As you may have guessed from the topic, today’s post is going to be pretty specific, dealing exclusively with the tactic of limping preflop with pocket aces.

Why do I bring this up? Because every time I see someone - and I mostly see people at limits around $2/$4 and $3/$6 - limping with aces preflop, I don’t see a smart player disguising his hand, I see a cry for help. And as I’d like to be a knight in shining armor, here I am - helping you, if you’re one of them, in your hour of need. Not only am I an arrogant knight in shining armor, but I wield math as my weapon to kill the dragon, making you loathe me even more.

Let me start this off by pointing out one of the very rare times that limping with aces is okay: When you attempt to trap someone before the flop. Limping UTG with pocket rockets, because you know that there’s a maniac on the button who likes raise and two blinds who call anything in a pot they’ve already invested in, allowing you to trap them for three bets, is okay. It’s more than okay, it’s good. But you need that read on the maniac to do this, and you have to understand - I can’t stress this enough - that your objective is to trap them before the flop, not after. If you limp/call instead of limp/reraise, you’re crying out for help. And I’m here to help.

So now that we have that covered, why am I telling you that disguising your hand is a bad thing? Isn’t deception everything? Do we not learn from Sklansky’s Fundamental Theorem of Poker that revealing the strength of your hand means that you will make less money? We do, it’s true. But the theorem only applies if your opponent play any differently if they know what you have, if they even pay attention at all. At the lower limits, we don’t have to deal with the nuisance of having thinking, hand-reading opponents. So that argument goes out the window. Let’s look at what the deal here actually is, then:

When you raise preflop with pocket aces, you have a huge equity surplus. We’re talking usually over 50%, unless the entire table calls (at which point you have 33% equity in the pot, which is even better for you). The exact numbers aren’t important, as they will vary with the hands that your opponents have, but a conservative estimate is 50% with four opponents. When you fail to raise preflop, you’re missing out on an extra bet from each of those opponents, and you own half of those bets - HALF! - meaning that you miss out on two small bets worth of profit right off the bat before the flop. Not a good way to start this game.

Can you make up for these losts bets on the flop and later streets because you’ve disguised your hand so cleverly? Possibly, but not likely. After the flop, you may still have the best hand, but any hand that will pay more bets on the flop probably has a piece of it, which usually translates to somewhere between 5 and 9 outs, or worse - they may have you beat already. But presuming you’re still ahead (which you will be the majority of the time against four other players on the flop), how do you plan to make up for those bets that you missed preflop?

Going with the above scenario, with limping/calling when the button raises preflop, your plan should probably be to check to the maniac and let him bet. When he does, you hope that both blinds call and then you can raise, trapping everyone for three bets. If you’re still ahead, this is an excellent plan, and you will likely have made up for the missed raise preflop. But what if one of the blinds fold? Or worse, both? Or worse, the button checks behind?! All of a sudden, your clever plot has done nothing but cost you money, and you’re sneaky attempt at trapping them has given everyone a cheap flop and a free turn. Now you’re suddenly in the middle of a tiny pot on the turn, and if you want anymore money you have to hope that someone calls a big bet in a relatively small pot. If you’re still ahead.

Observant readers will have noticed that your best case scenario on the flop - checking to the button who bets, both blinds call and you checkraise - is exactly the same amount of bets in the flop as if you had limp/reraised instead of limp/called before the flop. You’ve gained exactly nothing. This is just bad poker. Failing to get a raise in before the flop with AA is often as bad - and often worse - than limping with 72-offsuit is. This, if my memory serves me, is almost - but not entirely - a verbatim quote of Ed Miller, and he deserves props for it, not me. But the point still stands: Raise AA preflop, don’t limp with it.

Not convinced? Maybe you’re thinking that if you raise preflop, everyone will just fold. Well, so be it. You don’t know that they would have called for one bet either, and now you haven’t even given them the chance to pay two bets before the flop, which they may gladly have. I repeat, the only time you should be even remotely okay with limping with a powerhouse hand is when you strongly suspect someone in later position will raise you. Then, and only then, have you played smart.

Need more convincing? Here’s another one for you: Observant opponents, and there are actually one or two of these around, will see that you showdown AA and make a note of how you played it - I know I do. Why do I care enough about how you play a specific hand (that only comes up once every 221 deals) to bother making a note of it? Because knowing the difference in how someone plays AA/KK and AK means a great deal. If I know that this guy likes to deceivingly call preflop with AA (and maybe even KK), then when he raises preflop and bets the flop, that can drastically change how I play my top pair hands. I mean, come on - when you bet your AK unimproved on the flop into three players, aren’t you hoping they think you represent aces? If that’s the case, how about you actually play your aces like you do when you’re hoping we’ll believe you have them?

You get the idea, I’m sure. Play your aces fast preflop. Deception costs you money.

I’ll go polish my armor some. It’s starting to lose some of its luster.

Cheers,
FP