People who lay Kings down preflop are pussies

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
If you're consistent, and just say that you won't ever fold them (preflop) regardless of circumstance, isn't it +EV?

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course. It's impossible to be -EV with Kings. But this is equivalent to saying - isn't it a +EV strategy to never fold aces postflop? Of course, but it must be correct to fold them SOMETIMES. As another analogy, say a man approached you and offered you 3 propositions. In one instance, he will give you 2:1 on a coinflip. In another, he will give you 1.5:1, and in another, he will give you 1:1. You'd never take the 1.5:1 or the 1:1 propositions just because they 'weren't negative EV.'
-James

[XXPOKERNATORXX]

Now is it really necessary to add insult to injury?!?

[runout_mick]

[ QUOTE ]
Even AA vs five random, unpaired/paired hands is -EV

[/ QUOTE ]

Way way wrong.

What hand of these 5 have better preflop equity?

If I'm BB, with 9 all ins in front of me, I want to se AA when I look at my cards.

[Supesimmo]

Just lost KK to AA twice; all-in preo-flop....

At least I'm not a pussy

[_TKO_]

[ QUOTE ]
If you're consistent, and just say that you won't ever fold them (preflop) regardless of circumstance, isn't it +EV?

[/ QUOTE ]

Porbably, but it would even more +EV to lay them down every time you were against AA.

[CopTHIS]

"Just lost KK to AA twice; all-in preo-flop....

At least I'm not a pussy"

I've lost KK to AA on several times when it looked likely that they had AA when I called. But I'm still probably a pussy.

[Butcho22]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Even AA vs five random, unpaired/paired hands is -EV

[/ QUOTE ]

Way way wrong.

What hand of these 5 have better preflop equity?

If I'm BB, with 9 all ins in front of me, I want to se AA when I look at my cards.

[/ QUOTE ]


What I meant was that AA vs 5 random hands is still an underdog to win. Sure, you do have the best odds to win, but it's roughly 40% at this point. You don't want to get your money in with a 40% of winning.

[_TKO_]

[ QUOTE ]
What I meant was that AA vs 5 random hands is still an underdog to win. Sure, you do have the best odds to win, but it's roughly 40% at this point. You don't want to get your money in with a 40% of winning.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that you should a read a few more strategy posts. You don't want to face a 40% chance of winning against one other player. Against four other players, you will win 40% of the time, but your "fair share" of the money is 20%, so you make money when you call. It's about making money, not winning pots.

[Butcho22]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What I meant was that AA vs 5 random hands is still an underdog to win. Sure, you do have the best odds to win, but it's roughly 40% at this point. You don't want to get your money in with a 40% of winning.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that you should a read a few more strategy posts. You don't want to face a 40% chance of winning against one other player. Against four other players, you will win 40% of the time, but your "fair share" of the money is 20%, so you make money when you call. It's about making money, not winning pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

aaahhhhhhhhh


So since you would win 4/10 times, it would still be profitable in the long run with 5 players all in preflop right?

[_TKO_]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So since you would win 4/10 times, it would still be profitable in the long run with 5 players all in preflop right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Also, my math was a little wrong. I originally assumed you were up against 4 other players. Your fair share of the pot is actually smaller against 5 random hands, yet your equity edge is larger. Basically, what this means is that AA gains, not loses, value from each additional player.