AK vs weak agressive players
In tournaments and sit and gos I have to admit I find this to be one of the most frustrating hands to play. In many tournaments I have reraised a large amount all in and been covered by a weak player who calls with hands like J10 or 22.
Simply calling and folding if you don't hit is frustrating because if the flop is Q 7 2 they will come out betting with KJ as if they had QQ.
In a recent 10 rebuy on Stars with about 150 people left I had 50,000 chips (which was above average) and a weak aggressive player on the button raised from 2000 to 8000. He had 90,000 chips, but most had come from large all ins pre flop in which he was pretty much always the underdog (lots of KQ and A5 type hands he liked calling with). So I sat there and realized I likely would be a 2-1 favorite but was it enough? He had already given me 20,000+ chips in post flop play through his need to gamble.
It was a really frustrating situation, as against these type of players I like to pay little to see a flop and collect big when I hit and fold when I miss. Yet here I was with a premium hand that I knew was a favorite, and its a hand that is pretty much best all in pre flop. I did raise all in and he called with Q 10. Flop was 3 low cards, turn nothing and river a Q. The "bad beat" is not the point. I guess my question is when playing against a weak aggressive player like that is it ok to actually fold AK in that situation?
I guess the way to sum it up is - I find myself in a lot of 2-1 favorite all in pre flop situations with very weak players, and while I do win 2 out of 3, I wonder if that really in the end is beneficial to me or not. Yes, I make money, but could I make more if I reduced the all in situations (even the 2-1 ones) and concentrated more on post flop play. That make any sense?
Any suggestions and comments are appreciated.
Simply calling and folding if you don't hit is frustrating because if the flop is Q 7 2 they will come out betting with KJ as if they had QQ.
In a recent 10 rebuy on Stars with about 150 people left I had 50,000 chips (which was above average) and a weak aggressive player on the button raised from 2000 to 8000. He had 90,000 chips, but most had come from large all ins pre flop in which he was pretty much always the underdog (lots of KQ and A5 type hands he liked calling with). So I sat there and realized I likely would be a 2-1 favorite but was it enough? He had already given me 20,000+ chips in post flop play through his need to gamble.
It was a really frustrating situation, as against these type of players I like to pay little to see a flop and collect big when I hit and fold when I miss. Yet here I was with a premium hand that I knew was a favorite, and its a hand that is pretty much best all in pre flop. I did raise all in and he called with Q 10. Flop was 3 low cards, turn nothing and river a Q. The "bad beat" is not the point. I guess my question is when playing against a weak aggressive player like that is it ok to actually fold AK in that situation?
I guess the way to sum it up is - I find myself in a lot of 2-1 favorite all in pre flop situations with very weak players, and while I do win 2 out of 3, I wonder if that really in the end is beneficial to me or not. Yes, I make money, but could I make more if I reduced the all in situations (even the 2-1 ones) and concentrated more on post flop play. That make any sense?
Any suggestions and comments are appreciated.
Comments
but
I think any time you get your money in with the best of it is all you can hope for in tournament poker. I'd take the 2 to 1 shot.
Of course this does depend on what poistion I am playing in but I have no issue with folding AK when I see 3 people wanting to take a crap shoot and go all in before the flop. Once the people get down to 4 or 5 then I start to get "serious".
Also with a player whom you have pegged as being *this* bad (playing for all his chips pre-flop with hands like KQ and A5), there is a certain sense of urgency. This player is likely to give away all his chips *soon*, and I want them coming my way instead of someone else's. I may very well loosen up considerably in order to take a shot at this particular player. If I wake up with AK versus his raise, I start hearing the Star Spangled Banner go off in my head and my feet start dancing under the table.
While generally AK is a tricky hand, it isn't too hard to play against an opponent who has QT in his all-in pre-flop calling hand list. You've actually read the player as possibly being this bad, and I'm usually giving an otherwise unknown player in the $11+R player roughly this much credit. I push all-in and love it.
ScottyZ
I am not making an arguement against being a 2-1 favorite. Obviously that is a situation I am generally happy with. However, this was a unique situation as this player was very bad and he had a lot of chips deep into a tournament while my stack was also healthy (ie: if either of us are short stacked this is not even an issue).
I agree with every thought that said would go through your head. I had visions of having 100,000 chips and being among the chip leaders etc. However, I also knew that I was giving this unskilled, action addicted player a 1 in 3 chance basically of getting all of my chips and knocking me out.
My friend said something interesting in that he said my raise was good because most people will fold hands except AA KK and maybe QQ and AK, but that certainly did not apply here. I knew he would call and the question was did I want to put all of my chips on the line against such a crazy player at that time? I am still not certain what the right answer is in that case.
For what it is worth that guy was the chip leader after that hand with about 150 players left and still didn't make money which was for top 99 so Scotty is right in that he was willing to hand away all of his chips. While I can identify that type of player well, I am still trying to figure out the best way to play against them to get as many chips as possible
I don't think folding AKo against this type of player is going to get you many chips.
If you want to win tournaments and not slink into the money you are going to find youself in far worse situations (than 2 to 1) that you are going to need to win. Don't get gun shy. 2 out of 3 times you'll be the big stack in a multi. 1 out of 3 you go home. 2 out of 3 you'll finish high in the money. 1 out of 3 you lose you entry fee. +EV? yes.
Please do not interpret this specific situation against the SPECIFIC player as an indication of how this situation would be played out against other types of players.
Look at it this way. Let's say you were playing poker against a monkey who had buttons to push to fold , bet, raise and all in. On the first hand he pushes all in pre flop and you have AK. You are likely a 2-1 favorite over this monkey, do you call?
There are pot odds, implied odds. I guess I am trying to wrap myself around the concept of "player skill odds." If a player is extremely bad and aggressive, maybe - just maybe its better to avoid the no skill all in pre flop 2-1 favorite position and stick to outplaying and using the weak players aggression against him when you are much more certain you have him beat (ie: post flop). That make any sense?
Yes, of course.
ScottyZ
No, you are just not listening to/liking the responses you are getting. If you will only accept one answer to your question, why ask it in the first place?
If I can double up on a 2 to 1 shot, I'll take it everytime. I dont care if it's 1st hand, final hand, against the 1st place chip leader when I'm in 2nd (excluding where there are 3-4 players left), against a poker playing monkey.. doesn't matter, I'll pull the trigger on it.
My belief is that it is not always the correct play to simply call an all in pre flop as a favorite if the other player is a very weak and aggressive player.
Forget 2-1 odds. That figure is not what I am specifically talking about. If you think 2-1 is always worth taking that is fine.
2-1 wasn't the point (though it was the figure in my initial example). My point is this - would you accept an all in pre flop situation as a 51/49 favorite every time? After all, you are a favorite, albeit a very tiny one.
If your answer to that is yes, then you are saying that the only thing that matters is being a favorite (no matter how small or regardless of the players involved). You are certainly entitled to that opinion (though I don't happen to agree with it personally).
If you say no then what you are saying is that there are times where simply being the favorite is not enough to risk it all. THAT is what I am saying and it is something I believe in. Maybe 2-1 is too high a favorite ( I can see that point of view), but my point is there is a line where the situation merits passing even as a small favorite because by doing so you are allowing yourself to outplay the weaker player more in the future.
This is an idea straight out of TPFAP. Pro players should pass up small edges in the present if there will be larger edges in the future. Unfortunately, Sklansky doesn't say if 57% is/isn't good enough to push.
See, that is what I am getting at (and I am not sure what TOFAP even means
I do know (to complete the circle) that the reason why AK in that specific situation was so frustrating was because it tested my willingness to "challenge the monkey" as a decent favorite and risk it all even though I had been steadily gaining chips from that monkey for the past 2 hours.
Ummm... the fact that AK is typically getting 2-1 odds versus a random hand is very important to the decision.
With ATo versus a random hand, it gets a little more tricky. And with ATo versus the known hand KQs, trickier still.
I would not call any player on hand number one of a tournament If I knew with certainty (or at least felt that it was highly probable) that I had a 51-49 edge.
Yes. (In a tournament.)
Yes.
TPFAP = Tournament Poker For Advanced Players by Davis Sklansky
ScottyZ