeling.... obviously if theres a raise before me, i'll reraise or if theres 2/3 callers or more so that i can reduce the chances of them being cracked, which they never have:D, not that i've been playing poker for long and gotten enough AA hands for this to happen perhaps.....In fact i've gone a long time without getting them or even KK.... I got QQ last weekend only for my oponent to turn over AA:rolleyes:

5starpool

Tackle69 wrote:

I said i limp with aces unless......i've had too many experiences of raising with aces only for no one to call you... its not a nice feeling.... obviously if theres a raise before me, i'll reraise or if theres 2/3 callers or more so that i can reduce the chances of them being cracked, which they never have:D, not that i've been playing poker for long and gotten enough AA hands for this to happen perhaps.....In fact i've gone a long time without getting them or even KK.... I got QQ last weekend only for my oponent to turn over AA:rolleyes:

You've never had aces cracked? That would explain something about your strategy if you have never lost to a rivered 6 to send you spiraling out of a big tourney. Oh the pain.

Degag

5starpool wrote:

You've never had aces cracked? That would explain something about your strategy if you have never lost to a rivered 6 to send you spiraling out of a big tourney. Oh the pain.

Worst i've ever had cracked was KK in a fairly big tourny...Called the flop from utg caught a K on the flop raised all in after a moderate raise before He had A8, along with A8 on the board. Turn came a 4 and river came an A, only card that could save him....:mad:

fuzzbox

DeVore wrote:

And in that answer lies one of the most interesting questions about tournament play (particularly versus Cash play). Not that I have an answer for it!

RT is correct, the more players in the more value for the AA player. Short of some pretty contorted hand-selections he'll always be the favourite. It might be a 20% favourite against 8 other players who are all on a range of chances from 0 to 18% or something (I havent even looked at those odds, its not very helpful nor interesting so these are my approximate %'s guesses).

However this is a tournament, if you flat line, you are dead. Bye bye. Now if you play this supposed 9-way hand a hundred times, AA comes out as the clear leader so the move is +EV (by definition). However the variance is so high that on many occasions you may find yourself crippled or out of the tournie. Should this affect your considerations?
For me it does. I want 1-2 players headsup and get them all in preflop if I can. This is the equivalent of getting them in the corner and battering them for their lunch money.

So am I a coward for not pushing my edge? Why not try and get 4 players in? I'm likely to lose to ONE of them (from my experience 4 players is where AA goes seriously underwater, 3 well chosen hands have it at 50% for sure), but long term (over the course of say 20 tournies) I'm going to quadruple up in about 8 of them. Sounds nice eh? But I'll exit the other 12 there and then (if stack are equal).

I don't have a maths answer for any of this and it really depends on how much you value your continuing survival in the tournie. The more you value it at 0 the more you head towards RT (and past him, since he says he optimally prefers 3-4 players). The more you value it highly, the more you head towards Jaden, who prefers a fairly sure win but less chips.

I don't have an answer beyond what I feel and I already know I'm a cautious tournament player. I think the levels will have a lot to do with it too (ie in a 20 minute tournie I might be less cautious then a 2-hour level tournie).

This is all just my speculation and I would love to hear what others think...

DeV.

This is limit thinking. Getting all the hands to blindly put all their money in all the way to the river, with you holding AA is long term +EV.

However, the reality is that this never happens, and in true Darwin style, the fittest hands survive past the flop and turn, and your equity Vs those fittest hands is usually not as high as it would be Vs a team of random hands.

Also - players dont play random hands (well thats not always true). They tend to play the better hands.

Given that this is the case, you are far better attempting to get a lot of money from one/two players, rather than a lot of money from a lot of players (or even a little money from a lot of players)