Any merit to AA/KK only strategy?

[vaughn345]

First off let me preface by saying I am aware this might be a really stupid idea, I'm looking for some honest opinions on it though.

Looking through my poker tracker database I am surprised to see that, despite all my strategic maneuverings with lesser hands, about 40% of my entire profit is just from aces and kings. The marginal value of playing most of the other individual hands seems almost negligible.

My idea is therefore this, what if I instead of wasting time and energy on less profitable hands, multiplied the number of tables I was playing up to like say 30 or more and just played aces and kings? I realize that I would quickly be labeled as the aces and kings guy by any regulars so would have to only stick to playing against nonregulars. Better yet you could take repeated staggered shots at different sites with this technique so as to draw out the time until you were figured out.

I'm wondering if any other players out there have had this same idea and noticed some obvious logical flaw in the thinking, or have actually tried to play 20+ tables and only the most premium hands and could share their experience.

[Check_The_Nuts]

umm, you would end up playing on average 1 hand in 110 hands. Do I really need to say more.

[cs3]

the obvious flaw is that you get zero action when you only play AA/KK. any action you do do get postflop is form hands that have you crushed.
honestly, terrible idea.

[Marwan]

Can't be a winning strategy.. discounting all the value you'd lose from stealing blinds/playing other premium hands, etc, you'd get aces 1 in 220 times, same with K's.. For a 6-max game you'd play a hand every ~18 times around the table on avg, so you'd need to make 27BB's or more on avg to BE even from your KK/AA.. which isn't likely to happen

[tubasteve]

do it and find out.

[vaughn345]

thanks marwan, that's what i was thinking.