Slow playing AA

[Shandy]

Dont have hand history sorry. $10.70 double shoot out, first leg. 7 people started at table, 5 left. bb30. I had been trying to put across a calling station image, limping in many pots and calling small raises.
i am in CO with AxAx
sb is loose aggressive and the bigstack (3500),
bb- has been fairly quiet (1800).
Folds to me
I just call
sb raises to 90
bb calls
i call.
flop comes J52 rainbow
sb bets 210
bb min reraises
i shove
both call.
Thoughts on play would be appreciated.

 

[amygrantfan]

who won the hand?

 

[Shandy]

okay will post results as don't think they will effect analysis of hand, and may actually help.

sb had 1010
bb had JQ and rivered a Q to win with two pair

 

[lmille4574]

Did the aces hold or did they fold to your push. Normally when I have someone at the table doing the betting for me I will let them and only push if the board is scary. GL

 

[amygrantfan]

hmm, hard to say. i think if you made a big raise preflop and SB called, BB may fold with 2 big players before him. i generally don't like to slowplay aces - why let people see free cards. would rather have a little bit smaller pot but higher % chance of winning. i don't know what the odds say to do though. i'm guessing you shouldn't limp. but that's just me.

 

[vanquish]

i'm guessing you shouldn't limp.

^^ that

 

[Shandy]

I really still dont mind the way i played this hand, if the flop had come something like KJ8, or 3 of a suit, i wouldn't have pushed the flop, but i felt that on the flop the other two were probably only betting one pair, if they have a set of jacks- then i was always going to lose, set of 2s or 5s- well then i certainly should have raised preflop. But as it was with 2 cards to come they were drawing to 7 cards between the two of them, and i still got my chips in good, by my maths with 7 outs they had approx a 30% of winning, giving me 70% of basically trippling up, which would have set me up pretty well to get to the final table.

 

[joeeagles]

I think you played this fine. Table is 5-handed and you're dealt AA. With blinds at 15/30 if you raise here and everyone folds its a disaster, since all you pick up is the 45 from the blinds with your aces. You had no way of knowing the SB had TT, if you did you would have obviously raised PF. When he raised it to 90 PF if you reraise his bet everyone on the table plus their cats and dogs would put you on either AA or KK.

Considering also the image you had built I support this play, actually I think it was a very smart play because on the flop you were able to get both of them to put their chips in when they were WB, particularly the SB. For anyone who analyzes this hand, that is what you should keep in mind. This strategy got all the chips in the middle when ahead, what happened after is just a standard suckout and criticizing this play because of that is just being results oriented.

The play was a good one for a 5-handed table, it deserved better luck.

 

[dj11]

He who slow plays AA deserves to get caught, and will!

 

[joeeagles]

He who slow plays AA deserves to get caught, and will!

Perhaps dj, but she/he didn't get caught. Let me tell you what's getting overlooked here: the money went in as a 73% favored.

I'll give you the odds on this hand after the flop:

hero 73%
BB 18%
SB 9%.

Still think hero deserved to lose? Cause if you say that it means you think that the BB, who put all his chips in when he was a 4.5 to 1 dog, deserved to win. Why don't we do even better then, lets just say that the SB deserved to win, after calling an all-in as a 10 to 1 dog. Come on guys, lets be serious!!!

I don't understand why people keep looking at this like the hand was lost because it was slowplayed. Truth is this was well played and it took a big suckout to lose as a huge favored when chips in. Hero got 2 donks to call the all-in, 1 with TP and Q kicker, the other with an underpair, and we're almost saying that hero deserved to lose because on a 5-handed table, where 1 player had already folded, she/he limped with aces. Let me give a little reminder here. Harrington himself suggests to limp with aces 20% of the time, and that's on a full table. So I guess he's not good either, since he'll limp 1 time every 5 with aces.

Most of all everyone is completely disregarding the image that hero says to have built. Given the conditions (5-handed), the way hero was percieved (loose/calling station), and having an aggressive player in the SB who likely will overbet any pair, I don't really think this hand could have been played any better to maximize value. Evidence of it is getting 2 callers after going all-in. If everyone thinks that you should raise PF with aces 100% of the time no matter what, well good luck then because that's not the way to make money in holdem.

Keep in mind the way hero played this she/he will triple up 15 times every 20, and get knocked out 5 times out of 20. To me, that sounds like a pretty good deal, I'll take it.

 

[Shandy]

Thank you Joe, you said everything i wanted to say- just better. I think people may be saying i deserved it because they think i am posting it as a bad beat or sob story- i am not at all, i was not angry or even annoyed, i had been trying to portray a donk/calling station image, so i was not that surprised when i saw the hands which they had, they certainly didnt need a huge hand to call my allin from what they had seen previously. I also realised the risks of what i was doing, and would not have got so carried away if the flop had not been so dry.
And as joe points out this works great 15 out of 20 times- some may argue that just chipping away is the best way to go, but i find in these shootouts where there is nothing for 2nd- it is better to take some risks to knock people out and get the big stack early.
shandy

 

[Shandy]

wish i hadn't posted final result now, should have just posted the oppositions hands, think people are getting too results orientated (not you joe). Yes either opponent could have had 22 55 JJ, but i am willing to take that risk, and usually when another player hits a set against you it is going to happen whatever you raise preflop (without a huge overbet), as most will play any pokect pair (the big stack built his stack when i raised 8*bb with 99- and 2 others called and stacked of to him when he hit his set with 22), as it was the flop came J52, and i cant see many raising or calling with J2, J5 or 52- the only hand i was really concerned about was 34s, as they had 6 outs comared to another pps 2, or a Jx, 5x 2xs 5 outs, so at this point i was pretty sure that i was either way behind- 22 55 jj, or the other two were drawing to a max of 6 outs each or runner runner.
I did not post the hand as a bad beat- i knew the risks, i posted because i wanted peoples opinions on if they think it was worth it- also remember when contemplating this than many times they will have nothing or miss totally and i will still only collect the 45 chips.
shandy

 

[dj11]

Perhaps dj, but she/he didn't get caught. Let me tell you what's getting overlooked here: the money went in as a 73% favored.

I'll give you the odds on this hand after the flop:

hero 73%
BB 18%
SB 9%.

Still think hero deserved to lose? Cause if you say that it means you think that the BB, who put all his chips in when he was a 4.5 to 1 dog, deserved to win. Why don't we do even better then, lets just say that the SB deserved to win, after calling an all-in as a 10 to 1 dog. Come on guys, lets be serious!!!

I don't understand why people keep looking at this like the hand was lost because it was slowplayed. Truth is this was well played and it took a big suckout to lose as a huge favored when chips in. Hero got 2 donks to call the all-in, 1 with TP and Q kicker, the other with an underpair, and we're almost saying that hero deserved to lose because on a 5-handed table, where 1 player had already folded, she/he limped with aces. Let me give a little reminder here. Harrington himself suggests to limp with aces 20% of the time, and that's on a full table. So I guess he's not good either, since he'll limp 1 time every 5 with aces.

Most of all everyone is completely disregarding the image that hero says to have built. Given the conditions (5-handed), the way hero was percieved (loose/calling station), and having an aggressive player in the SB who likely will overbet any pair, I don't really think this hand could have been played any better to maximize value. Evidence of it is getting 2 callers after going all-in. If everyone thinks that you should raise PF with aces 100% of the time no matter what, well good luck then because that's not the way to make money in holdem.

Keep in mind the way hero played this she/he will triple up 15 times every 20, and get knocked out 5 times out of 20. To me, that sounds like a pretty good deal, I'll take it.

I posted this before I read his reply to you joe.
I missed the significance of this from the OP;
'I had been trying to put across a calling station image, limping in many pots and calling small raises.'

This shows some savvy, and if his original intent was to get all his money in the pot, and all of whoever else's money in the pot, then I can forgive him as it was a strategic play gone bad.

We all know slow playing aces has its serious downside, and I stand by my original response, 'He who slow plays aces deserves to get caught'.

 

[joeeagles]

I missed the significance of this from the OP;
I had been trying to put across a calling station image, limping in many pots and calling small raises.

This shows some savvy, and if his original intent was to get all his money in the pot, and all of whoever else's money in the pot, then I can forgive him as it was a strategic play gone bad.

Lol, I knew that a "flopologist", on 2nd thought, would reconsider.

It actually was a great, strategic play gone bad dj. Limping with aces, particularly shorthanded and with a loose/calling station image is a perfect setup. It desrved better luck.

Time ago I read about a big SM ($1050 buy-in) final table that was down to the last 4/5 players, and a good, solid on-line player limped with aces with a ton of money on the line. If I remember correctly he lost that hand too lol, and got knocked out, but again we can't be results oriented if you're ahead when all the chips go in. I'm going to search for that HH and post it here if I find it, just to show that no matter what the stakes are, good players make these moves, particularly in shorthanded situations.

 

[joeeagles]

Ok found it. This is copied and pasted from cardplayer.com:



"Next, THAY3R’s stack was running critically low at just $1.3 million, when the big blind was at $130,000. He limped preflop in the small blind and mrrain checked his option. The flop came 4

3

2

and THAY3R bet the minimum, $130,000. Mrrain raised all in, having THAY3R covered, and THAY3R called and showed A

A

. Mrrain revealed K

5

for an open-end straight draw and a flush draw. The turn was the 2

and the river the 6

, completing both a straight and a flush for mrrain (the flush played, of course) and THAY3R’s cracked aces sent him to the virtual rail in fourth place ($88,179)."



Ok, so he got knocked out in 4th place with this hand, meaning table was 4-handed. He was the SB and it was folded to him. So the situation is different from ours (lol but also the buy-in was $1050), still though he limped with AA for a strategic play. I checked odds for their hands on the flop, AA is ahead. The OESFD is 46% to win here when chips went in.

Just as a note, the player who limped with AA is ranked really high, he's a good player, not a donk.