AK is crappy multi-way all-in hand...

[FortunaMaximus]

Yup. Incremental edge * volume = profit. Variance's the price.

And that's something every tournament player must get used to if he or she has even a rational chance of becoming a successful player.

bogey,

You're defining a Hero with a skill edge over his opposition that rarely, if ever exists in tournaments with 300+ runners. Once you start trying to find better spots to double up with a bigger edge...

The bigger the field, the more you hurt your EV in the long term. And your edge would probably have to increase exponentially to overcome field sizes.

And practically anybody that thinks or assumes they do have that edge doesn't. Such a player doesn't exist.

Of course there are scenarios where you can fold AK, and no, you don't need to put your opponents on KK+ either to make your case. (FWIW, you're making a situational argument. Perhaps if you defined a specific situation, you'll make your point a little clearer?)

On pure maths, you have 33.9% EV, and when you examine 'stove calcs, you look at the EV metric, not the win % metric to assess what your equity is in the hand.

While it's true these days opponents have gotten better and this phenomenon has filtered down to the micros somewhat, there are still concepts and applications of those concepts they are clueless about and even solid, profitable players don't extract enough value from.

And that is superaggression and near-eidetic knowledge of ICM calcs in pushbotting phases of turbos.

[Pokerfarian]

[ QUOTE ]
38% is just over two to one to win, no? So with two all ins ahead of you, you get just the right pot odds vs these two hands. Only Kings and Aces have you smashed though, I think.

I think the question is though, do you want to take the ~1% (or whatever) edge with pot odds or wait till the maniacs bust each other out and attempt to outplay them later.

[/ QUOTE ]
Say you have 1000 chips and 2 allins in front of you, so you have the option of calling and if you win you get 3100, and your 38% to win. That gives 0.38x3100 = 1178, or a 18% increase in equity. 18>>>>1. You've got to be careful to not underrate your edge.
Also, comparing AK v QJ v AT or AK v AQ v 77 or etc isn't very helpful. Use pokerstove & ranges, for example:
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 26.776% 25.10% 01.68% 6493088 434363.67 { 55+, A2s+, K8s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T9s, 98s, A7o+, A5o, KTo+, QTo+, JTo }
Hand 1: 34.710% 30.98% 03.74% 8013844 966308.33 { 66+, A9s+, KJs+, QJs, ATo+ }
Hand 2: 38.514% 33.97% 04.54% 8788941 1175385.00 { AKo }

[Cornell Fiji]

Pokerfarian makes an important point about not using hot and cold calculations against hand but rather using pokerstove ranges.

I think that it would benefit this analysis for someone to give a hypothetical example of a time where they might be calling all in with AK.

Will someone please post the stack sizes/blinds/antes from a point late in a turbo and create hypothetical action in front of them where they are the hero with AK. I think this will help show why the edge with AK is so great.

[Sherman]

[ QUOTE ]
99.5% of players shouldn't fold AK PF....ever

[/ QUOTE ]

Minor FYP.

[ras52]

[ QUOTE ]
...there are still concepts and applications of those concepts they are clueless about and even solid, profitable players don't extract enough value from.

And that is superaggression and near-eidetic knowledge of ICM calcs in pushbotting phases of turbos.

[/ QUOTE ]

eidetic: marked by or involving extraordinarily accurate and vivid recall especially of visual images <an eidetic memory>

I had to look it up, so I thought I'd share!

[Eratosthenes]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
99.5% of players shouldn't pass up a 0.6% EV edge.

Try inputting a plausible range for your opponents 3-way, you start to get a better picture of how 3-way situations work.

Finding a specific 3-way scenario in where AK isn't a 1:1 in a situation where it only needs 2:1 on average is not going to make a plausible case.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I put plausible ranges at 22+ and A2+ for starters. You throw in a few JQ type hands and it doesn't really get any better.

cards %win %lose %tie EV
Ad Kh 34.93 64.83 0.24 0.350
5c 5d 30.94 68.82 0.24 0.310
Qs Js 33.89 65.87 0.24 0.340

If you can put NEITHER player on a pair, it gets good. But one all in and one call? Awfully good chance someone has a pair.

AK is going to be a bit better overall as you might catch QJ shoving, called by AT, then you have AK. That's the dream scenario though. Most of the 3-way all-ins I see have at least one person with a pair.

[/ QUOTE ]

What if each of them has a pair?

[MJBuddy]

PLAUSIBLE RANGES.

I.E.: First person jamming looser, second caller calling tighter, you have AK/AKo.

I'm running the pokerstove, but apparently it's quite a long calculation. I'll post it when it's done.

[Sherman]

[ QUOTE ]
PLAUSIBLE RANGES.

I.E.: First person jamming looser, second caller calling tighter, you have AK/AKo.

I'm running the pokerstove, but apparently it's quite a long calculation. I'll post it when it's done.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just do Monte Carlo rather than all possible combinations.

[MJBuddy]

What's the difference?

[MJBuddy]

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 27.692% 26.34% 01.35% 143705872296 7375060046.00 { 22+, A4s+, K7s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T9s, A8o+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo }
Hand 1: 33.278% 30.56% 02.72% 166720018776 14836624904.00 { 55+, ATs+, KQs, ATo+, KQo }
Hand 2: 39.031% 35.64% 03.39% 194466677388 18477770654.00 { AKs, AKo }


---

So...yeah...AK is pretty damn good multi-way.