I always hear folks talk about how AA, KK, QQ need to be raised to narrow the field because they don't play well in multiway pots.

I've never been a believer in this - though of course I raise these hands for the simple reason that I've got a huge hand and I want to get paid some money. And big pots are hard for folks to get away from once their in it.

Here's some research on Sklansky's starting hands, and the mutli way sensitivity of certain hands. You'll notice AKo is extremely sensitive after a certain number of opponents (I think more than 4 and it drops significantly). But no sensitivity for AA, KK, QQ. And apparently JJ and TT play better in multiway pots.

Wonder what folks think about this.

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/People/mummert/poker/

This is a good reference.

Reading this altered the wy I play all drawing hands and caused me to ask loads of queestions and do further work on it.

The problem with AA,KK,QQ,JJ is that in order to make money you need ppl to call - and the more the merrier. BUT with more ppl calling the harder they are to play...

You get these balances throughout NL. In order to win pots (not hands) you must be constantly on the verge of actually losing the hand...

The prime example of this is the flush draw aginst tptk. Money just flows into the pot in this conflict because both ppl have a fair stab at taking down the pot.

__________________
See me playing $10/$20NL like it was play money

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...405&q=xxdemexx

Doberman: "but Sarge, isn't poker gambling and just luck?"
Sgt. Bilko:" not the way I play it"

try this link to, click on the players guide link and unzip.

http://evgr.com/TechCorner/

Opened my eyes to life after Sklansky in poker.

****EDIT**** Ha! same thing. I read this about 3 years ago, and have referenced it here before.

__________________
For poker news, strategy, and more, check out my daily column at Examiner.com

I read the whole study twice and figure I’ll have to do at least once more. A couple of thoughts I had while reading the alterations to Skalanky’s groups were ‘Pure Mathematical Science’ vs ‘Real Life Experiences from the Experts who Lived It” and the fact that science has proven beyond any doubt that Bumble Bees CAN NOT fly - they just forgot to tell that to the Bumble Bee! There is an analogy here although with poker it may have to be a controversial one.
As so many of the experts quote “Poker is not a game of cards played with people but rather a game of people played with cards” and I am wondering if many of the starting hand guidelines given over the years by so many of the big names in poker hasn’t been skewed somewhat by their ‘people skills’ and how they apply aggression and trapping into their ‘total game’?!! Also while science is often used as the ‘proof’ because the numbers don’t lie – I have to wonder just how isolated each ‘proof’ is unto itself and not reflective of the ‘total game’.
For example - How many times do you have to have your AA sucked out on the river by 8-4o before you REALLY want to thin the field of these hands pre-flop? You may want change your reason for raising from ‘thinning’ to ‘value’ but I’ll stick with Doyal, David and Mike on this one and raise to thin - it still amounts to getting money in the pot but in my mind if a Calling Station want to play garbage, it will have to come at a cost, otherwise get out of the way! The ‘luck’ factor in poker is expressed as a percentage in science so while AA will win 85% of the time vs one player (who will get lucky 15% of the time), that luck is increased to 53% to beat the AA when 5 opposition enter the pot. *Example percentages taken off a chart but Poker Stove comes very close in comparison*. Those who slow play AA and KK from early position in a loose full ring game are taking an unnecessary risk IMO. Better a smaller pot won than a bigger pot lost!
This study may cause me to re-think certain starting hands and possibly open up my game a bit from mid to later positions but for the most part, the Top 16 will always be raised-to-thin hands!

u arent really raising to thin the field, but you are raising to get build the pot, and define opponents hands.

When you raise with AA - you really shouldn't be too upset if you get multiple callers. It has been well discussed on this forum that AA gains EV up to between 8 and 11 opponents depending on whom you believe.

I don't think I have ever heard anyone here say AA doesn't play well multi-way, but I prefer playing against fewer people because it is easier.

I thought that AA is always a HUGE favourite, no matter how many callers, at least in terms of the numbers and statistics...but it's just that if you have a lot of callers, there's more chance of someone sucking out on you?

A sort of 'sod's law' effect! So you raise to shut people out, because it's sod's law if you don't the BB will check with 72off, and the flop will come 7-7-2.........

Just as a note, it's only impossible for bumblebees to fly by conventional aerodynamics. Bees don't fly like airplanes, it's an airfoil. The biologist who orignially published that article was drunk and not thinking.

Science never proves anything that is technically happening as wrong, science only tries to explain why things happen the way they do.

The raise with AA is because most of it's strength is preflop.

Preflop, you know you are ahead and so getting as much in the pot as possible is the way to go.

Once the flop lands then there's a chance you are no longer ahead.

Essentially you know that your opponents are drawing against you when you have AA and you should make them pay to see the draw (not that they will be aware they are drawing).

The principle is the same as playing anyone with a draw. Make them make a mistake and don't give them free cards.

There's definately times to slow play AA but all things being equal you want as much in the pot preflop with as many callers as you can get with AA, finding yourself still betting on the river against multiple opponents is a sure way to get sucked out.

Let me try to explain why noone understands this starting hand contradiction.

AA has all the features of a top pair hand which plays well against smaller fields. AA also has the features of a big hand (the 11.5% set on the flop potential plus the overpair) which plays well against large fields. You raise AA to build a big pot first and foremost, BUT you are not unhappy when players fold since it also plays well in smaller field pots.

You are also raising it for information, to possibly gain better position on your opponents, and to represent strength.

Poker is a game of contradictions, when you semi-bluff you want your opponent to fold but are not completely unhappy when they call. Raising pre-flop with AA, KK, QQ is a similar situation you want callers but are not unhappy when lesser hands fold.

__________________
For poker news, strategy, and more, check out my daily column at Examiner.com

Thats the beauty of AA, no matter what happens you should be happy

__________________
For poker news, strategy, and more, check out my daily column at Examiner.com