Do you have the balls to fold AA?

[raze]

Being 35% chance to win in a 3-way pot means you're putting your money in with about a neutral-expectation (33% would be neutral, 35% means you have a tiny advantage here as a best-case scenario.

Let me show you a worst-case scenario:

Hand 0: 04.393% 03.10% 01.29% 6048 2520.00 { AA }
Hand 1: 58.564% 57.27% 01.29% 111708 2520.00 { 54o }
Hand 2: 37.043% 35.75% 01.29% 69732 2520.00 { 88 }

AA is only going to win 4% of the time if we happen to be up against a set and a made straight.

Also note that we are so far behind here, the guy with 88 is in a profitable spot (37% chance to win the pot, having put in only 33% of the money 3-handed). He is in a good spot, because of our dead money, even against a made straight.

[choccypie]

At higher stakes I'd fold, but at NL2 where players are likely to get ai on the flop with top pair or overpairs it's a call.

[Doc T River]

Just the board alone is scary with the straight draw and the flush draw. But add in the action and it gets even scarier.

By the way, you did not tell us if you had the Ace of clubs to even give you a chance at the back door flush. Also, how big is your total bankroll? Not just what you had at the table, but your entire bankroll.

Personally, based on the board and the action and without knowing your total bankroll, I would fold.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]

Also, how big is your total bankroll? Not just what you had at the table, but your entire bankroll.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, it is generally a bad idea to make decisions at the table based on the size of your bankroll.

While it could be right by a little to give up a small edge to avoid a large amount of variance, poker players are usually very bad at recognizing which gambles are marginal. Time and time again, people have used the avoidance of variance to justify avoiding a gamble that is far safer than playing ordinary poker.

It is also a bad idea to suggest that people need to declare their bankrolls (and risk tolerance, and strategy for moving up or down) in order to receive advice on hands.

[PokerKhan]

That depends on how important $2.71 is to you. That's about one gallon of gasoline. But it's all relative. If I were in the same situation at the stakes I normally play, everything larger relative to the stakes, I would insta-fold my aces. There are just too many hands that have you beat to risk your whole stack (3rd dude who has more than you is still to act). With five other players in the hand, it is at least two to one that someone already has your pair of aces beat (Aces against five random hands is only about 30% to win). All you have at the moment is one pair.

I recently sat down at $1/$2 NL table, and got dealt pocket aces three times in the first 20 minutes. The third time, I got them UTG. Since most pots were raised, I only called, planning on reraising preflop. Instead, I got six callers. Flop came 5-4-3, 2 suits. BB bet out - I insta-folded. I just knew there was no way my one-pair hand would be good. Eventually the flush won against a flopped straight.

[maSkraP]

[ QUOTE ]
By the way, you did not tell us if you had the Ace of clubs to even give you a chance at the back door flush.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I had A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. Also, I agree with pzhon.. I don't think your bankroll should justify how you play at the table. If you're playing right.. you should be playing at a table where you have sufficient bankroll to play in. But to alleviate your curiosity anyhow, I had 20+ buy-ins.

[ QUOTE ]
Was this a real hand that you can sure the results of with us?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes it was. I shall share the results shortly... as for now, I have to go out for a bit. When I come back home later tonight, I will post the results. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

And another note, thanks raze. I shall try and make more sense of your post once I come back.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
That depends on how important $2.71 is to you. That's about one gallon of gasoline. But it's all relative. If I were in the same situation at the stakes I normally play, everything larger relative to the stakes, I would insta-fold my aces.

[/ QUOTE ]
If your goal is to win money, you will probably find it better not to worry about what the money can buy. Concentrate on making +EV decisions, not the size of those decisions. Later, you can be pleasantly surprised at how much all of your winnings can buy.

[Paul2432]

[ QUOTE ]
Fold. Even if you're up against just a flush draw and just a straight draw + small pair for example, you're in a breakeven spot.




Board: 7c 6c 8s
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 34.773% 34.51% 00.26% 16830 126.00 { AA }
Hand 1: 34.551% 34.29% 00.26% 16722 126.00 { QcJc }
Hand 2: 30.676% 30.42% 00.26% 14832 126.00 { 97o }




[/ QUOTE ]

This is not a break even spot. There is already money in the pot so you would have an overlay. Also, you might lose to the short stack, but beat the larger stack, and get most of your money back.

Paul

[raze]

[ QUOTE ]
This is not a break even spot. There is already money in the pot so you would have an overlay. Also, you might lose to the short stack, but beat the larger stack, and get most of your money back.

Paul

[/ QUOTE ]

It's true, my example oversimplifies the situation. However, my point is that in a best case scenario we are a slight favourite (unless we're against say two overpairs, but this is much, much more rare than the dozens of spots against draws and better hands OP could be in, similar to the one I demonstrated).

At best, we are a slight favourite plus a small overlay. At worst, we are 4% to win the pot from the flop. Our expectation for a flop call lies somewhere between slight favourite and huge underdog IMO.

[BabboonBoy]

Tough to say, someone could have a pocket pair or made the straight and overbet to protect them against a possible flush. It would depend on the read I have of the players.