Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

One of the common themes in books & articles is that AA in & of itself is not a great hand & can get you into all kinds of trouble in LO8.

I wonder what the experience of the members has been.

In over 500k tracked hands of LO8, AA is far and away the biggest % winner I play.

When played aggressively they serve o limit the number of players often enough that they often win on without a showdown, on their own unimproved, or with as little as 2 pair. In addition, they can improve for low, flushes, str8s, sets & boats.

Often, the trouble with aces can be that players who have read that you can get in trouble with aces, slow down in the face of any aggression, or when they dont flop a great hand.

I am not saying that there arent times to let go, but a good player should get better at sensing those times based on the texture of the board and the habits of the opposition.

Thought - go ahead & flame away. For those with PT, if you go to your General Info tab, to Categories, and then add some categories like AA, A2 - less AA, A3 - less AA,A2 etc - you might find the results surprising.

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

Often aces makes top two or a set against someone with just the nut low draw, and when their low misses you rake it in. IMO playing aces properly depends on your read of your opponent. If they called a raise and the flop comes 379, you'll often find that they have A2 and no high, and often you'll have AA2 and quarter them or scoop. One of the best cards you can see on the turn is a 9, it is unlikely to give them trips, and they have missed their low. The nut two pair is usually only good if they are convinced that their two pair is good or if they only have a low draw. Sometimes if you bet they'll call down with a naked A2 and you scoop or quarter 'em. Top boat is always good. But if the flop comes 9TJs and there is action I'm out of there.

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

1MoreFish4U - A pair of aces within a hand is one of the best two card combinations you can have in Omaha-8.

Nobody, to the best of my knowledge, is recommending you discard a starting hand because it has a pair of aces. A pair of aces is an asset in a starting hand.

And about three times out of four, when you have a pair of aces, at least one of them will have one or two cards of the same suit, giving rise to another of the best two card combinations you can have within a starting hand in Omaha-8, a suited ace. (Or the hand with the pair of aces might even have two of these ace-suited combos).

And there are various wheel cards that go well with a pair of aces. You might have a deuce and/or trey, and or four, or a trey + four, or a trey + five, or a four + five. These are also all fine combos to have within a hand. And one of the aces can also fit well with an honor card to make a high straight.

So it gladdens one's heart to look down and see a pair of aces as the first two cards dealt.

But then when the flop is
7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img],9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img],K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], in a full game, unless you have an A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img],X[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] combo, (or maybe another X[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img],Y[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] combo and know what you're doing) your pair of aces turns to dung.

Or when the flop is K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img],2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img],K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], in a full game, unless you also have a king (or maybe a pair of deuces), your pair of aces turns to dung.

Or when the flop is 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img],3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img],2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], in a full game, unless you also have a five (or maybe a pair of fours, treys, or deuces), your pair of aces also turns to dung.

I could go on and on. There are a myriad of flops that will not fit your hand when it contains a pair of aces. (It's different when you're playing heads-up or short handed).

And then, at least in a full game where a number of your opponents have also seen the flop, when your aces or your other cards don't fit well with the flop, you must fold those lovely aces.

When you don't, you're "overplaying your aces."

It's a very common mistake, made especially by some players who play a lot of Texas hold 'em and don't switch their thinking to Omaha-8-mode fast enough.

As an aside, in a full game, AA is not the very best two card combo you can have within a hand in a full ring game of limit-Omaha-8.<ul type="square">A2 suited,
A2 off-suit,
A3 suited,
A3 off-suit, and
A4 suited[/list]are all better two-card combos to have within a hand in a full ring game than AA. And you can overplay those great two-card combos too. (AA is very close to, but slightly behind A4 suited in a full ring game of limit-Omaha-8).

Buzz

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

Aces are (of course) going to show as your strongest winners by percentage on PT. They aren't chopped liver -- they are still the strongest pairing to have (with A2).

I think that the point of the folks who say that people "overplay aces" is that with optimal play of aces one can make even more money with them ... and that lots of us play aces suboptimally through overvaluing them and then acting on that overvaluation.

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

In low limit live O/8, AA has proven thorny for this relative newcomer. Raising PF does not get many people out at Commerce even though I play comparatively tight. I am getting better at getting away from bad flops. And so much depends on the other two cards in my hand. If I don't have a Plan B and I've raised PF, now I have to throw away a hand that is twice as expensive to play as the normal starting hand. High risk for possibly high reward.

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

AA in a loose passive full ring game where an average of 4 or more players see the flop is a hand to be played carefully and should not be raised preflop simply because you have AA. Without at least one good low sidecard or two connected high cards it is usually a call or even sometimes in rarer occassions a muck depending on the preflop action. This changes of course in shorter more aggressive games like the ones found online where you raise and pretty much 3bet any AA hand because of how vital it is to get the pot heads up where your AA makes you a favorite vs. nearly any hand. AA is much easier to play on paired boards and unconnected high card boards in these games, and has been profitable for me since aggressive opponents tend to come after you on flops like K92r or QQ8, if they read you for a low card hand.

Heads up AA should often be used as bluffcatcher in these spots, but of course given a solid read it can be thrown away there as well. Out of Position against an aggro opponent it is often better to check the turn or the river and let him bluff on boards that are likely to have missed his hand, and that he knows missed alot of your preflop raising and 3betting hands if you are properly playing hands like A23J, 2345 suited, etc aggresively. Inducing bluffs is important here, since people love to peel the flop and even the turn with very little when you are betting and then when you slowdown try to take the pot away if all the draws blanked out.

Remember sometimes your opponents will not call you on the last two streets with a hand a worse hand than AA, but will bet the same inferior holding if given the opportunity to try and steal the pot. This play is of course very situational, and is meant to be used when your their is no low possible, or the low you made that accompanies your aces is pretty weak.

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

When someone says that AA is overplayed in LO8, they're correct, but they need to be more specific.

IMO, AA is overplayed in LO8 for several reasons, one of them being the fact that nearly all of us learned hold'em first, and we learned how to play AA fast, especially in LHE. That being said, a lot of your opponents are only recreational LO8 players, they dont play LO8 primarily, thus they overplay AA.

Now all of that has some truth to it, but for it to bear a considerable more amount of accuracy, the type of hand that is overplayed that contains AA is a hand like AA98 or AAK7, AAJ9, etc, etc. For the most part, players dont overplay AA-wheel because even if they overplay their high hand their low hand bails them out. Think about how many times you've fired with your overpair (AA) and been raised on the turn or river and called, winning just the low. That's the distinction that I think needs to be made in an arguement about overplaying AA. Players often misplay one way hands in general, so AA with no low is no different.


Furthermore, AA is much easier to misplay and much more commonly overplayed in multiway pots.


I think if you looked at a sample of 500 random LO8 players you'd find that AAxx with no low is a losing hand in multiway pots. On the rare occasion I find myself in a tough full ring game, I dont have any problem mucking a hand like AAQ9 no suits UTG, b/c it can be so difficult to play out of position against great LO8 players.





-Tex

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

Hi Tex - That which you write always makes good sense to me. (I agree with what Truthiness and 2handed have written in this thread too).

[ QUOTE ]
the type of hand that is overplayed that contains AA is a hand like AA98 or AAK7, AAJ9, etc, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]That rang a bell.

I've noticed that certain high combos go down in value when in the same hand with AA. For example you like a starting hand with an ace and a king, so that when you make two pairs with an ace and a pair on the board, you also have a king kicker. Or when you make trip aces you have a king kicker. But when you already have two aces, you don't need that king as a kicker. You'd much rather have an extra wheel card to go with two aces than a king.

So in a way, AA devalues AK and various other high combos. I'm not sure if that makes much sense. (I'd still rather have AAKX than AA9X, but I much prefer AKXY to A9XY).

Buzz

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

The problem with AAxx in a loose game, where opponents frequently cold call is that you cannot, move them off hands like 23xx. In a tight game, opponents don't like to cold call, so will be more cautious with hands like A4xx and other poor Lo's.

So, when you catch your Ace for Hi, you generally split the pot... Due to loose nature of opponents, you may easily fail to fold correctly, or fold incorrectly as you'll find it hard to know when you're beat.

Many of my opponents overplay AAxx and end up paying off with 2nd or 3rd best hands both ways, in a pot that they ought not to have seen even the turn card.

AA23 on other hand, rather likes a ALH flop, tset + Nut Lo draw. The loose player will frequently overplay 2nd and 3rd Nut Lo's, generally putting you on A2xx.

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

[ QUOTE ]
In low limit live O/8, AA has proven thorny for this relative newcomer. Raising PF does not get many people out at Commerce even though I play comparatively tight. I am getting better at getting away from bad flops. And so much depends on the other two cards in my hand. If I don't have a Plan B and I've raised PF, now I have to throw away a hand that is twice as expensive to play as the normal starting hand. High risk for possibly high reward.

[/ QUOTE ]

The rake in the $4/8 LO8 at the Commerce is a joke. No flop they take $1. Any pot where there is a flop is raked $3 min.
I won a pot that had $14 in it, minus $3 rake and $1 for the bogus jackpots they have. None of the jackpots get very big which is strange because I think you need quads beaten in the holdem games. I got up and cashed out of the $4/8 LO8 when the dealer took $5 rake and $1 for jackout from a $18 pot. It was probably an error but they don't care.

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

I left my last O/8 game after two orbits stating that since the paint was now dry, I could get up and leave. However, the session before was like this:

AKK6 (K6s) UTG in a 6/12 full kill hand. I call, raised pot - 7 to the flop. AT5 with the A5 in my suit. 7 bets, no folds. Turn K. Now I have KKK and backup nut flush draw. I bet out. 7 calls. River T. I bet out, 2 calls and one of our resident nut balls (a mute guy) raises. Pocket aces? Another guy makes a move to call and pulls back - mute guy goes nuts and gets the floor. The way the mute guy is acting it is looking more and more like AA. Floor rules the other player had not bet. I call. Mute guy is 777TT. Ship the $200+ 3/6 pot killed and scooped to ME!!!

That's why you play O/8 with its rake at Commerce!

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

All kinds of good comments made above, and I think the most important one to keep tucked away in most player's minds is that you can 'overplay' any hand. In other words, always be aware of where you are in the hand and willing to release likely losers -whether you wnat to take a stab with them or not.

A few comments - although I play a lot of h/l from heads up to full ring, I stand by my statement that I make more money per hand with AA than any other 2 card combo - by far.

That may be because I ahved gotten better at laying them down when I should, and continuing with them when others would give up.

I do mix up my play with them much more than I used to - and have broadened my open raising hands considerably, as well as 3 betting various combos much more often.

Two things that work well in online h/l are 1. aggression, and 2. varying your play/disguising your hand.

As Tex stated about his play, I too have learned to be able to lay down ugly AA hands OOP facing multiple bets, or even OOP knowing that I ahve aggressive players following me in the hand.

I also realize my original post may have made it seem as though I see AA as a hand on it's own - which I dont, and of course I'd rather have at least one A suited, and at least 1 wheel card when going to battle - I just mean that there are many ways that various AA hands can win some or all of a pot, and the pots can be substantial.

Buzz - you know the game, and you know the math, but I would sooner take my chances with AA65 with a suited A, than with A49Q with a suited A - in a full ring game.

Is any A4 suited combo much ahead of an AA5 suited A combo? - or just fractional?

Also, one point I intended to make was that by being able to play so many AA hands very aggressively you can take down pots without showing down, which also adds to the win total per hand average because of this scoop potential.

Aside to Fishyak - in the hand above, am I reading the cards wrong, or did you lose to quad tens?

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

[ QUOTE ]
I would sooner take my chances with AA65 with a suited A, than with A49Q with a suited A - in a full ring game.

[/ QUOTE ]1MoreFish4U - Me too.

[ QUOTE ]
Is any A4 suited combo much ahead of an AA5 suited A combo? - or just fractional?

[/ QUOTE ]No. Probably not at all.

But you're adding a suited ace to AA.

My comparison was between two aces and an ace-suited-to-a-four. And before any action in the hand. And before the flop.

Things change after action, and then certainly after the flop.

It's admittedly difficult (if not impossible) to separate two cards from the four cards within a hand. All the cards play together.

It's a moot point with me, because I'm going to want to see the flop with either of those holdings within a hand (AnAnXY or As4sXnYn). And I have them pretty close.

If the ace in the AAXY hand is suited, that adds another dimension to the hand and it becomes even better. Add a wheel card (like the five you added) and it's even better.

I fully realize you cannot separate two cards from the four within a starting hand. In truth, all four of the cards affect the probability of the outcome of a hand.

It's just that people talk about a pair of aces. (Indeed, this very thread is about a pair of aces). And if you're going to do that, comparing other two card holdings within a hand to the pair of aces suggests itself, at least to me.

And anyway, I do, rightly or wrongly, tend to think about the various two card combinations within a hand. And when I do that, before the flop I think of ace-four suited as being just a tiny bit better than ace-ace without the suits and without an extra wheel card. (And a lot depends on how particular individuals within the group and also on the group as a whole is playing and also on position. It's pretty hard to isolate two cards within a hand and compare them to two other cards within a hand without taking many various factors into consideration. I was innocently trying to simplify).

Would I prefer AA5-suited plus a random card to A4-suited plus two random cards? Of course I would! It's no contest.

Here's maybe a better comparison, from my data base for nine non-folding hands:
AA55s 561 567 812 1940
A455s 338 775 657 1770

AA5Ts 521 531 769 1821
A45Ts 336 775 629 1740

AA5Ks 532 534 744 1810
A45Ks 334 806 671 1811

Focus on the right hand column. As the fourth card in the hand becomes higher, comparing AA5Xs to A45Xs, the gap between AA4Xs and A45Xs narrows. (1810 and 1811 are virtually the same. If I re-ran the same simulations, AA5Ks and A45Ks might exchange places. Indeed, because of the higher scoop potential, I think AA5Ks is a slightly better starting hand than A45Ks. But it's a moot point. If I can't see the flop with both of those fine but non-premium hands, I need to find another table.)

Buzz

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

[ QUOTE ]
The problem with AAxx in a loose game, where opponents frequently cold call is that you cannot, move them off hands like 23xx. In a tight game, opponents don't like to cold call, so will be more cautious with hands like A4xx and other poor Lo's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, so you adjust. Proper play of aces in one context is overplaying them in another. This is true of all hands, but it carries special importance when you pick up AA or A2. I have a hell of a time adjusting to online PLO8 after 4/8 donkey limit because what is optimal is so different.

I'm glad that we are kicking this around. Optimizing AA play is probably the difference between making a little bit of money and a whole lot of money.

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

Truthiness - I didn't write what you quoted in your reply posted as a response to me. Rob wrote that. While I don't disagree with what Rob wrote regarding the difficulty of pushing opponents off hands in a loose game, I don't think of that as the problem with "overplaying aces."

Let me explain what I think the problem is:

Things change going from one betting round to the next when you play in a full loose game. A hand containing a pair of aces may start out as the favorite before the flop. And if you can manage to get into a heads-up confrontation, the pair of aces has a good chance to remain the favorite.

But as Rob implies, it's rare when you manage to get heads-up before the flop in a full loose game. And when you don't get heads-up, (or maybe even when you do), the lead often changes depending on how well various particular two-card combinations within everyone's hands fit with the flop, then the flop+turn and finally the flop+turn+river. Unless you specifically see an ace on the flop (and maybe even if you do), your pair of aces is simply probably not the best possible two card holding after the flop.

Does an opponent actually have a two card combination that fits with an ace-less flop better than your pair of aces? That's hard to know. The likelihood depends on the actual flop cards and the range of hands everybody is playing.

Aces fit well with more cards than any other rank. If there is no ace on the flop, do the other two cards in your hand fit well with the flop? Or does one of the other cards plus an ace fit well with the flop? If so, then you're not continuing because of the pair of aces, but rather because of some other two card combination within your hand.

However, if nothing else fits well with the flop, if all you have is that pair of aces - and if you continue, then you're probably "overplaying aces."

[ QUOTE ]
Optimizing AA play is probably the difference between making a little bit of money and a whole lot of money.

[/ QUOTE ]You only get dealt a hand with a pair of aces about once every forty deals!

I think the main thing is not to fall in love with your starting hand.

Buzz

(Now that damned song "It's So Easy To Fall In Love" has started rattling around in my brain).

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

[ QUOTE ]
RobNottsUK Wrote: The problem with AAxx in a loose game, where opponents frequently cold call is that you cannot, move them off hands like 23xx...

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Buzz Wrote: Rob wrote that. While I don't disagree with what Rob wrote regarding the difficulty of pushing opponents off hands in a loose game, I don't think of that as the problem with "overplaying aces."

Let me explain what I think the problem is:

Things change going from one betting round to the next when you play in a full loose game. A hand containing a pair of aces may start out as the favorite before the flop. And if you can manage to get into a heads-up confrontation, the pair of aces has a good chance to remain the favorite.

But as Rob implies, it's rare when you manage to get heads-up before the flop in a full loose game. And when you don't get heads-up, (or maybe even when you do), the lead often changes depending on how well various particular two-card combinations within everyone's hands fit with the flop, then the flop+turn and finally the flop+turn+river. Unless you specifically see an ace on the flop (and maybe even if you do), your pair of aces is simply probably not the best possible two card holding after the flop.


[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for expanding on this, Buzz. I feel it'd still be good to emphasise a keypoint that probably ought to have been clearer, relating to the importance of scoop potential. It's probably "obvious" to many, but it's probably worth making it explicit.

[ QUOTE ]
RobNottsUK Wrote: So, when you catch your Ace for Hi, you generally split the pot... Due to loose nature of opponents, you may easily fail to fold correctly, or fold incorrectly as you'll find it hard to know when you're beat.


[/ QUOTE ]

In a Tight game, AAxx has a good chance of isolating the blinds, or 1 other player, and in a HU pot AA has scoop potential, through forcing an opponent to fold.

In a very loose-passive game, going for Hi, or Lo only may be profitable, if you can see the flop cheap.

But in a only somewhat loose game, 3-4 players see flop against an early pos raiser say....

Now, with a bare AAxx what do you want to hit?

When you catch your Ace, you're hoping top set holds up and noone makes a flush on you, or a str8.

If you don't, all you have is a pair of Aces, and opponents who are not afraid of drawing to poor Lo's. Furthermore you might fold the winning Hi hand, due to Nut Lo raising a loose-aggressive opponent (or a good player trying to promote the 3rd Nut Lo or try to avoid splitting with you on 2nd Nut Lo A3xx for example).

So whilst in a weak-tight or a super loose game the sidecards may not seem as important, in some kinds of games, you're going to just put money in the pot to split (defending your previous investment), but risk being outdrawn by Lo's on a free roll.


Now when I read, some of the early response posts, the good experience of playing AAxx a certain way might very well be related to game type.

I observe opponents, over-playing AAxx, pushing very marginal advantage early in the hand, and then being in a reverse-implied odds situation, where they can only win small, but will lose the maximum when they're outdrawn. Because loose players won't fold poor lows, the value of flopping top set is severely compromised.

At least with KKhh or KK23 making top set you have more chance of scooping, with no Lo possible on the river (or "valid" Lo hands being counterfeited).

Re: Is \"Overplaying Aces\" A Myth
 

Just adding a related hand thread where AA27 rivers a set and consensus is that it's a fold, due to str8's and Lo's.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showth...=1#Post12045916