How to play A-K in a no-limit tournament

Something that MiamiKeith said in the "Ask Dave" section has really focussed me on A-K in no limit hold'em tournaments.
On a side note (possibly somewhat related, if she DID have AK) I have been noticing that every time someone is talking about a tournament, and they talk about a hand that they misplayed, or a hand that really cost them, it seems that more often than not it is AK. I noticed this in your "final day" post too. All 3 hands that you said you regretted in that 36 hour period were AK. Personally, I hate this hand in no limit. I never have a clue what to do with it. It seems like, either I'm winning a couple of chips, or blowing off a significant portion of my stack. Seriously, how are you supposed to play this hand? I am starting to think that it's overrated.

I have been giving A-K A LOT of thought since the WSOP. I am interested in hearing everyone's thoughts on this difficult and yet powerful hand. I am still crafting my own but siffice to say that I think I have had a major epiphany about A-K.

And yes... MiamiKeith is leading the "free hat derby."
«1

Comments

  • I was very close to posting about an AK hand from the Brantford 'underground' Venom tournament on Sunday. Maybe I should have... I might be in the running for a hat... :wink:

    Here's the hand:

    I have AdKd UTG. Blinds 150/300 and I have maybe 2500. The table is full, with all manner of stack sizes, and mine is below average, but still OK. I make it 600 and get two callers, one MP and the BB.

    Flop comes 633, no diamonds. Ugh. BB checks, and now it's decision time. I raised small preflop for just this reason... there is a decision left for me to make. I checked as well, as did MP.

    Turn was a 4 or something, and BB bet at least 600. Me and MP folded.

    At first, I hated the way I played that hand. I'm practically begging someone to steal the pot from me. Upon further reflection, I like the mini-raise, and the check-fold, especially from UTG.

    AK is a hand that I try to invest few chips into preflop now, especially if I have bad position, or if I have a 'medium' stack. As a shortstack, I'll push, and as a big stack, I'll use it to push people around. These are very general statements, but I think my bottom line is that I don't like AK nearly as much as I used to when I started playing NL hold'em. If I'm looking for a coin-flip, I like it, but otherwise, if I miss the flop and I have a reason to believe I might be beat, I'm outta there.

    Regards,
    all_aces
  • Good topic...

    I have found myself at all ends of the spectrum with this hand, but mostly, I think I play this hand horribly post flop. Either I'm wasting a bunch of chips trying to bluff at a missed flop, or I get no action from a hit. I find that I very rarely get any action from the people I out kick (like AQ). I probably run into another AK more than I do AQ (lots of split pots with this hand).

    Maybe it's because it's such an easy hand to put someone on? Since you would play this from any position, and since it's a drawing hand, maybe it's not normally a hand you would slow play pre-flop like you might with high pocket pairs, and it's always something you would auto-bet the flop with? not sure...

    It's definately a hard hand to get away from (pre or post flop), and maybe that's why I have such a hard time with it.
  • From my experience, if you don't hit with AK you'll almost always lose in limit Hold 'Em. In no limit, you can at least still attempt to bluff off your hand as a high pocket pair. It's not an easy hand for me to fold though.
  • I love Big Slick myself. In my mind I still think of it as the hand with the most potential. If it misses the flop, oh well, let it go. If the flop helps out, then take it from there. Too many times have I seen others play AK like they are ACES, all the time. Then they can't get away from it if it misses. Also it is easy to put them on it when they have it. My rule has been to "try" to never play the same hand the same way on multiple occassions at one session...
  • I play AK in a similar (and predictable) way as described by previous posters.

    I'll raise pre-flop and see if I hit something on the flop. Even if I don't, I'll be the first raiser post-flop, but if I get re-raised, I'm out of there.

    Another related question:

    How do you play AK when:
    1. 5+ handed
    2. 3-4 handed
    3. heads-up

    To answer my own question; I tend to play AK the same way in all 3 situations. I should probably play it stronger as less ppl are involved, but I can't bring myself to do it.

    Cheers
    Jim
  • I think it's made me more money than it's lost me. Guessing about 70/30. I've also laid it down numerous times depending on stack size, cards showing, betting pattern, opponents style. Agree it has great potential. But you don't ride it down the pipe if the flop isn't kind to you. Unless you're desperate. (been there) lmao
  • AK - Big Slick - are my initials. So you would think I like this hand. Obviously, the math behind it says I should...

    Yet this hand always fucks me, either when I have something like hooks or bitches, and then push all-in pre-flop and someone with Big Slick out-draws me, or if I have AK, and push all-in, and catch nothing, and get sent by some dude who has pocket 7's. Either way, I always seem to get chumped when I have this hand.

    Because of these gory details, I also kill myself trying to decide how to play them. Push in pre-flop, wait it out? It's like chinese water torture man!!!

    This is funny - I just posted about this hand in another thread earlier. I am also a guy who is ALWAYS SECOND GUESSING how to play this hand - since it always seems to cripple me at the worst possible time.

    AK is an easy hand to play in the early stages of a No Limit event. I will always make a nice raise, and wait to see what kind of action I get.

    Yet I am flummoxed by it in the end game though - when your pre-flop decisions can and will dictate everything.

    When you don't push pre-flop, you risk another comer taking down the pot, on a hand that they probably would have folded with a big raise.

    Bottom line, I think - as is always the case in Poker - that hitting the flop is the best possible strategy :wink:

    That being said - I'll still take AK any day of the week...
  • I personally like to play A-K. As someone posted above, if you hit the flop you're sitting nicely and if you don't you can throw it away. However I LOVE playing against A-K with my friends because they will stick with it all the way till the end, even if no help arrives...resulting in a large pot for myself more often then not 8)
  • I personally like to play A-K. As someone posted above, if you hit the flop you're sitting nicely and if you don't you can throw it away. However I LOVE playing against A-K with my friends because they will stick with it all the way till the end, even if no help arrives...resulting in a large pot for myself more often then not 8)

    The problem is that, playing against sane opponents, even if you hit the flop and make top pair top kicker, you are unlikely to get much action from a worse hand. Hence the whole, "either win a few chips, or lose your entire stack" dilemma.

    Of course, if your opponents are the sort of players who think that K9 is good enough to call for their whole stack when the flop is K62, then AK is much, much more valuable. But if your opponents have a clue, it is a lot harder to play post-flop.

    Keith
  • I am still crafting my own but siffice to say that I think I have had a major epiphany about A-K.

    Not to rush you but... are you done crafting yet? I am waiting here... right now my strategy includes limping with AKs and folding AKo preflop in NL cash games against tough opponents. This might seem overly tight (ok, it is overly tight) but I am reminded of something that Roy Cooke said... "When you are unsure of a situation, don’t make plays that may put you in a position of having to make a tough decision. Inevitably, some of those tough decisions will be errors, and many of them will be big-volume errors." (Link: http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_magazine/archives/?a_id=12953) Yes, he was talking about limit poker, but this has to be 100x as true in no limit, where "high volume" goes from being a few bets to your entire stack.
    And yes... MiamiKeith is leading the "free hat derby."

    Sweet. I didn't even know about the free hat derby. But, let me assure you, free stuff is my favourite kind of stuff. ;-) So, how does this work exactly? What's the hat for? The best question? Most thought-provoking? Is it a "stump Dave Scharf" contest?

    Keith
  • MiamiKeith wrote:
    And yes... MiamiKeith is leading the "free hat derby."

    Sweet. I didn't even know about the free hat derby. But, let me assure you, free stuff is my favourite kind of stuff. ;-) So, how does this work exactly? What's the hat for? The best question? Most thought-provoking? Is it a "stump Dave Scharf" contest?

    Keith

    Here's the thread where Dave describes the free hat thing:

    http://pokerforum.ca/forum/viewtopic.php?t=527

    ScottyZ
  • Playing A-K in a tournament.

    I have had several thoughts on this strong, yet troublesome hand.

    (1) If the chips counts are deep there are precious few ways to win a big pot against skilled opponents. Post-flop you will either get no action or you will be beaten and have a hard time folding. For instance, in the following hand from my WSOP journal: “Dan Harrington raises UTG. The tight aggressive player that laid down A-Q earlier re-raises. I am the button with A-K. I give it some thought. I even thought I picked off the shaking hand tell from TA player. Yet, I called. In retrospect, there is NO flop that I could have felt really comfortable with in that spot and I should have saved the $30K and folded. I do get really lucky though. Dan Harrington re-raises all-in. The TA player re-re-re-raises all in. Now I fold. Harrington J-J. TA player A-A. Whew. Harrington wins with a flush.”

    If Harrington had flat called I would have been in a world of hurt. The flop came king high and I probably would not have got away from the hand. In other words, there was no way to win a big pot because a lot of the hand was played post flop.

    (2) If there is much action pre-flop A-K is a big problem. What hands are in there mucking around? Sure, A-x is possible but against a lot of heat these hands will generally bow out (the exception being A-Q). All of the other hands that one is likely to be up against (pairs) are the favorite. Furthermore, if you hit the flop your hits are in the open and that will end the action. You have “reverse implied” odds – you can lose a lot or win a little. This is not the case in limit hold’em since your enemy can’t take that much off you AND because he is much more likely to pay you off with a worse hand.

    So… what good is A-K? The big benefit to A-K is that although it is rarely very far ahead, it also only very rarely very far behind (A-A or K-K being the only two hands that dominate A-K). So, to me, the power of A-K is the power of the semi-bluff. A LOT of hands that people will raise with pre-flop will lay down to a re-raise. Of those that call you aren’t really in very bad shape. In other words, A-K is made for a no-limit semi-bluff. In the WSOP hand in which I called A-K against 5-5 post flop I played HORRIBLY because I gave my semi-bluffing hand NO FOLD EQUITY. I knew he was going to move on the pot. I knew it. But, if I beat him to it, he can’t call. If he does I have outs.

    So… long and short of it is that A-K is a hand that should, I think, be played very aggressively. You do not need much FOLD EQUITY for the play to be very profitable. You are hoping for you opponent to fold. If he doesn’t then you are hoping to get a lucky flop. Just that same as you are with a hand like 7-6s except that there are A LOT less hands that A-K is in trouble against. It’s my new no-limit hold’em tournament mantra “If I have A-K I am bluffing… If I have A-K I am bluffing… If I have A-K I am bluffing…”
  • Playing A-K in a tournament.

    I have had several thoughts on this strong, yet troublesome hand.

    (1) If the chips counts are deep there are precious few ways to win a big pot against skilled opponents. Post-flop you will either get no action or you will be beaten and have a hard time folding. For instance, in the following hand from my WSOP journal: “Dan Harrington raises UTG. The tight aggressive player that laid down A-Q earlier re-raises. I am the button with A-K. I give it some thought. I even thought I picked off the shaking hand tell from TA player. Yet, I called. In retrospect, there is NO flop that I could have felt really comfortable with in that spot and I should have saved the $30K and folded. I do get really lucky though. Dan Harrington re-raises all-in. The TA player re-re-re-raises all in. Now I fold. Harrington J-J. TA player A-A. Whew. Harrington wins with a flush.”

    If Harrington had flat called I would have been in a world of hurt. The flop came king high and I probably would not have got away from the hand. In other words, there was no way to win a big pot because a lot of the hand was played post flop.

    (2) If there is much action pre-flop A-K is a big problem. What hands are in there mucking around? Sure, A-x is possible but against a lot of heat these hands will generally bow out (the exception being A-Q). All of the other hands that one is likely to be up against (pairs) are the favorite. Furthermore, if you hit the flop your hits are in the open and that will end the action. You have “reverse implied” odds – you can lose a lot or win a little. This is not the case in limit hold’em since your enemy can’t take that much off you AND because he is much more likely to pay you off with a worse hand.

    So… what good is A-K? The big benefit to A-K is that although it is rarely very far ahead, it also only very rarely very far behind (A-A or K-K being the only two hands that dominate A-K). So, to me, the power of A-K is the power of the semi-bluff. A LOT of hands that people will raise with pre-flop will lay down to a re-raise. Of those that call you aren’t really in very bad shape. In other words, A-K is made for a no-limit semi-bluff. In the WSOP hand in which I called A-K against 5-5 post flop I played HORRIBLY because I gave my semi-bluffing hand NO FOLD EQUITY. I knew he was going to move on the pot. I knew it. But, if I beat him to it, he can’t call. If he does I have outs.

    So… long and short of it is that A-K is a hand that should, I think, be played very aggressively. You do not need much FOLD EQUITY for the play to be very profitable. You are hoping for you opponent to fold. If he doesn’t then you are hoping to get a lucky flop. Just that same as you are with a hand like 7-6s except that there are A LOT less hands that A-K is in trouble against. It’s my new no-limit hold’em tournament mantra “If I have A-K I am bluffing… If I have A-K I am bluffing… If I have A-K I am bluffing…”

    Sklansky gives similar advice in his tournament book (there is a section entitled "Ace-King in no limit play"). The basic idea of it is, you are rarely in serious trouble if you get all-in before the flop with AK, and it is better to be the bettor than the caller.

    But, if the chip counts are deep, and you don't get all in preflop, it seems that you are in trouble even if you are being aggressive. For example:

    Say the blinds are 100-200. You are on the button with 50k chips, and AhKd. It folds around to the cutoff, who also has 50k chips. He makes it 1000 to go. Now, what can you do?

    Pushing all-in is too much. Risking your whole stack to win 1300 chips... you are only getting called by a hand that beats you (AA or maybe KK)

    Say you make a "normal" raise to, say, 4000 or 5000. The blinds fold and the raiser calls. Flop is Kc Jc 8s. The raiser makes a pot-sized 10,000 chip bet at you. How good do you feel? He could easily have you beat (KJ, JJ, 88, even AA if he is the type of player to call your re-raise with it and try to trap you). He could be semi-bluffing (eg QT, Ac8c, Qc8c). It could even be a complete bluff, hoping you have a hand like QQ that you could lay down. If you play back at him you are in the uncomfortable situation of only being called if you are a small favourite or a big underdog. Do you really want to put your whole stack in jeopardy with just one pair on this flop?

    If you make a bigger re-raise pre-flop, it seems like you are putting yourself in even more trouble. Say you make it 10k to go. Again the blinds fold and the raiser calls. Now, having already put 20% of your stack in, are you going to be able to get away from the hand on a Kc Jc 8s flop when the raiser bets 20k into you?

    My main problem with AK is that if you hit the flop (which is what you want, right?) you are going to have to make difficult decisions. You are essentially setting yourself up to have to make a tough decision for a large portion of your stack, if not the whole thing. Getting all-in with it pre-flop eliminates this, but this is not always possible. I would like to see a whole book entitled "How to play AK when you hit the flop in NL Hold'em".

    Keith
  • I have often in my head had Sklansky's words running: "A-K prefers to be all-in pre-flop." My post is no great news but, for me, I have finally gained understanding. Sklansky is like that for me. I have to read him and think about him A LOT before the lightbulb finally goes on.

    Sklasnky's Tournament Poker for Advnaced Players is THE book. He's the man.
  • we interrupt this discussion to point out the irony of a guy named miamikeith possibly winning a hat that says canadian poker player.

    :wink:
  • What about considering a flop like Kc Jc 8s as *not* hitting the flop?

    ScottyZ
  • I don't think you can consider it as NOT hitting the flop. You VERY likely have the best hand. You must, however, be willing to fold. And, you must be good at folding when you are beat but calling when you are not. If you will routinely fold top pair top kicker then you will get RUN OVER by an aggressive player.
  • Miami Keith is just another misguided dolphins' fan (AJ Feeley 4 Life!) in a Patriot-kind-of-world.

    Too bad he can't pick games against the spread, like he can play poker... :wink:
  • I have often in my head had Sklansky's words running: "A-K prefers to be all-in pre-flop." My post is no great news but, for me, I have finally gained understanding. Sklansky is like that for me. I have to read him and think about him A LOT before the lightbulb finally goes on.

    Sklasnky's Tournament Poker for Advnaced Players is THE book. He's the man.

    I just got his book a couple of weeks ago and have read it twice already. I'm going to read and study it once or twice more before that Brantford Hold Em tourney in three weeks. It's a great tournament book if I didn't make that point clear yet. 8)
  • AK*1 wrote:
    Miami Keith is just another misguided dolphins' fan (AJ Feeley 4 Life!) in a Patriot-kind-of-world.

    Too bad he can't pick games against the spread, like he can play poker... :wink:

    If Fiedler doesn't win that starting job I am getting off the Wannstedt bandwagon.

    Umm... Do I know you? Who are you? That AK is sounding familiar.. from the pick 4 pool???

    Keith
  • Where did you get the book Jay...it is obvious that this book could greatly enhance my game.
  • ScottyZ wrote:
    What about considering a flop like Kc Jc 8s as *not* hitting the flop?

    ScottyZ

    So, what are you waiting for? AAK or QJT? I mean, if you're going to take that route, at least wait for a hand like 98 so you have a better shot at that straight.

    Keith
  • Where did you get the book Jay...it is obvious that this book could greatly enhance my game.

    Amazon.ca
  • Thanks Jay, I'll have to check it out in the morning.

    I have gained unbelievable knowledge about A-K play from this thread. Thank you to everyone.
  • So which is it? You got the flop you were waiting for, or you didn't?
    MiamiKeith wrote:
    Say you make a "normal" raise to, say, 4000 or 5000. The blinds fold and the raiser calls. Flop is Kc Jc 8s. The raiser makes a pot-sized 10,000 chip bet at you. How good do you feel? He could easily have you beat (KJ, JJ, 88, even AA if he is the type of player to call your re-raise with it and try to trap you). He could be semi-bluffing (eg QT, Ac8c, Qc8c). It could even be a complete bluff, hoping you have a hand like QQ that you could lay down. If you play back at him you are in the uncomfortable situation of only being called if you are a small favourite or a big underdog. Do you really want to put your whole stack in jeopardy with just one pair on this flop?
    MiamiKeith wrote:
    So, what are you waiting for? AAK or QJT? I mean, if you're going to take that route, at least wait for a hand like 98 so you have a better shot at that straight.

    These two quotes are actually a nice demonstration of the ambiguity involved in playing AK.

    ----

    Great flop = AAK

    You may get no action.

    Good flop = K73 rainbow

    You may get no action.

    Mediocre-to-bad flop = KJ8 with 2 clubs

    There are a lot of valid threats. You may or may not be winning right now. You may or may not get drawn out on and/or semi-bluffed. A scare card may or may not come off on the turn.

    My original point was maybe this particular flop is a lot different than many of the other King high flops. It's got a 2 flush. It's got high card strength (i.e. connecting with JJ). It's got lots of scare cards that can come off, which may put you in a pickle against a tricky player.

    All King high flops are not created equal.

    ScottyZ
  • Dan808 wrote:
    we interrupt this discussion to point out the irony of a guy named miamikeith possibly winning a hat that says canadian poker player.

    :wink:

    LOL :lol:

    ummm stuped question BUT is there a miami in Canada? :?: :shock: :?:
  • ScottyZ wrote:
    So which is it? You got the flop you were waiting for, or you didn't?

    This is my point. Even the flop that you were waiting for isn't all that good. Although you are winning most of the time if an A or K hits, you are only getting significant action if you are losing. Compare to a hand like 55, where if you hit the flop, there are lots of worse hands that will give you action.

    Keith
  • Good flop = K73 rainbow

    You may get no action.

    The problem isn't that you may get no action. The problem is that if you DO get action you are probably losing.

    Keith
  • Just to see if I understand this correctly. Dave, the actions you are talking about here
    So… what good is A-K? The big benefit to A-K is that although it is rarely very far ahead, it also only very rarely very far behind (A-A or K-K being the only two hands that dominate A-K). So, to me, the power of A-K is the power of the semi-bluff. A LOT of hands that people will raise with pre-flop will lay down to a re-raise. Of those that call you aren’t really in very bad shape. In other words, A-K is made for a no-limit semi-bluff. In the WSOP hand in which I called A-K against 5-5 post flop I played HORRIBLY because I gave my semi-bluffing hand NO FOLD EQUITY. I knew he was going to move on the pot. I knew it. But, if I beat him to it, he can’t call. If he does I have outs.

    So… long and short of it is that A-K is a hand that should, I think, be played very aggressively. You do not need much FOLD EQUITY for the play to be very profitable. You are hoping for you opponent to fold. If he doesn’t then you are hoping to get a lucky flop. Just that same as you are with a hand like 7-6s except that there are A LOT less hands that A-K is in trouble against. It’s my new no-limit hold’em tournament mantra “If I have A-K I am bluffing… If I have A-K I am bluffing… If I have A-K I am bluffing…”

    are pre-flop, right?
    And, you must be good at folding when you are beat but calling when you are not.

    This part of my game needs a little work. 8)

    Plus, if I really was good at that, I sure don't think I'd have to wait around for hands as good as AK. :)

    ScottyZ
  • MiamiKeith wrote:
    Good flop = K73 rainbow

    You may get no action.

    The problem isn't that you may get no action. The problem is that if you DO get action you are probably losing.

    Keith

    I would have a lot more confidence trying to pick off an agressive player's bluff with a K73 rainbow flop, compared to a KJ8 two-suited flop.

    You may get action from an agressive bluffer on any King high flop. It might matter whether the bluffer is likely to have any outs and/or potential scare cards.

    You don't just get action from made hands.

    ScottyZ
Sign In or Register to comment.