AA and KK - only worth playing for set value on vc?

Tackle

AA and KK cracked within three hands of each other by the same villain, after I'd being going well this morning.
The villain is loose. I have him in my notes as "went all in with 1010 on a KQx flop after I had raised with AK" and "couldn't lay down an unpaired AQ". Had to call him with that background information.

AA and KK have cost me a fortune. If I stick them in preflop, i'm running about evens (which is bad enough in itself), but whenever I see a flop to hopefully make a few quid out of them I usually take a big hit.

From now on I'm playing them for set value or taking down small pots with them, AA and KK are a COMPLETE FÚCKING JOKE on vc.
And you can quote me on that.


[Aug 8 10:04:25] : Hand Start.
[Aug 8 10:04:25] : Seat 2 : BritLion10 has $21.94
[Aug 8 10:04:25] : Seat 3 : timus has $50.29
[Aug 8 10:04:25] : Seat 4 : kerberos has $23.73
[Aug 8 10:04:25] : Seat 5 : mikeemike has $168.49
[Aug 8 10:04:25] : Seat 6 : Tacklef has $137.06
[Aug 8 10:04:25] : BritLion10 is the dealer.
[Aug 8 10:04:25] : timus posted small blind.
[Aug 8 10:04:26] : kerberos posted big blind.
[Aug 8 10:04:26] : Game [52079] started with 5 players.
[Aug 8 10:04:26] : Dealing Hole Cards.
[Aug 8 10:04:26] : Seat 6 : Tacklef has Kd Kc
[Aug 8 10:04:28] : mikeemike called $0.50
[Aug 8 10:04:39] : Tacklef called $0.50 and raised $2
[Aug 8 10:04:42] : BritLion10 called $2.50
[Aug 8 10:04:42] : timus did not respond and is folded
[Aug 8 10:04:44] : kerberos called $2
[Aug 8 10:04:46] : mikeemike called $2
[Aug 8 10:04:46] : Dealing flop.
[Aug 8 10:04:46] : Board cards [6s Tc Jh]
[Aug 8 10:04:52] : kerberos bet $21.23 and is All-in
[Aug 8 10:04:56] : mikeemike folded.
[Aug 8 10:05:01] : Tacklef called $21.23
[Aug 8 10:05:04] : BritLion10 folded.
[Aug 8 10:05:05] : Showdown!
[Aug 8 10:05:05] : Seat 6 : Tacklef has Kd Kc
[Aug 8 10:05:07] : Seat 4 : kerberos has Ts Js
[Aug 8 10:05:07] : Seat 6 : Tacklef has Kd Kc
[Aug 8 10:05:13] : Board cards [6s Tc Jh 4d 9d]
[Aug 8 10:05:13] : Seat 4 : kerberos has Ts Js
[Aug 8 10:05:13] : kerberos has Two Pair: Jacks and 10s
[Aug 8 10:05:13] : Seat 6 : Tacklef has Kd Kc
[Aug 8 10:05:13] : Tacklef has Pair: Kings
[Aug 8 10:05:13] : kerberos wins $50.08 with Two Pair: Jacks and 10s
[Aug 8 10:05:23] : Hand is over.


[Aug 8 10:07:20] : Hand Start.
[Aug 8 10:07:20] : Seat 2 : BritLion10 has $0
[Aug 8 10:07:20] : Seat 4 : kerberos has $49.58
[Aug 8 10:07:20] : Seat 5 : mikeemike has $165.32
[Aug 8 10:07:20] : Seat 6 : Tacklef has $131.71
[Aug 8 10:07:20] : Tacklef is the dealer.
[Aug 8 10:07:20] : kerberos posted small blind.
[Aug 8 10:07:21] : mikeemike posted big blind.
[Aug 8 10:07:21] : Game [52082] started with 3 players.
[Aug 8 10:07:21] : Dealing Hole Cards.
[Aug 8 10:07:21] : Seat 6 : Tacklef has Ac Ad
[Aug 8 10:07:24] : Tacklef called $0.50 and raised $1
[Aug 8 10:07:32] : kerberos called $1.25
[Aug 8 10:07:33] : mikeemike called $1
[Aug 8 10:07:34] : Dealing flop.
[Aug 8 10:07:34] : Board cards [Kc 6d 3s]
[Aug 8 10:07:37] : BritLion10 : dont be - u have to go for a fullhouse
[Aug 8 10:07:39] : kerberos checked.
[Aug 8 10:07:47] : mikeemike bet $0.50
[Aug 8 10:07:52] : Tacklef called $0.50 and raised $2
[Aug 8 10:07:58] : kerberos called $2.50
[Aug 8 10:07:58] : mikeemike folded.
[Aug 8 10:07:58] : Dealing turn.
[Aug 8 10:07:58] : Board cards [Kc 6d 3s Tc]
[Aug 8 10:08:04] : kerberos checked.
[Aug 8 10:08:11] : Tacklef bet $5
[Aug 8 10:08:14] : kerberos called $5 and raised $40.58 and is All-in
[Aug 8 10:08:23] : Tacklef : not again
[Aug 8 10:08:26] : Tacklef called $40.58
[Aug 8 10:08:26] : Showdown!
[Aug 8 10:08:26] : Seat 6 : Tacklef has Ac Ad
[Aug 8 10:08:28] : Seat 4 : kerberos has Kh Kd
[Aug 8 10:08:28] : Seat 6 : Tacklef has Ac Ad
[Aug 8 10:08:33] : Board cards [Kc 6d 3s Tc 8c]
[Aug 8 10:08:33] : Seat 4 : kerberos has Kh Kd
[Aug 8 10:08:33] : kerberos has 3 of a Kind: Kings
[Aug 8 10:08:33] : Seat 6 : Tacklef has Ac Ad
[Aug 8 10:08:33] : Tacklef has Pair: Aces
[Aug 8 10:08:33] : kerberos wins $100.16 with 3 of a Kind: Kings
[Aug 8 10:08:43] : Hand is over.

bohsman

Why play them for set value? Chances are you will lose anyway to a straight or flush or whatever, I think folding preflop is the way to go.
App 65% of Boards Forum users agreed in research done a while back*







*This was to do with the wsop but to prove my point will apply here

Tackle

Well, if I did apply the folding preflop strategy (on vc), I would have several hundered extra euro in my account now.

Dave

Yeah the AA rants are getting ridiculous at this stage. No one really cares.

Dub13

Dave wrote:

Yeah the AA rants are getting ridiculous at this stage. No one really cares.

Very true...all you have is the Nuts pre flop....do people forget that 5 yes 5 more cards still have to come.

bmc

Tackle wrote:

Well, if I did apply the folding preflop strategy (on vc), I would have several hundered extra euro in my account now.

so fold...

Problem solved. Well done bohsman.

P.S.

I'd like a hug...

I had A3o cracked by AA in a $5 shorthanded turbo STT this morning...

It nearly knocked me out of the tournament.

Shortstack

Alternatively play them correctly and you may not lose as much money with with them. Your pre-flop raises are far too small for micro limits poker. The second hand You are not going to get rid of the KK player whatever. Note on both you called an All In post flop. AA and KK can both be folded post flop if you think you are behind, you have only one pair remember.

Tackle

Did you read my notes on the villain, he went all in with pocket 10's on a KQx flop that I had raised with AK. Never mind when he went all in with AQ unpaired. How are you supposed to fold here when he has such a wide range he'll go all in with - top pair any kicker, pocket pairs, and A high card.
Just going by the odds, the chances of him beating me with a 4-1 shot twice in a row are 15-1 - Although I have been beaten with Aces and Kings 3 or 4 times consecutively on previous occasions.

I don't see a problem with the raising amount.

NickyOD

Who gives a ****. I'm getting sick and tired of reading these kind of threads on the forum. I get bad beats every day and only ever post the obscure ones. Jesus if I always posted about my aces and kings getting cracked I'd be repeating myself every ****ing day. If his range is that wide you don't fold smple as that. You call and if you're beat you shrug, reload and forget about it.

***** Hand History for Game 2498753991 *****
$100 NL Texas Hold'em - Monday, August 08, 09:57:43 EDT 2005
Table Table 37079 (6 max) (Real Money)
Seat 1 is the button
Total number of players : 6
Seat 1: jezuman ( $144.40 )
Seat 2: Enzymatic ( $100.35 )
Seat 3: prostakan ( $113 )
Seat 4: learntowalk ( $222.85 )
Seat 6: tingmark ( $118.55 )
Seat 5: TheSqueeze79 ( $107.85 )
Enzymatic posts small blind [$0.50].
prostakan posts big blind [$1].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to TheSqueeze79 [ Kc Kd ]
learntowalk raises [$4].
TheSqueeze79 raises [$15].
tingmark folds.
jezuman folds.
Enzymatic folds.
prostakan folds.
learntowalk calls [$11].
** Dealing Flop ** [ 2d, 3c, 5s ]
learntowalk checks.
TheSqueeze79 bets [$20].
learntowalk raises [$40].
TheSqueeze79 is all-In.
learntowalk calls [$52.85].
** Dealing Turn ** [ Ts ]
** Dealing River ** [ Qc ]
learntowalk shows [ 4s, Ad ] a straight, ace to five.
TheSqueeze79 doesn't show [ Kc, Kd ] a pair of kings.
learntowalk wins $215.20 from the main pot with a straight, ace to five.

Shortstack

Tackle wrote:

Did you read my notes on the villain, he went all in with pocket 10's on a KQx flop that I had raised with AK. Never mind when he went all in with AQ unpaired. How are you supposed to fold here when he has such a wide range he'll go all in with - top pair any kicker, pocket pairs, and A high card.
Just going by the odds, the chances of him beating me with a 4-1 shot twice in a row are 15-1 - Although I have been beaten with Aces and Kings 3 or 4 times consecutively on previous occasions.

I don't see a problem with the raising amount.

I did read your notes, do that mean that a loose player will never get a real hand (KK) or hit the flop harder than you (not at all). 3 other players saw the flop with you on the first hand so your Aces are probably less than 50% to win. A bigger raise would have got rid of at least one, most likely two and had you heads up where you are a bigger favourite. if the guy is as loose as your notes say then go and find him, you will win your losses back. As Nicky says these are not bad beats.

Iago

I folded AA preflop yesterday....

first hand of a STT, I'm on the button with AhAd and two limpers in and I fold.

Flop came down 9 T 2 rainbow and two players went all-in turning over TT and 99 respectively. The TT took the pot and no A came on the turn or river, inspired I thought.
































[size=-12]ok so I was out of the room and the client folded me when I ran out of time, but it was still inspired play for me to leave the room[/size]

roryc

Yeh, I'm still waiting to fold the kings pre-flop, you know, the 'true mark of a professional'!

Folded Queens the other day on a 2 3 4 flop though, so I'm getting there!!!



Interestingly has anyone here REALLY droped kings preflop before??

Hitman Actual

I'm sure most guys here have folded kings preflop at some stage, although I'd say probably only in cash games. Much harder to do in a tournament, imo. Way back I folded kings in a Fitz cash game, the other player being Smurph! And she did have the Aces.

Shortstack

roryc wrote:

Interestingly has anyone here REALLY droped kings preflop before??

Only twice both times I was sure I was up against Aces and both times AA was shown but I have ran them into Aces loads of other times

roryc

v nice to both

careca

I know some boardsters don't like Simon Trumper, but he has a very good article on Sportinglife.co.uk (too hungover to insert the link) about laying down AK. Flop JQ10 unsuited. He was so convinced your man had a set that he said he would fold if the board paired. River another 10, your man bets and he folds. Other guy had 10J. The interesting point is he only had 3000 left and the pot had 20K in it. Thats a good fold, in fairness to him.

ocallagh

When Harold limps in 1st pos I fold KK.

When Oscar limps in mid-pos I fold KK. 64s never fails.

Hectorjelly

careca wrote:

I know some boardsters don't like Simon Trumper, but he has a very good article on Sportinglife.co.uk (too hungover to insert the link) about laying down AK. Flop JQ10 unsuited. He was so convinced your man had a set that he said he would fold if the board paired. River another 10, your man bets and he folds. Other guy had 10J. The interesting point is he only had 3000 left and the pot had 20K in it. Thats a good fold, in fairness to him.

How often does he have to be wrong to make that an absolutely terrible fold?

careca

Hectorjelly wrote:

How often does he have to be wrong to make that an absolutely terrible fold?

I know. I read a very good piece by Mike Caro about that same topic and it paid off handsomely for me. Basically you only would have to catch him bluffing 1 time out of 6 (ish) to make it pay. But again to be fair to him, his read was spot on, and I don't think he would fold it every time. It did keep him in the tournament for another 10 mins

Shortstack

Hectorjelly wrote:

How often does he have to be wrong to make that an absolutely terrible fold?

This is an extreme 'live read' situation and maths does not come into it.

Hectorjelly

Shortstack wrote:

This is an extreme 'live read' situation and maths does not come into it.

Unfortunately this isnt true. Its not possible to have a 100% success rate on your reads so pot odds must come into the equation. Now its possible that based on his estimation of his read and the pot odds he was offered that it was a good fold (I doubt it as explained below), but unfortunately without maths you would never be able to work our when.

In the hand itself he was sure the guy had a set. This proves that his read was not 100% accurate as he actually had TJ, and if the river came a queen he would of folded the best hand. If the pot is offering you close to 10:1 on the river and you have any chance of winning at all you should call.

mewso

Too many people reading Phil Helmuth's stories about great laydowns. You'd swear they want to join the "folded Kings" club. I prefer stories about great calls like Stuey's call with 10 high also in Phil's book.

careca

Hectorjelly wrote:

Unfortunately this isnt true. Its not possible to have a 100% success rate on your reads so pot odds must come into the equation. Now its possible that based on his estimation of his read and the pot odds he was offered that it was a good fold (I doubt it as explained below), but unfortunately without maths you would never be able to work our when.

In the hand itself he was sure the guy had a set. This proves that his read was not 100% accurate as he actually had TJ, and if the river came a queen he would of folded the best hand. If the pot is offering you close to 10:1 on the river and you have any chance of winning at all you should call.

I take your point on his read not being 100% accurate. I don't agree with the final point though. So if you are as convinced as you could possibly be of your opponents hand, you have to call because the pot odds dictate so ? His reasoning was the blinds were only 100/200 and with 3000 left he could possibly get back into the tournament. If he was to say " well I know I'm behind but I have to call for the odds" then he's out. I agree with Mike, its a good read (albeit not totally accurate) and although maths does come into it, theres more to the game.

Marq

laid down the kings once preflop in cash game. Good fold. I'm still a rubbish player though. Just because some people find themselves in an obvious kings-folding situation, doesn't mean they're any better than those that are lucky enough not to.

NickyOD

There are only a handful of players who can make helmuthian laydowns and I don't think Trumper is one of them. This is results oriented thinking for sure. A better question would be why he had 3K left when there was 20K in the pot. Why wasn't he all in on the flop? Did he hold back in case the board paired or why didn't his oponent just put him all in if he believed his JT was good? Looks to me like both players misplayed their hand.

Dub13

Marq wrote:

I'm still a rubbish player though.

Dont be so modest

Shortstack

Hectorjelly wrote:

Unfortunately this isnt true. Its not possible to have a 100% success rate on your reads so pot odds must come into the equation. Now its possible that based on his estimation of his read and the pot odds he was offered that it was a good fold (I doubt it as explained below), but unfortunately without maths you would never be able to work our when.

In the hand itself he was sure the guy had a set. This proves that his read was not 100% accurate as he actually had TJ, and if the river came a queen he would of folded the best hand. If the pot is offering you close to 10:1 on the river and you have any chance of winning at all you should call.

No it is not possible to have a 100% success rate on your reads but as Careca correctly pointed out he would have had enough chips left to play in the tournament without 'all in' being his only option. A lot of players are stupid enough not to trust their instincts when they know they are beat especially when it comes to their last chips in a tournament. Whether the guy had a set or two pair is irrelevant he knew he was beat when the board paired.

If he folds he is always still in the tournament, every time he goes against his experience and instinct and loses he is out. Confidence is a big part of live poker and if you make a laydown like this and be shown to be correct then this will only improve your confidence and therefore your game. It is only a bad move if you use it unwisely and never call without the nuts.

Hectorjelly

Shortstack wrote:

Whether the guy had a set or two pair is irrelevant he knew he was beat when the board paired.

Maybe you misread the post, but it said that Simon knew he had a set before the river. When the river paired the board he assumed he had lost because he knew the guy had a full house. But he didnt have a set, he had two pair. And had a queen been the river card he would of folded to a bet "knowing" he was behind.

Shortstack wrote:

If he folds he is always still in the tournament, every time he goes against his experience and instinct and loses he is out.

Only because we know the result! If this same happened a million times he would lay the best hand down a good proportion of the time. He put him on a set and he had two pair. Sometimes he would have the wrong end of the straight. Folding the river when you are priced in with a very strong hand is a much more exploitable mistake than always calling.

[/QUOTE]
Confidence is a big part of live poker and if you make a laydown like this and be shown to be correct then this will only improve your confidence and therefore your game. It is only a bad move if you use it unwisely and never call without the nuts.[/QUOTE]

But then from time to time you fold the winner and show your great fold leaving yourself severely shortstacked, but your opponent shows down a worse hand and your game goes to pieces.

With many strong hands you get to the point of no return. When the pot odds are so overwhelming (ie 10:1 and better) that folding is much more of a mistake than calling ever could be you should often call, even if you think your beat, If your a fan of Harrington you can read his example on this very topic, about calling all in with QQ on a A high board being pretty sure you are beaten.


Just to simplify matter because Im sure Im not explaining my point properly. A river call should be treated like any other decision in poker, a chance to maximise your EV. Worrying about having enough blinds to play on shouldnt really come into your thoughts, thats more for calling all in when you have outs. If you face a full pot bet on the river your hand has to be good half the time to make a profit calling. So you should call anytime you think you are better than 50% to win the hand. If you are getting 9:1 you should call if you think that there is a better than 10% chance your hand is good. As the pot odds get better so does the punishment for folding the best hand.

Now taking that into account, its entirely concieveable that Simon had a very good tell and was so sure that he was behind that he could fold. But I would be very wary of believing this (based on other calls Ive heard hes made), and also would be wary of giving this out as advice.

Hectorjelly

careca wrote:

I take your point on his read not being 100% accurate. I don't agree with the final point though. So if you are as convinced as you could possibly be of your opponents hand, you have to call because the pot odds dictate so ? His reasoning was the blinds were only 100/200 and with 3000 left he could possibly get back into the tournament. If he was to say " well I know I'm behind but I have to call for the odds" then he's out. I agree with Mike, its a good read (albeit not totally accurate) and although maths does come into it, theres more to the game.

If you are 100% sure you are beaten then of course its a fold. If you are 75% sure you are beaten then its a call.

NickyOD

I want to see the link to the hand history. I can't think of one good reason why trumper wasn't all in or put all in on the flop.

henbane

This is result oriented rather than decision based thinking.

His read is incorrect. It just lead to a correct read when one of 4 cards came out. There were 6 cards on the river that would have caused him to make a significant mistake. He had a read that was costing him money 6/10ths of the time the board paired on the river and he laid his hand down getting 76% (23/3) from the pot. Does it still look inspired?

This is a major problem with narrow reads. They have to be made for a very good reason. Two pair is significantly different from a set, so is the idiot end of the straight; many players are going to look excited no matter what hand they hit and their betting patterns may be be very similar too.

pokertroll

NickyOD wrote:

I want to see the link to the hand history. I can't think of one good reason why trumper wasn't all in or put all in on the flop.

I don't think all-in with the nuts was his tactic there, Nicky. He was simply value betting his hand. When he was getting called all the way, he was trying to put his opponent on a hand and decided that the hand was a set.
He should have gone all-in on the turn, though, as his opponent would most likely have called with the set.

bohsman

pokertroll wrote:

I don't think all-in with the nuts was his tactic there, Nicky. He was simply value betting his hand. When he was getting called all the way, he was trying to put his opponent on a hand and decided that the hand was a set.
He should have gone all-in on the turn, though, as his opponent would most likely have called with the set.

Theres 20,000 in the pot he has only 3000 left, what was the play on the flop and preflop that left him putting everything bar 3000 in? And of course his opponent didnthave a set but for only 3k more would have had to call with 2 pair

NickyOD

pokertroll wrote:

I don't think all-in with the nuts was his tactic there, Nicky. He was simply value betting his hand. When he was getting called all the way, he was trying to put his opponent on a hand and decided that the hand was a set.
He should have gone all-in on the turn, though, as his opponent would most likely have called with the set.

That I can understand but his oponent smooth called on the flop with 2 pair and left trumper with 1 7th of the pot. If he thinks his 2 pair are good there's no reason not to put him all in for 3K more before the turn or did they both check the flop?

pokertroll

Don't think he was ever getting rid of this guy!

SimonTrumper wrote:

I raised to 1600 to get rid of the blinds and any potential flush draws and after they passed, he flat called. So now I redefine his hand, not likely to be AK of hearts and I also discount AT of hearts.

So pretty sure he has a made hand like a set, at this point I have no idea if he has even considered what I have raised with, it is unlikely he would put me on AK for the nuts. But I could have the AT of hearts, 89s, JQs for top 2 or even a set of tens or Jacks.

Turn was the 4 of clubs, he now bet 2000, now I am certain he has a set and decide with 6400 out there I am going to make him pay for his draw. I raise to 8000 leaving myself 3000 if he calls and hits (remember blinds are only 50 100 so I could still recover if it pairs up.)

NickyOD

"I raise to 8000 leaving myself 3000 if he calls and hits"

I really can't understand his logic here. If he believes his oponent has the ability to call for 8000 then he should also call for 11000 getting him in while he's a 3:1 dog. How could he ask for a better chance to maximise his chips than that?

"now I am certain he has a set"

The guy was a total calling station. His range is off the charts. I wonder if his oponent would have just decided to put trumper all in for a 7th of the pot even if a Queen landed. He's not likely to fold no matter what the the river card is now. What if the guy had QJ and the 10 landed and he still bet the river?

Like I said they both misplayed their hand.