NL$50: Any way to make money here?

[threads13]

I think that assuming you will get no callers is assuming too much. Furthermore calling just puts you in a funny position postflop being OOP. The dead money in the pot is an incentive to make a raise here. If you really don't think that you will be called very often here then you don't have to raise as much. A raise to 6 still gets you in a good spot postflop if you only expect 1 caller.

If you think your 3-bets never get called here then an occasional 3-bet semi-bluff is a good play.

[VegasRunner]

My intial reaction was a pot sized raise, but after thinking about it more, I like Alex's "large raise" idea.

They know nothing about you. Yes, you might be losing a little value, but screw it, you are out of position anyway.

I say make it 20 to go and shove on the flop.

The worse thing that happens is that you win a small pot (this might happen with a $7.5 preflop raise anyway) and now, everyone thinks you are psycho.

Aces are overrated anyway. All they are good for is taking down a small pot.

[threads13]

[ QUOTE ]


Aces are overrated anyway. All they are good for is taking down a small pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aces are overrated by many. You see guys cling all their hopes and dreams on them. However, the second sentence is a blanket statement that requires qualification.

[Chargers In 07]

[ QUOTE ]
However, the second sentence is a blanket statement that requires qualification.

[/ QUOTE ]Doyle Brunson said it, he has qualification. A ridiculous statement for just about any game IMO but obviously does not apply to this game.

[VegasRunner]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Aces are overrated anyway. All they are good for is taking down a small pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aces are overrated by many. You see guys cling all their hopes and dreams on them. However, the second sentence is a blanket statement that requires qualification.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, you're right. It's a broad generalization that isn't always true, but I still think it's a good rule of thumb and I think there are bigger tragedies than taking down the blinds and the limp in money with aces if no one has a legit starting hand.

In the live games where I play with usually no more than 100 BB buy-ins, extremely large raises aren't that uncommon. So in my mind, it's a total waste to not get in half your stack if there's a good chance you'll get called.

I've seen too many people play them slowly and lose a ton.

The reason I say that they are overrated is because if they don't improve, they are just an overpair and if they do improve, your opponent usually can tell from the glaring ace on board (or four diamonds) that he is behind and you lose your action. Yes, set over set is possible, but I can count the number of times I've seen that happen live on one hand in the last year.

Unless the stacks are extremely deep (or extemely short), I'm playing them fast.

[MadMike]

Aces aren't overrated, they're the best hand to start with. Their value can go down a lot on the flop though. Best way to avoid that and make postflop simple is to raise big. There is a big difference between going broke in a reraised pot with an overpair and going broke when you raise from EP and get 2-3 callers behind.

Make it $9 to go. PP's can't call profitably here with that raise. You want someone with KK,QQ,AK to repop all in or go broke on an low flop or with worse overpair.

And heck, I'm not even thinking it's a bad idea to just shove preflop- someone who read NLHTP might think "he must have AK and be doing a squeeze" and call with TT.

Aces make more than any other hand- be thrilled you got them when there was some action preflop, and not when you make a 4xBB raise from MP and get it folded around earning you the blinds.

[Specialwon]

Yeah I like a shove with it being your first hand, the more donks the more shoving I do here. You might even get more than one caller.

[CalledDownLight]

I don't know why we want to force lower pairs out. Of course, if they will incorrectly call the raise then we want to raise the highest amount they will call. However, if they will only call the raise with proper odds to flop a set then why don't we give it to them? Thats more +EV for us.

[threads13]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, the second sentence is a blanket statement that requires qualification.

[/ QUOTE ]Doyle Brunson said it, he has qualification. A ridiculous statement for just about any game IMO but obviously does not apply to this game.

[/ QUOTE ]

By qualification I mean the specific circumstance. Having Doyle say it isn't what I mean. No disrespect to him intended.


I believe many good players say that AA is still their top money-maker. So, sure they may be overrated, but that is a subjective term and just saying "Oh, they are overrated so you need to raise." is fuzzy thinking. All I was doing was pointing out the fuzzy thinking.