Alright some interesting things were brought up. On a normal table against decent players and regular donks, I raise this hand almost always.

Here the table dynamics were quite different (I forgot to mention that the BB was really weak tight). I wanted to play as many hands as possible against the donk king, especially with premium hands. He plays garbage for 2 bets but not 3.

I'll need to improve to win this hand anyway, the Donk in the CO isn't gonna fold if I re-raise unless an A flops and he doesn't have one. So I figured that cold calling here fit for several reasons, namely keep the donk king in, maybe get some more money in from the weak tight BB, disguise my hand a bit against the UTG+1 raiser, and finally for meta game reasons which the competent players on the table may pick up on.

I also recall these type of hands being mentioned in HPFAP, be more apt to raise with good players to act after you and less so when bad players remain. It got me thinking alot about these and somewhat similar situations.

Let's make something clear because this can go in a really stupid direction really fast.

You're always a better chance to win that pot right there right now heads up as opposed to multiway.

AND

AK makes more money against 2 loose players as opposed to one.

Both of these statements are irrelevant in this situation because Phyto's example implies that you're not getting rid of anyone with a raise. That said, you have Ace-hi. With a drawing hand, you invest a little to win a lot. The only times, you push the aggression a bit more early is if you won't get paid later or to force you opponent to inflate the pot to make them chase.

Your objective: money.

You can't protect your hand. Your hand's value for this time is inconclusive. Throw all of the numbers you want at me. This is gambling. Poker is a game of incomplete information. You'll get the information you need and be better equipped to start making smart investments knowing 71.4% of the information as opposed to 28.6% of the information.

AND

The rounds are more expensive after 85.7% of the information of your hand has been revealed is FOR A REASON. Professional poker players invent and/or modify the poker games we play. Through history, the nature of the gambler is to chase and professional gamblers knew this. You get the value when your hand has value. Fear of not getting it isn't an option is your example.

__________________

Alex,

Interesting comments. Is it your opinion then that we should look to slow down with hands like AK because we don't necessarily have as big of an edge on the early streets as we MAY have on the later streets, and therefore we should wait to exploit the bigger edge when its more costly to our opponents?

I ask because this is contrary to what Miller says in SSH. He says hands like AK, AQ etc are monsters which should be pushed hard early to maximize our equity advantage against what is likely to be worse hands.

I admit that I struggle with this because it seems to lead to me losing big pots and winning little ones with these hands.

I am reluctant to become a limper with these hands...and I don't think thats what you are proposing, but it makes me wonder where we should draw the line between these two schools of thought. When does the one strategy become more applicable than the other?

No. No. No. No. No.

Poker is a game of relativity and you haven't named THE situation that Phyto's discussing. My comments in this thread should be taken within the context of this thread.

Re-read what I quoted from HPFAP. These are not two seperate schools of thought. It is the one fact that poker is relative ergo, adaptions are necessary to be a winning player.

You're getting into the shootuts that S&M are discussing.

__________________

I am going to stay out of all the theory discussion. I find it both interesting and applicable but my head hurts right now so I'll stick to the simple stuff.

I like a three bet here since the players are donks. They will probably check the flop to you so you can take a free card if no A or K flops if you wish.

If they have 99 1010 JJ or QQ they will slow down if an A or K flops so it is best to get more money out of them preflop, the bigger pot will tie them to it as well so they will be more likely to call you down even if they think they are beat.

I'm not a big fan of coldcalling in general as discussed in many recent threads, but when I do it - it tends to be against good/thinking players since the deception factor may help me make more money - the stupid donks are going to just play their hand - there is no point in giving up some equity preflop trying to deceive since they will make errors regardless postflop.

__________________

1.) The implication is that with two people, when an A or K DOESN'T flop, you're not goaded into calling because of the pot odds that you created for yourself.

2.) Bad players can be trapped on good boards for you when they're raising with bad Aces and Kings which is equally, if not more common, than them having a pair.

I think you make some great points, but you have to distinguish the difference between tricky calling against good players and calling to trap bad players.

I'm holding off this thread for a while because I'm starting to repeat myself.

Anyone who knows me on this forum, I'm usually the last person to say call instead of raise in ANY situation. So, I'm clearly discussing this singular situation.

__________________

OK -
1. I understand the situational dynamic you're going for but I disagree with the hand you're using to accomplish your strategy. A-K doesn't fair as well multi-handed as does AA/KK/QQ which I believe are better suited to what you're up to since even if the flop misses which it will 2/3 of the time, at least with a large pair you still have a made hand to play with!
2. keeping king donk in a hand vs AK has it's inherant risks such as him playing 7-2s and flopping 7-2-Q. Facing a 3x re-raise (2x to him in BB) it's quite likely he would have folded that garbage where as for 1x more he'll come along - just as you wanted. With AK you're finished but with AA/KK/QQ you're still very much alive and way ahead!
3. Knowing you still have to improve the hand - which you will only 1/3 of the time - you give up significant positional advantge that a pf raise would have provided - that of bluffing the flop or taking a free card. UTG isn't likley to give up a c-bet once you just call! Faced with a missed flop and a c-bet from UTG you are now faced with Ace high and only 2 draws to catch up to anyone who caught bottom pair!
4. Disguising AK has much more value from the blinds than it does from the button. Now if you were to smooth call AA/KK/QQ to allow BB to come in and disguise you strength to UTG, I think you're onto something here and for this particular dynamic you're discussing.

My take on it anyway

__________________
:ah :as :ad :8c :8d

What do you guys think of the position issue? I think the key factor for me that makes this situation a clear threebet is that you are on the button.

I have found that with a threebet here on the button that at 90% of tables I get checked to on the flop. Assuming everyone called preflop, I think I take a free card here.

I have found by coldcalling, 90% of the time you are facing a bet on the flop from the preflop aggressor.

It seems like this arguement alone would push me towards threebetting.

If this question was originally posed as being out of the blinds I would be more likely to coldcall.

__________________

I posed the positional arguement in points 3 & 4 of my previous post so will not repeat them here again.

I agree coldcalling AK from the blinds has more value (strategic not EV) than from the button and I hope I made a good arguement for making this situational play with large pocket pairs instead of AK. In the blinds however, I would definately re-raise with large pocket pairs while coldcalling the A-K.

__________________
:ah :as :ad :8c :8d

Good replies so far, if the situation was even marginally different I would be 3-betting the vast majority of the time, I didn't cold call here to be tricky or because I was passive fearing that my hand isn't very good. Though both of those have applicable meta-game values. I know there is risks involved in letting a player with no starting hand requirements in, but I am more than happy to risk getting trapped by 84 on a 84K flop.

If king donk was the CO this is a 100% raise, if he was in the BB this was a 100% raise also.

I am certainly not saying that cold-calling here is the right move, heck I don't even know if I made a mistake doing it. I might be a bit results orientated as well because of how the hand played out.

I appreciate the comments, maybe I should take a poll of who would play the hand in which way.

Growlers --->3-bet
Aces -----> 3-bet
Alex -----> not really sure
TA------> 80:20 3-bet