Ax-suited a loser in loose limit games?

[Voltaire]

Good analysis as far as it goes. Thanks for posting it.

I've attempted a similar analysis a couple of times and came to similar, but slightly more positive conclusions. My actual experience shows that I've made money playing A9s-A2s in limit games from 30/60 to 1/2. It's very close though.

In positions 7 and 6 these hands are clear losers because you're more likely to get pumped by someone with a better ace in which case you are mostly dominated. These are position sensitive hands more so than many others.

Uh...where are these "loose limit games"?

[PorkchopDJG]

Canterbury Park MN
Please come and see for yourself.
Happy Hunting!

[Voltaire]

Great state. Maybe I'll move there, just as soon as you can do something about the weather.

[CardSharkGames]

[ QUOTE ]
Good analysis as far as it goes. Thanks for posting it.

I've attempted a similar analysis a couple of times and came to similar, but slightly more positive conclusions.


[/ QUOTE ]

My assumptions were actually overly optimistic, IMO. For example, I assumed flopping a flush draw 120 times in 1000 while in <u>Odds And Probabilities</u>, Hilger says it's only 110 times. I also think that a flopped pair of Aces are going to hold up a lot less often then I assumed (at least in my game they don't hold up).

[ QUOTE ]

My actual experience shows that I've made money playing A9s-A2s in limit games from 30/60 to 1/2. It's very close though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I always felt that I was winning long-term with Ax-suited, but without very complete records, feelings can be misleading. That's why I did the analysis.

Some people made comments here about how profitable Ax-suited should be if played correctly, but couldn't provide any specific suggestions in how they should be played better than outlined in the original post, nor did they point out errors in the analysis.

[ QUOTE ]

In positions 7 and 6 these hands are clear losers because you're more likely to get pumped by someone with a better ace in which case you are mostly dominated. These are position sensitive hands more so than many others.

[/ QUOTE ]

In <u>Small Stakes Hold'em</u>, Sklansky recommends playing Ax-suited in ALL positions, which is another reason I did the analysis.

[GiantBuddha]

In a loose passive limit game, I'll play every suited ace I'm dealt (not for a raise cold or anything, though). I'll also raise the limpers with it if I'm in position.

But the real value of Axs comes from being able to read the board and read hands. You have to know when your aces will be good. And be able to lay down top pair no kicker when it's not good. You also have to know when to semibluff. Don't just pump the pot every time you have a draw, but know when to pump the pot for value, and when to push people around.

Small pocket pairs play themselves in loose games. Axs does not. They both rely heavily on implied odds, on facing opponents that go too far with their hands. But they don't play the same way.

Loose aggressive games, btw, Axs is much harder to get value from. Small pocket pairs are the [censored] there, though.

[PorkchopDJG]

I agree that in loose/passive games you have to open up your starting hand requirements and play more hands like this preflop. Now I'm not usually advocating playing these from early position or even opening with these (unless you are almost 100% sure it won't be raised after you) but if even one player limps you should be limping with hands like A3s, 78s, Q,Ts and low pocket pairs for several reasons.
1) People behind you are passive and will rarely raise unless they have a huge hand
2) When you are the second limper you encourage others to limp and you will have a multiway pot with quite a bit in there.
3) In these types of games big hands(AA,KK,AK) don't hold up as much because it's likely that someone else in the multiway pot will hit their two pair, trips, flush so you can't just wait to play these hands.
4) If you do hit big you will win a big pot when you bet and are called down by 2 or 3 opponents.

Now if the table changes and gets more aggressive you should definitely change and dump more of these hands. It may be 2 or 3 bet behind you and you don't want to be in a three way pot with A3s where you have to hit huge to win.

[Voltaire]

I took a closer look at my stats for A9s-A2s. (BTW, get PokerTracker and you won't have to guess at your results.) There is an apparent anomaly in that the worst performing hands are A9s, A8s and A7s losing respectively 0.09, 0.17 and 0.09 BB per hand. The best performing hand is A5s at +0.12. A5s-A2s outperform A9s-A6s. Overall A9s-A2s is a wash.

However, if I just take the hands that were not blinds, A9s-A2s is a clear winner at +0.03 BB per hand. (n = 5,345 or about 668 each hand. Distribution theory would yield 5,400 hands or 675 each from a sampling of 223,914 hands played.)

Of course it may be that I play A5s-A2s better than I play A9s-A6s. And it may also be that the results will smooth out as my database grows. Incidentally, A9s-A2s VP$IP = 74.50. Better results would probably come from a smaller VP$IP! I play a lot looser than your average winning player. But that's another story.

Part of the anomaly probably results from playing multiple tables. If I only played one table at a time A9s would probably be the best hand, not to mention I would probably have better results!

My conclusion is the same as before: A9s-A2s are winners if you take into consideration what the other posters have said, namely that you have to play them well. A good point made (by mvdgaag) is that playing marginal hands makes you look looser and gets you more action on your solid hands. Clearly in any game in which you sometimes get free cards (that are really free), most marginal hands are winners. Alas I see a free card that's really free about once every 50 hands or so, if that.

I don't have Sklansky's book on small stakes limit hold'em in front of me. I lent it to my son-in-law. :-( But remember Axs is a Group 5 hand for Sklansky. The "loose" games that he would recommend playing Axs in upfront would have to be very loose with lots of yummie free cards.

[creedofhubris]

A5s-A2s make the wheel and also make unlikely trips; no shocker that they've got more value than A6s-A9s.

[CardSharkGames]

[ QUOTE ]
A5s-A2s make the wheel and also make unlikely trips; no shocker that they've got more value than A6s-A9s.

[/ QUOTE ]

In <u>Small Stakes Hold'em</u> (page 70), Sklansky says:

"Some players mistakenly conclude that A5s-A2s are better than A9s-A6s because they can make a wheel. While the wheel possibility is useful, it generally does not overcome the high card strength of the latter hands."

[GiantBuddha]

Axs can be profitable from any position in a loose game. To me the key to extracting value when you make aces is:

1) Know who will call you down with middle and bottom pair; value bet them mercilessly
2) Know who will limp with a big ace; don't give these players excess action
3) Know who will bet a draw or any pair on the flop and raise them (in position), bet the turn and check behind on the river. Out of position, I'll often check/call these players to let them bluff off their chips.
4) Know when you're beat or
5) Identify spots where you'll chop with hands as good as AJ or AQ: when the flop comes AKx, if x pairs or a running pair comes, you're choping any other ace. Very important.
6) Know the difference between A9 and A2. A2 is a one card hand. A9 beats A8. That's a lot of added value when you're getting calls on your bets.