PokerStars homepage
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

10NL Zoom (6max), Folding AKo pre-flop?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 10NL Zoom (6max), Folding AKo pre-flop?

    Hi guys~ Villain5 stats 32:19 AG 3.2 3B 3.8 270 hands Is this a horrible fold? He 3-bet my UTG raise from MP seems pretty strong so I think I am only beating his AQ( if its in his range), and most importantly I am OOP so I folded. Plus even if I make a pair its either a win small or lose big situation for me. It's the first time I folded a hand like this so I am not quite sure Any thoughts?
    Last edited by hahaharofl; Thu Nov 21, 2013, 08:56 PM.

  • #2
    Folding AK here is completely fine.

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi laugher,

      I agree, good fold. If you plug his 3b% into an equity calculator of 3.8%, the only worse hand in it is AQs. And as you note, UTG+1 vs an UTG open is quite likely a stronger range that this. So we are out of position vs. a strong range that AK does not play well against. When we hit the flop and make the best hand we will have a hard time getting value, and when we make a 2nd best hand we'll have a hard time not giving it. When we miss we'll largely be giving up not having position. All of which makes calling unattractive to me. And 4-betting/getting it in I think is a pretty big spew here. The villain is loose so he's not likely to fold any of his premium range, and we'll simply get it in tied, as a small dog, or as a big dog. The only way it works out is if he flats a 4b then folds to a c-bet, but again it's optimistic to have the hand go down this way as he has to decide to flat the 4b pre, catch a scary (to him) flop, and be willing to fold... a parlay I don't think we can bet on profitably. So if both flatting and 4-betting look unattractive, that leaves folding as the most reasonable option imo.

      There are not many times I'm folding AK preflop, but this is one of the few I think it makes sense.
      Head Live Trainer
      Check out my Videos

      4 Time Bracelet Winner



      Comment


      • #4
        This is confusing.
        I personally will call and re-evaluate on the flop
        AK has almost 50/50 chance pre flop versus 22+ and KQ+
        When you say "When we hit the flop and make the best hand we will have a hard time getting value", so what, you are going to collect money and there's nothing wrong with that.
        When you say "when we make a 2nd best hand we'll have a hard time not giving it", I think that's where you separate the good players from the bad, as you need to know when to fold. That's why you need to re-evaluate after the flop.
        I see it very often, were AK will be all in on a 4Bet, but I don't, I will just call

        Dave, how would you explain, you calling my raise with 58s in Vegas?
        You were in profit, makes sense. you had lots to drink....lol, makes sense.
        You know me as a tight player, so if you put my range as 22+ and KQ+, I'm 70% favorite, why would you call and not call AK in this hand?

        Comment


        • #5
          Hi Trap!

          Great questions, I'll try to clarify:

          AK has almost 50/50 chance pre flop versus 22+ and KQ+
          Yes, except his range is more like JJ+/AK here. He's already a tight 3-bettor in general, and here he's 3-betting an UTG raise from UTG+1, which should be even tighter. VS. JJ+/AK our equity is only 40%.


          If he were 3-betting as wide as 22 and KQ, I would certainly not be folding.

          When you say "When we hit the flop and make the best hand we will have a hard time getting value", so what, you are going to collect money and there's nothing wrong with that.
          There is something wrong with that, if it costs us money in the long run (over many trials).

          When you say "when we make a 2nd best hand we'll have a hard time not giving it", I think that's where you separate the good players from the bad, as you need to know when to fold. That's why you need to re-evaluate after the flop.
          Good players win more with their winners, and lose less with their losers, but being a good player doesn't necessarily mean we can play all spots profitably.

          Let's take an example, suppose his actual holding is QQ. Think about how the following flops might play out and whether or not they'll be good or bad for us:

          A73
          K55
          AQ4
          962

          The first 2 represent the statement I made, it seems we will win this pot but not be able to extract value. The 3rd one represents the accurate statement you made about good player. While I would expect us to lose less than a huge fish would here, we certainly didn't plan to check/fold to a single flop c-bet on a board we hit, so it will cost us some $ between now and folding... likely more $ than we will win in the first 2 flop cases. Also while it's true that this 3rd flop may be a fairly rare occurance, where we hit tptk and he hits a set, keep in mind this genre of flop also represents other times we improve and aren't winning, like in flop #2 when he holds KK or AA. Flop #4 represents the large % of flops that don't improve us, and while this generally only costs us our preflop call (as we'll likely check/fold the flop), this is the most common occurrance so over the proverbial many trials, these -.60c preflop calls add up against us fairly significantly.

          Remember that 40% equity vs. JJ+/AK is hand equity going to showdown. This hand is not likely to go to showdown often. When we flop squarely into what would be our 40% zone (flops 1 and 2 above), we won't be able to realize this equity as we won't get paid much. When the flop is in his 60% zone (flops 3 and 4) we will lose a small amount (the most frequent occurance, flop 4) or lose a larger amount (flop 3). And our equity is actually worse than 40%, since that's including seeing all 5 board cards, but on flop #4 we won't get to do that.

          Dave, how would you explain, you calling my raise with 58s in Vegas?
          You were in profit, makes sense. you had lots to drink....lol, makes sense.
          You know me as a tight player, so if you put my range as 22+ and KQ+, I'm 70% favorite, why would you call and not call AK in this hand?
          Well first, as I said above vs.that wide a range I would continue with AK. Regardless, here's a couple points:

          -A lot of drinks and playing very LAGgy is part of it. (Being in profit is NOT part, I personally believe that loosing up and gambling simply because you're in profit is a leak)

          -Your starting range being a 70% equity favorite only comes into play if we are all in preflop, or in for a significant amount relative to our stacks. In this case if I didn't hit the flop you weren't winning any more money off me, where as if I did hit it solidly, I expected to win more off of you, and we had plenty of money behind to bet post flop.

          -I also had confidence in my ability (even a dozen or so drinks in) to navigate more tricky post flop spots, such as flopping 1 pair, flopping a draw, or representing certain board textures that were good for my calling range and not your raising range to put pressure on (which works well against tight players).

          Am I saying my calling your raise with 58s was +EV? I don't know, maybe it was and maybe not. But I was confident in my ability to maximize the EV of the situation. And at least it was consistent with my image of LAGgy drinking guy. lol
          Head Live Trainer
          Check out my Videos

          4 Time Bracelet Winner



          Comment


          • #6
            Hi Dave, thx for the reply When we look at his stats "32:19 AG 3.2 3B 3.8 270 hands", I presume VPIP is 32 and his PFR is 19, that's at the highest peek of a normal range for 6-max, therefore I would assume a very loose aggressive player. 270 hands only represent 45 times at that particular position, how did he play those 45 hands? Even with his tight 3-betting, with his loose VPIP and PFR, I give it a much wider range. Is he a regular?, does he play lots of tables? Does he bluff often?, those would also influence my decision. As for the example, supposing QQ A73 - Check raise (since he's the raiser, let him c-bet) K55 - Check raise (since he's the raiser, let him c-bet) AQ4 - This would probably be the $$$ losing hand 962 - Check Fold But what if he had KQs, JJ, we could always assume that every player that raises has AA. All I'm saying is that with AK being a very strong hand, it is worth the call. When looking at stats, every time you had AK UTG and you played them following a raise, how often did you lose or win and what is the end result? I just looked at my 2013 stats, I was dealt 677 times AKo in EP (UTG), 496 hands won (73%) for a BB/100 of 139.66. More detail stat: UTG raise and calling any re-raise with AKo, 49 hands, won 22 (44.9%) for a BB/100 of 219.35 As per my stats, I will take that chance of calling, but will be able to fold if necessary and yes I will lose a few of them, but my judgement on the long term will be more positive. I'm sure you've got some stats of your own Here are 2 of the hands out of the 49

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Sandtrap777 View Post
              A73 - Check raise (since he's the raiser, let him c-bet)
              K55 - Check raise (since he's the raiser, let him c-bet)
              This seems like valueowning/value-cutting yourself to me.
              It goes back to what Dave was saying. You win a small pot when you have the best hand (e.g. vs QQ) and you lose a big one when you have the worst (e.g. against AA/KK).

              Check-raising seems crazy to me, because it folds out worse hands and only gets action from better ones.

              Maybe if you check-raise at higher stakes it looks more bluffy and could induce a villain to spaz out, but in general terms I think it's spewy to raise those dry flops, because nothing worse calls.
              Bracelet Winner

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by ArtySmokesPS View Post
                This seems like valueowning/value-cutting yourself to me.
                It goes back to what Dave was saying. You win a small pot when you have the best hand (e.g. vs QQ) and you lose a big one when you have the worst (e.g. against AA/KK).
                I guess you need to know how to play them, especially with notes you've taken and as for win small and lose big, please re-read the bottom part of my post as 219BB/100 is winning BIG

                Originally posted by ArtySmokesPS View Post
                Check-raising seems crazy to me, because it folds out worse hands and only gets action from better ones.
                Crazy to you maybe, if I bet he'll fold, I get nothing extra, but if he bets and I re-raise, at least I get extra money. Sure I left the door open for an extra card if he checks back, but I like my odds. Again, I need notes on the players to play this way.

                Originally posted by ArtySmokesPS View Post
                Maybe if you check-raise at higher stakes it looks more bluffy and could induce a villain to spaz out, but in general terms I think it's spewy to raise those dry flops, because nothing worse calls.
                He's the raiser, so I like to let him cbet first, I guess you need to know how to play them. There's no written standard play, you need to stay away from "standard play" if you want to succeed, but you need NOTES on the players

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by hahaharofl View Post

                  Villain5 stats 32:19 AG 3.2 3B 3.8 270 hands

                  His VPIP to PFR ratio is really low, which seems to suggest that he's got a passive streak - is he passive post-flop when he's got initiative?

                  Any interesting info in the pop-up?
                  Last edited by TrustySam; Sat Nov 23, 2013, 02:47 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Sandtrap777 View Post
                    Crazy to you maybe, if I bet he'll fold, I get nothing extra, but if he bets and I re-raise, at least I get extra money.
                    I wasn't suggesting betting out. I would be check-calling, to keep worse hands in the pot. If villain has a worse hand, I want him to keep putting money in the pot on future streets. He won't do that if I raise.

                    This is pretty fundamental stuff. If you have a hand with value, you should only make raises with it if you think you will get called by worse. If nothing worse calls, then raising is pointless, and in many cases stupid.
                    Bracelet Winner

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by TrustySam View Post
                      His VPIP to PFR ratio is really low, which seems to suggest that he's got a passive streak - is he passive post-flop when he's got initiative?

                      Any interesting info in the pop-up?

                      Is the ratio really low ... or really high?? Hopefully everybody knows what I was trying to say

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by ArtySmokesPS View Post
                        I wasn't suggesting betting out. I would be check-calling, to keep worse hands in the pot. If villain has a worse hand, I want him to keep putting money in the pot on future streets. He won't do that if I raise.
                        LOL and of course giving him an extra card and losing all the money you've been calling with........smart

                        Originally posted by ArtySmokesPS View Post
                        This is pretty fundamental stuff. If you have a hand with value, you should only make raises with it if you think you will get called by worse. If nothing worse calls, then raising is pointless, and in many cases stupid.
                        Ok, so now I'm stupid, well I'm happy being a stupid winning player. Arty try and accept that your style of play is not the only way to play and remember that there's NO standard play. I don't see many PSO members winning with your standard strategies.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Sandtrap there is no need to get personal against Arty. There are a lot of players who play 'standard' and do very well in online cash games, from 25nl all the way up to 1000nl.

                          Just because you are successful with a more unorthodox strategy doesn't mean other people have to do the same.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by birdayy View Post
                            Sandtrap there is no need to get personal against Arty.

                            Just because you are successful with a more unorthodox strategy doesn't mean other people have to do the same.
                            birdayy, I'm not getting personal and never said people have to play the same way I do, please read carefully.

                            Originally posted by Sandtrap777 View Post
                            Arty try and accept that your style of play is not the only way to play and remember that there's NO standard play. I don't see many PSO members winning with your standard strategies.
                            birdayy,
                            You can read what Profess Awe posted here:
                            http://www.pokerschoolonline.com/for...145#post462145
                            You can read what Galfond posted here:
                            http://www.reddit.com/user/Phil_Galfond
                            You can also watch Felix video here:
                            http://www.pokerschoolonline.com/for...473#post436473

                            PS. Arty never accepted the way I play, always commented negatively about my plays or all of my posts, why? jealousy? I wouldn't be surprised

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Well everyone in this thread plays well, so everyone made great points I thought umbup: Like yeah, the low 3-bet rate of 3.8% with the 3-bet here coming from mp into utg certainly is troublesome. And yet, yeah from what we've been given of the villain's stats, they're definitely on the extreme end ... like in a possibly spewy kind of a way, depending on if the villain is playing in a similar fashion post-flop? Probably there's some difference of opinion on calling/folding because with this particular villain, even though he's got a low 3-bet rate, he's also got stats that indicate big leaks? Like with AKo being a top hand, even despite the villain's low 3-bet rate, maybe there's also some profit potential there, depending on if there's anything we might see in the villain's stats post-flop, and depending on if there's anything in the villain's pop-up stats to give us a better idea of how likely it is the villain's got AA or KK? Interesting substantive discussion everybody!! Have a nice evening!! umbup: umbup:
                              Last edited by TrustySam; Sat Nov 23, 2013, 06:10 AM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              X Cookies Information

                              We have placed cookies on your computer to improve your experience on our website. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.