Advanced search

AK challenge

Hand analysis. Post your trouble hands here

Moderators: iceman5, LPF Police Department

AK challenge

Postby iceman5 » Sun May 29, 2005 9:08 am

AK is probably the worst of all good NL hands. Everyone loves it, but its really not hat great of a money maker at all.

Who wants to post their AKo stats? I think you need at least 100 of them or the stats dont mean much. Please post them even if they are negative because thats the point. I know alot of very good players who lose money with AKo. Ive seen alot of guys who post a screen shot of therir PT stays and evenything looks good except I see red in that one column.

AA...green
AKs.green
AKo..red
AQs..green
AQ...green

Get the picture?

I'll start off

Prima....

AKo...230 hands.....2.24 BB per hand

Party..

AKo...237 hands.....-0.06 BB per hand

Total...467 hands......1.07 BB per hand.

These are true win rates (double PT)

This is also one more huge anamoly I have between Prima and Party (along with QQ).
I cant figure out why I win so much at Prima and lose at Party with the same hands.
I think its because I have supreme confidence at Prima and I dominate the tables there so I raise much more preflop with premium hands. I'll open raise to 6bbs with AA, AK, QQ, TT, 89s..and other hands..but at Party I dont do this nearly as much.

For some reason the cartoonish look of Party makes $12 look like a bigger preflop raise. I think this is somethign I need to work on.

Anyway, the point of the post is AKo stats
iceman5 [As]
User avatar
iceman5
Semi Pro (Online)
 
Posts: 13875
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 6:49 pm
Location: Texas

Postby Smokin'Al » Sun May 29, 2005 10:00 am

AKo results (in Iceman BB rather than PTBB)

- 152 instances in current database (from Party and Stars).
- +2.7 BB/hand
- (won 65%, pre-flop raise 75%, went to showdown 20%, won at showdown 75%)

A bit more analysis, probably too few samples for significance, but still:
- Took down blinds/limpers 45 times: +2.0 BB/hand
- Breakdown of 66 hands in which I raised pre-flop (+1.9 BB/hand, won 50%)
....- 32 times bet flop: +1.5 BB/hand (won 69%, wtsd 25%, w$sd 50%)
....- 26 times checked flop: -0.88 BB/hand (won 35%, wtsd 20%, w$sd 80%)
....- 8 times other (6 folded, 1 called, 1 raised)
- 13 times cold called pre-flop raise: +4.7 BB/hand (won 31%, wtsd 25%, w$sd 100%)
- 40 unraised flops: +3.4 BB/hand (won 48%, wtsd 15%, w$sd 100%)

(totalling the above, note there's a few hands PT's breakdown didn't want to tell me about!)
User avatar
Smokin'Al
Enthusiast (B&M & Online)
 
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 5:48 pm
Location: London, UK and Baltimore, MD

Postby HopyMSU » Sun May 29, 2005 10:11 am

AKo
387 times
68.48% win
Net win: $849.45 (various levels...NL/PL and 6-max $25-$400 games)
PTBB/hand: 1.23
VP$IP 98.71%, PFR 89.92%
WtSD: 22.06%, W$SD: 58.06%
User avatar
HopyMSU
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 4:22 pm
Location: Ohio

Postby Aisthesis » Sun May 29, 2005 3:46 pm

I'm not at all happy with mine in the current database (I know I had them as winners earlier and am just not sure how I messed up):

AKs: 3.58 BB (26 hands)
AKo: -0.88 BB (98 hands)

together: 0.06 BB

The thing I'm beginning to question the most is actually is Brunson's "follow up with a flop bet." I almost think that that only makes sense if you're having trouble getting action.
User avatar
Aisthesis
 
Posts: 3285
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 9:36 am

Postby piersmajestyk » Sun May 29, 2005 5:23 pm

Well here are some nice negative numbers for you on AK :shock:

AKs: 104 times, VIP: 96.35%, PR: 73%, -0.97 PTBB/100, W$SD: 27%
AKo: 333 times, VIP: 96.7%, PR: 75%, -0.17 PTBB/100, W$SD: 35.2%

AQs: 111 times, VIP: 88.3%, PR: 64%, 1.75 BB/100, W$SD: 63.2%
AQo: 305 times, VIP: 87.2%, PR: 55.4%, 0.09 PTBB/100, W$SD: 47%

My AQ results have held me up overal with the negative AK results.
Last edited by piersmajestyk on Sun May 29, 2005 5:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
piersmajestyk
Pro (B&M & Online)
 
Posts: 2684
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 9:21 am
Location: Durham, NC

Postby Stelvask » Sun May 29, 2005 5:26 pm

ok. i filted PT to just show me hands at 100nl, 200nl, and 400nl.

AKs: 183 instances. 2.6 BB/100 hands

AKo: 557 instance. 1.4 BB/100 hands


I still feel it's important to note that i've lost my stack with AKo in teh same situation on two seperate occasions. raise preflop, QJT flop with a flush draw, wind up all in against AKs, who turns or rivers the flush. take those hands out and my AKo stats jump significantly. :(

~Dustin
-[4h]-
Stelvask
User avatar
Stelvask
Enthusiast (Online)
 
Posts: 1074
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 4:24 pm
Location: SoCal

Postby iceman5 » Sun May 29, 2005 7:12 pm

Im going to look very deep into my numbers in the next week or so.
My numbers look fine over all, but the Party numbers are horrendous ( as are Piers' and Aisthesis' numbers). I suspected exactly this and I need to get to the bottom of it.

I could fold AK every time at Party and be better off. Thats just not acceptable. If I have to look at every single AK hand I will.
iceman5 [As]
User avatar
iceman5
Semi Pro (Online)
 
Posts: 13875
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 6:49 pm
Location: Texas

Postby Stoneburg » Sun May 29, 2005 8:00 pm

Guess I am worst so far, what do I win?

Had it 106 times.
AKo -1.96bb/Hand

It's just plain horrible. I've rethought my play of it a lot lately though and hope to see an improvement. For me, AKo has become a sucker hand. The feel of joy I used to get when I picked it up (before PT showed me the reality) has been transfered to 87s and 76s, the real money making monsters :)
User avatar
Stoneburg
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 9:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Postby AlexMR » Mon May 30, 2005 12:15 am

User avatar
AlexMR
 
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 11:27 am

An AK rant by ThaNinja,

Postby thaninja » Mon May 30, 2005 2:57 am

User avatar
thaninja
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 9:44 pm
Location: Maryland

Postby Aisthesis » Tue May 31, 2005 1:34 am

I'll be most interested to hear what you come up with, ice. Although few of us have achieved it, I'm thinking a well-played AKo should be somewhere around 2 and AKs maybe as much as 3. That's what I think one should really shoot for.

And it also makes AK indeed a very good hand to have, as it should be--significantly worse than AA/KK, obviously, a little worse than QQ, somewhere around JJ, but better on average than the little pairs (which are still really my favorite, although aggravating when you don't hit your set--they're just so much fun when you do!!!).

Here's my feel largely from my current B&M game:

First, I think it's very important to play AK pretty fast (consistent raising, and even to be considered for re-raises in some situations)--obviously much different than the little pairs. I think it also adds value to your big pairs with a consistent raising policy.

The trick, I think, is the "whether or not to follow up with a bet on the flop." A virtual auto-bet is just not good. But I do think it's important as raiser to be looking for an excuse to bet rather than an excuse not to (I'll also post a difficult hand I had tonight--I'm pretty sure my AK is still in the black at my B&M, but it has definitely had some swings).

There's no question about a very serious pot-sized bet when you hit. But I think the profit/loss is really going to be a feel for when you can bet unimproved and when you can't--and it's difficult to define exactly when you can and when you can't. If the table is pretty tight and capable of laying down, then you probably should do it as a rule. If it's loose with a lot of players looking for excuses to call (or worse, raise or checkraise), then you shouldn't. The better you can know your opponents in the hand, the better off you are.

Sorry that's so vague and fairly obvious, but I really do think it's hard to put a finger on it more than just "feel." The only really clear distinction I think one can make is: At tight tables do follow it up if you possibly can, and at loose ones, let it go pretty easily and follow it up unimproved only rarely. But in both cases, a never or an always is not really a good way to play it. And, even improved (as in the hand I'm getting ready to post), there are also some definite problem flops.

I like Stel's and Stoneburg's stats here and would be interested in hearing from them a little more about how they play AK.

Piers' and mine don't look so great. Would be interested to hear from Piers, who actually surprizes me here since I know he's one of the best players on here, why he thinks they look so questionable.

I figure my own results suffer from being a little too routine in betting out unimproved. That's my hypothesis anyway. I still like being pretty routine about raising the thing (oh, ice, one thing that might be interesting to look at on your data, is how the unraised AK looks vs. raised AK--I gather you have some serious doubts about more or less auto-raising on it).

Let's get some more analysis going on this one, because it's definitely a VERY important hand in influencing how one's win-rates look. I think it certainly needs to be at least at 2 BB/hand. (to Stel: are those PTBB or true big blinds in your win rates?)
User avatar
Aisthesis
 
Posts: 3285
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 9:36 am

Postby Stoneburg » Wed Jun 01, 2005 9:07 am

User avatar
Stoneburg
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 9:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Postby legendary loser » Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:25 am

User avatar
legendary loser
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 10:11 pm

Postby bobby » Wed Jun 01, 2005 12:08 pm

User avatar
bobby
Enthusiast (Online)
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 10:48 am
Location: California

Postby Yogadude » Wed Jun 01, 2005 1:00 pm

If everybody was able to make a living off of their hobbies the world would be a much better place.
User avatar
Yogadude
 
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Hollywood CA

Next

Return to No Limit Hold'em Cash Games

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron