Playing Axs in Early Position, NLH

[VegasRunner]

I don't think I've ever seriously disagreed with anything I've read by Sklansky until I began reading No Limit Hold em by Sklansky and Miller.

In his preflop strategy section, he refers to Axs as a "bread and butter" hand and he advises usually limping in with it in early position. I can imagine a game where this play would be profitable (specifically, againist a table of people who never raise preflop and also happen to be visually impaired), but generally speaking, even in games with small blinds ($1-$2), this play seems like it would have a negative expectation.

Here's my reasoning:

1. If someone behind you puts in a decent preflop raise, you almost have to fold b/c you are out of position and you probably aren't going to get the number of callers to justify chasing a flush draw. On top of that, there is a good chance that you are dominated.

2. If you flop an ace, it's has very little value. If you bet out, you will scare away everyone who doesn't have an ace and the only likely calls (or raises) will be from people who have (at least) a better kicker.

3. AND MOST IMPORTANT: I fully am aware that the real value of this hand is it's nut flush potiential, but even if the hand develops perfectly (no preflop raises, at least 2 of your suit flop, and a high card flops to give someone a strong second place hand) unless you are playing againist a total donk who will fail to notice three suited cards on the board, you're chances of cleaning out a large stack with this hand still seem incredibly low when you are playing it out of position. Even at low limits, EVERYONE notices 3 suited cards. I don't even think the very rare payoff from a smaller flush will make-up for all the money lost when this hand fails to make it's draw.

I'll certainly try to limp in with Axs in late position, but I almost never play it otherwise. In my opinion, flush draws are far too visible to the average player to make them profitable from early position.

Anyone disagree?

[sandman-54]

I disagree, if only slightly. In general, I will play a weak suited ace, as long as there is a somewhat weak player who limped in before me, even if I'm in a late early or middle position. This is sometimes true even if there is a good chance that there will be a raise behind me. As NLHTAP points out, it can still be correct to call, planning to fold to a raise, even when the chances of a raise are good.

In the following article, which is the second of his 7 article series:

http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/artic...f-position.html

Miller points out the dangers of calling with a weak suited Ace in early position and then calling a 5BB raise from a tough player behind you. Although I think it's assumed that calling the tough player's raise from out of position is a more major mistake, the reader can easily infer that the original call was pointed out as a mistake as well.

In Ed and David's book, it is pointed out that the guidelines are for games with deep stacks and typical opponents of a $5-10 blind no-limit game. Ed's article is meant for a deep-stacked $1-2 blind no-limit game. It seems weird to me that the advice would change from a limp to a fold when talking about a lower limit. In Ed's first article in this series, he calls Axs a "Sometimes Playable" hand.

If it is generally incorrect to limp when first in from an early position, I would think it is because the effective odds justify folding. Playing a flush draw out of position is very hard because it allows your opponent to punish you to the fullest. This is pointed out in general terms in the first article of Ed's 7 article series:

http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/artic...play-tight.html

I think that I do agree with you and Ed, but have struggled on the fence with what to do in this situation myself even before NLHTAP came out. I suppose this will spark a good debate and I would love to hear any additional reasons for limping or folding. Also, you should contact Ed via his website: www.notedpokerauthority.com

[Number27]

[ QUOTE ]

1. If someone behind you puts in a decent preflop raise, you almost have to fold b/c you are out of position and you probably aren't going to get the number of callers to justify chasing a flush draw. On top of that, there is a good chance that you are dominated.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not true in most low limit live games I've played in. Usually if someone limps in early position it starts a call parade. The same holds true if someone in late position raises to 3x-4x the blind. After the first person has called it usually entices more people to call behind.

[ QUOTE ]
2. If you flop an ace, it's has very little value. If you bet out, you will scare away everyone who doesn't have an ace and the only likely calls (or raises) will be from people who have (at least) a better kicker.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't have to bet out when you flop an ace. You can check and reevaluate. If the preflop raiser will bet every time he is checked to, there is a good chance you can check call and reevaluate the turn.

[ QUOTE ]
3. AND MOST IMPORTANT: I fully am aware that the real value of this hand is it's nut flush potiential, but even if the hand develops perfectly (no preflop raises, at least 2 of your suit flop, and a high card flops to give someone a strong second place hand) unless you are playing againist a total donk who will fail to notice three suited cards on the board, you're chances of cleaning out a large stack with this hand still seem incredibly low when you are playing it out of position. Even at low limits, EVERYONE notices 3 suited cards. I don't even think the very rare payoff from a smaller flush will make-up for all the money lost when this hand fails to make it's draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, in lower limit games that I've seen there are many players that will make crying calls even if the flush comes. Last week I got a guy to stack off on a 4flush board with top two. I think you are vastly overestimating the skill of the average $1/$2NL live player.

[ QUOTE ]
I'll certainly try to limp in with Axs in late position, but I almost never play it otherwise. In my opinion, flush draws are far too visible to the average player to make them profitable from early position.

[/ QUOTE ]

It depends on the table obviously; but there are a lot of live "party" tables where the average player is only vaguely aware of the board texture. About half of the ones that are aware of the board texture don't have the discipline to fold.

[sandman-54]

Number27,

Would you still normally call if you were first to act in the $5-10 blind no-limit game that Sklansky is considering in NLHTAP, namely a game where most players are neither particulary good or bad?

[cpk]

[ QUOTE ]
Number27,

Would you still normally call if you were first to act in the $5-10 blind no-limit game that Sklansky is considering in NLHTAP, namely a game where most players are neither particulary good or bad?

[/ QUOTE ]

I never was sure what Sklansky means by that, either. Are they "not particularly bad" in that they won't stack off with top pair necessarily? Are they "not particularly bad" in that they won't play Axo? WTF does it mean?

The 5-10 game I play in commonly features 6 players to the flop, people stacking off with less than top pair, and people playing junk like K4o. I'm inclined to think that Sklansky meant that these players were particularly bad.

[sandman-54]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Number27,

Would you still normally call if you were first to act in the $5-10 blind no-limit game that Sklansky is considering in NLHTAP, namely a game where most players are neither particulary good or bad?

[/ QUOTE ]

I never was sure what Sklansky means by that, either. Are they "not particularly bad" in that they won't stack off with top pair necessarily? Are they "not particularly bad" in that they won't play Axo? WTF does it mean?

The 5-10 game I play in commonly features 6 players to the flop, people stacking off with less than top pair, and people playing junk like K4o. I'm inclined to think that Sklansky meant that these players were particularly bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

They play like this in Seattle? How deep are the stacks? Stacking off with less than top pair is in general very weak.

I wish I knew more of the logic David had in mind when recommending to limp in with Axs. It seems that there are usually just as many dangers as there are benefits. I'll try to grab Ed from his website and see if he'll entertain all of our curiosity in this thread.

[cpk]

[ QUOTE ]
They play like this in Seattle? How deep are the stacks? Stacking off with less than top pair is in general very weak.

[/ QUOTE ]

The buy-in limit is usually 100 BB, and the stacks quickly become much deeper than this. OTOH, it's really 10-500 spread limit, so there are some strategy wrinkles. There's also three raises max. Both of these together mean it's a lot harder to stack off once you get deeper than $2000. People manage to do it, though, with the most absurd hands.

[Number27]

[ QUOTE ]
Number27,

Would you still normally call if you were first to act in the $5-10 blind no-limit game that Sklansky is considering in NLHTAP, namely a game where most players are neither particulary good or bad?

[/ QUOTE ]

It depends; but if the table was playing fairly passively and letting you draw for cheap or there were bad players mixed in the game who would stack off even if a draw were completed then I would absolutely limp Axs up front.

If the table was full of aggressive players who can make good folds then I would obviously tighten up my EP hands.

That being said, the average low limit NL game I've seen involves a lot of players to the flop and a lot of bad calls post flop-- both of which make any suited ace worth playing from almost any position.

[VegasRunner]

Thanks all for the replies. You've given me something to think about

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2. If you flop an ace, it's has very little value. If you bet out, you will scare away everyone who doesn't have an ace and the only likely calls (or raises) will be from people who have (at least) a better kicker.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't have to bet out when you flop an ace. You can check and reevaluate. If the preflop raiser will bet every time he is checked to, there is a good chance you can check call and reevaluate the turn.


[/ QUOTE ]

Number 27,
I completely agree with you on what to do if an ace flops. Unless there is only 1 (maybe 2) players acting after me, I think the only logical move is to check and call a late position flop bet and reevaluate.

However, is this really a position that you want to put yourself in? Do you really want to have to possibly call three bets to find out if your weak ace is any good? This seems like an instance to me where you are getting reverse implied odds. (By that, I mean if he's got an ace with a good kicker, you have to pay him off big to find out / if he doesn't have an ace, the pot you win from him will be smaller.) Plus checking and calling might give him the opportunity to catch the free card he needs to catch up.

As you can tell from my number of posts, I'm not as experienced as most people here. So perhaps someone who is better at reading people wouldn't mind being put in this spot, but for me, this just seems like setting myself up to make a mistake. Personally, I'm almost positive I'd be better off dodging Axs in early position altogether.

I'd also like bring some math into my side of the argument. The odds of flopping the ideal flush draw is only about 8 to 1. (Just for the sake of comparision, you have better odds of flopping a set with a pocket pair.)

The fact that this happens so rarely doesn't bother me if I'm in late position because when I'm last to act, I love overbetting the pot with my four flush, because i know if I don't win the pot right there, no one is going to bet into me on the turn, so I get a free card, so the odds of making the flush are 35%. This is my absolute favorite time to semi-bluff.

However, in early position even when you do flop the draw, you are in a bad spot. Either you have to come out firing and pray that you don't get raised from someone who acts after you or you have to check and call. Further if a late position bet or raise is of any decent size at all (let's say, 2/3 of the pot) I think you have to muck your draw anyway because there's only about 19% chance you'll catch your flush on the turn before he throws another monster bet at you.

In my mind, anyway you slice it, trying to play Axs out-of-position is serious trouble.

[sandman-54]

Below is a paste of a question I asked Ed on notedpokerauthority.com if it's any help to this thread. For those that haven't visited his site, it can be a great resource for any serious poker player.

Steve
@ Wed May 30, 2007 05:17:51 PM
10

A piece of this seems like a contradiction to the general advice given in NLHTAP. A few of us are curious why it seems this way or if there is just some confusion. Any help would be much appreciated Just click below to help:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...D=#Post10585147
Ed Miller
@ Thu May 31, 2007 12:54:46 AM
11

Steve,

This series is intended to be simple, and my simple advice for weak suited aces up front is to fold them. The advice in NLHTAP is considerably more nuanced, and you’ll probably find several places where these articles don’t “gel” with something in there.