Not convinced KK all-in preflop up to 100BB is good idea (at $0.50NL)

[cjd]

First, sorry this is an image. I didn't want to spend a lot of time figuring out how to make that into a UBB Code table.





I know this issue has been debated before, and the generally accepted idea seems to be not to fold KK preflop up to around 100BB. I'm hoping to bring this discussion to a higher level, at the risk of being called a noob. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

A few disclaimers:
* All my data is based off $0.50NL. I'm sure things are different at different limits.
* These hands are ones I observed going all-in preflop. The vast majority of them I was not all-in preflop, and probably held junk hands.
* I ommitted results in bottom right due to having insufficient data. One hand in a cell doesn't tell you anything.
* Although I included data for QQ-AQo where there were a few hands in one cell, realize that for these hands it's a small sample size. I am not saying that AKs will win 84% of the time for between 30-40BB. 25 hands isn't that many.


When I started playing cash games, I would always be willing to go all-in preflop with KK unless I knew my opponent well enough to know he would only go all-in preflop with AA.

I got burned so many times holding KK all-in preflop against AA, that I stopped being willing to go all-in preflop with KK.

I ran across this humerous picture contest thread that made me think maybe I was giving up +EV by not willing to go all-in preflop with KK for amounts anywhere near 100BB.

So, I ran some custom queries against my PokerTracker database of 180,000 hands at $0.50NL, and the conclusion I come to from my data is that going all-in preflop up to 50BB or 60BB is profitable, but beyond that, it's not.

Based on my data, once you pass the 60BB point, kings win less than 50% of the time, and go into deep negative average BB/hand.



180,000 hands is a large sample size, but obviously not enough to come up with a rock solid conclusion. Does anyone have any data to refute my findings? Were pocket kings just really unlucky during the 180,000 hands I've seen?

[cjd]

For anyone wanting to query their own PT database, here's the query I used. It should grab hands that were all-in preflop (preFlopBet=totalBet AND we saw a river card AND we never folded)

Just change the last two lines in the where clause, from "120" and "200" to the range of BB you want to look at.

---------------
SELECT
hole_cards,
game_level.game_level_big_bet,
SUM(total_won-total_bet) AS Net,
COUNT(*) AS Times,
SUM(IIf(total_won>0,1,0)) AS TimesWon,
ROUND(100*SUM(IIf(total_won>0,1,0))/COUNT(*)+0.000001,1) AS PercentWon,
ROUND(AVG((total_won-total_bet)/game_level.game_level_big_bet)+0.000001,2) AS BBPerHand
FROM
game,
game_players,
game_level
WHERE
game.game_id=game_players.game_id
And game.game_level_id=game_level.game_level_id
And pre_flop_bet=total_bet
And hole_cards<>""
And game.river<>""
And isnull(game_players.when_folded)
And (game_level.game_level_big_bet between 0.49 and 0.51)
And hole_cards in("AA","KK","QQ","JJ","TT","AKo","AQo","AKs","AQs ")
And pre_flop_bet>=game_level.game_level_big_bet*120
And pre_flop_bet<game_level.game_level_big_bet*200
GROUP BY
hole_cards,
game_level.game_level_big_bet
ORDER BY
game_level.game_level_big_bet DESC,
COUNT(*) DESC
;
---------------

[Gonso]

A couple things -

1) Is this in PTBB? It looks like it, and that would solve this pretty quickly if so.

2) It doesn't look like your sample size is enough for the event your looking at, I mean KK winning after being all in preflop 0 percent of the time between 120bb-200bb obviously isn't realistic.

3) The effective stacks seem to be somewhat small a lot of the time, which would be somewhat explained if you're using PTBB instead of bb.

[Gonso]

ALTHOUGH -

If these are all hands observed, you could come up with a rough range of what the average player at this limit will show down at each range of stack sizes.

Obv it's more complex than that, since some are the ones pushing and others calling, but overall it would be interesting to see what hand you need to play for stacks with in general at each effective stack size at that particular limit. I'm sure KK is ahead that range BTW.

[cjd]

[ QUOTE ]
A couple things -

1) Is this in PTBB?

2) It doesn't look like your sample size is enough for the event your looking at, I mean KK winning after being all in preflop 0 percent of the time between 120bb-200bb obviously isn't realistic.

3) The effective stacks seem to be somewhat small a lot of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) Sorry, should have specified that. It's in terms of the Big Blind, not PTBB.

2) I agree my KK sample size at 120BB+ isn't very large. However, past the 60BB point there isn't a lot of data suggesting it would be at or above 50%. Past 60BB, KK wins all-in preflop 24/62 times, or 38.7%, with -28.38BB. Even discounting the 120BB+ point, it's 24/58 times, or 41.4%, with -19.46BB. I'd have to assume that if KK gets worse between 60BB-120BB, it will get even worse past 120BB. Looking at it this way, a sample size of 62 or 58 isn't horrible IMO -- but obviously I'd love to have a larger sample.

3) Yeah, I think this is for two reasons. First, people willing to go all-in preflop with less money at the table. Second, so many people at UltimateBet and AbsolutePoker at $0.50NL don't fully load up. I hate that, I always make sure I'm topped off. (On related note, I'm done with AP for now, due to the scandal. Moved all my money from AP to UB. I can't withdraw from UB at the moment due to complicated issues unrelated to Poker that I won't get into.)

[Gonso]

With only 62 hands over the 60bb range, I really don't think it's enough to evaluate. I mean most of the samples are decided by one hand...

Second, win % isn't necessarily equal to preflop AI equity, since a small number of those hands can go multiway. You should have a generally downward slope here with enough data as the effective stack sizes increase, and it's not really close there yet.

Next, you also have to factor in that there will be some money in the pot when it comes time to decide where to call the AI (for example with a standard raise, three-bet, shove line).

With some allowance for multiway and pot odds, you'd likely still be +EV even if you were only 40% win at showdown - although again I'm sure it's not going to be that low in a decent sized sample.

[br.bm]

I _never_ saw a PF AI in my FR games from 100BB stacks w/ QQ, JJ or AQ.

[LarryLaughs]

Also, opponents will notice that you only go all in with AA. Thus going in with more hands will give you more calls when you actually have AA.

So, to make this test truely useful you should compare the winnings of several players all willing to go all-in with different hands (only AA, just AA and KK, AA/AK/KK and so on). Then see who makes the most out of all-in pf situations.

[GittyUP]

This is interesting and I would like to see the results of someone with a big PT database. 1-2 million hands maybe. Also the results of someone who datamines and can provide the results from a more independent viewpoint rather then from one player vs the field.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
First, sorry this is an image.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't see any image. I've tried going directly to http://img86.imageshack.us/img86/334...preflopnw3.jpg and I get nothing.

[ QUOTE ]

I know this issue has been debated before, and the generally accepted idea seems to be not to fold KK preflop up to around 100BB.


[/ QUOTE ]
Generally accepted by whom?

If you ask players who are collectively barely beating microstakes games, you will hear that they have heard that you should never fold KK preflop. They even showed Farha, known for taking bad gambles, getting all-in with KK for 300 BB against Greenstein as evidence that ... folding KK is always wrong? (Farha pushed over Greenstein's 100 BB 4-bet.) That isn't a rational interpretation. You need to see people pushing with QQ or AK or worse to call all-in with KK.

If you look through some of the past higher stakes threads, you will see people have a very different attitude, and can not only fold KK when appropriate, but expect that some opponents are willing to fold KK preflop.

[ QUOTE ]

I'm hoping to bring this discussion to a higher level, at the risk of being called a noob. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]


[/ QUOTE ]
I play poker for the money, not to avoid being called a noob. To win more than a mediocre player, you have to make plays some mediocre players don't like.

It's an excellent idea to collect real data, rather than taking a survey of players who haven't collected data objectively.

[ QUOTE ]

I got burned so many times holding KK all-in preflop against AA, that I stopped being willing to go all-in preflop with KK.

[/ QUOTE ]
Likewise, although I used a smaller sample. This doesn't mean I fold them preflop. I adopt different lines that rarely result in getting all-in preflop. This may extract more money while ahead.

By the way, people often say that if you are willing to fold KK, then you can be bluffed very easily. This is wrong. AA makes up a large percentage of my range whenever I would consider folding KK, so pushing as a bluff would be extremely unprofitable against me.

[ QUOTE ]

I ran across this humerous picture contest thread that made me think maybe I was giving up +EV by not willing to go all-in preflop with KK for amounts anywhere near 100BB.

[/ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] It depends on the stakes. When you are playing for pennies (or the smallest live game available), the players are very likely to be overplaying a weaker hand because they think TT is a monster. When you are playing in a very aggressive game, the raises mean less, the 3-bets mean less, etc. There is a small window in which the players are rarely going to push with QQ or AK, and in this range, calling all-in with KK is often -EV.

[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] It depends on position. An open raise on the button represents much less strength than a raise from UTG. This means it takes much more room to figure out that KK is behind when there is an open-raise from late position than when there is a raise from early position.

A limp-reraise is usually strong. An overlimp-reraise is not as strong.

[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] It depends on the stack sizes. A reraise from someone who could have called for set value is much stronger than a reraise from someone who didn't have that option.

[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] It depends on your reads, obviously. Don't give a maniac who 3-bets the same credit as a passive player who 3-bets. If you have been raising a lot, people will play back at you with weaker hands.

These are factors to consider when someone sets you all-in. How some sycophant playing NL $10 feels about it shouldn't be on your list.

[ QUOTE ]

Based on my data, once you pass the 60BB point, kings win less than 50% of the time, and go into deep negative average BB/hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe it was supposed to be clearer in the image, but that you may lose money with KK does not mean that the last call was incorrect, or that your last push was incorrect, since you don't have the option to take all of the money back from the pot.

If Farha thought that tossing in his last $178,000 would return $179,000 on average (or $179k worth of value), then he was right to do it, even though he would show an average loss of about $10,000 on the hand.

So, you might want to compare folding with calling all-in rather than comparing cancelling the hand with calling all-in.