AA pf question

I know it gets tricky on how to play them... pretty basic stuff for a plo player but how often will a hand like ds kj89 hit a pair? How often will they hit a pair plus fd? How often will that particular hand hit a pair plus a straight draw?

Is theyre any way to find out this info?

Thanks so much.

Thanks alot.. appreciate it.

Just checked omaha odds calculator.. is theyre a way of finding out like what my question asked? Ex. A run down hitting a pair + straight draw?

Appreciate it

If you can get a third of your stack in pre with any AAxx, you basically should, always. More than that, and pump it up. Less, and still, usually pump it up.

It's possible that you're not being aggressive enough with other parts of your range, which makes your AA more face-up, making them harder to play, giving others better implied odds, the ability to bluff you, etc.

Either that, or variance. But getting your whole stack in pre with aces is a good habit, not a bad one. I'm actually somewhat addicted to that habit

What Wazz said. I think getting in 30% of your stack pre you can profitably shove dark if it’s heads up. You’re probably running into spots where it’s multi way and or not enough went in pre to auto stack off.

Thanks for replies guys it just makes sense to do so...

I was up to a 700bb stack this particular time and a 200bb stack I "think" wanted to just flip pre...

Basically is it just part of the game to just give at 55%? Seems like you play a skilled game and chip up gradually than only questioning because to lose a big chunk of your stack to a flip from the human side of it could cause tilt... but I haven't been grinding consistently and don't feel desensitized to these things like in the past when I was playing professionally so that is prob. Def. It. But, it seems like to have a big stack and to lose a good portion to a flip just well I guess it just the game and 55% I'd 55%!

PLO is crazy high variance. It's hard to generate significant edge postflop - you might find yourself dominating some of the time, but range against range is very frequently like 52 - 48. Getting comfortable with the variance isn't enough - you have to embrace it. 'Proper' PLO is going to involve lots of gigantic flips, lots of heavy losing sessions despite playing perfectly. This is avoidable, but at the cost of significant EV to the point where a slightly winning player can become losing if they take the lower variance play too often.

Thanks Wazz that's what I'm figuring out.. ty.

I play in games very deep myself with most opponents also very deep with very few short stackers. A lot of the time the games play loose and somewhat passive before the flop and a three bet almost always means good aces. That said many have learned to play mediocre to bad aces without raising or without three betting unless they can get the SPR below one.

I will three bet very good aces but balance this with three betting good rundowns suited at least once with no more than one gap and the gap has to be near the bottom. If the game is especially loose passive I'll limp behind a limper up front as long as the hand has some nuttiness. To me nuttiness is a lot of connection or and/or pairs above tens and/or a suited ace. But if the weaker hand I limp gets raised once or twice and I'm no longer getting a good price I'll ditch it pre flop. I believe this really cuts down on having bad swings.

I look at low suited hands more as something you might back door with another primary draw or as blockers to an opponent's nut suited draw. Heads up or short handed it's different but with three or more opponents making small suits a primary draw is horrific. I think of small sets the same way. If I'm betting a small set I have other good features in my hand. or I'm against one or two opponents who play almost face up.

In these loose games the hands I avoid are low card hands and hands with low to medium pairs. Set over set is common and it's hard to apply pressure with third set on the flop.

I sort of disagree with Wazz (otherwise one of my favorite posters of all time) regarding post flop edges. I find I'm sometimes getting it in with huge draws against weaker draws or current nuts with redraws to another nut or two against opponents who only have the current nuts. Here your post flop advantage is enormous and can lead with some luck to enormous wins with little downside.

The others have made some good comments but I'll add a few more.

I play in games very deep myself with most opponents also very deep with very few short stackers. A lot of the time the games play loose and somewhat passive before the flop and a three bet almost always means good aces. That said many have learned to play mediocre to bad aces without raising or without three betting unless they can get the SPR below one.

I will three bet very good aces but balance this with three betting good rundowns suited at least once with no more than one gap and the gap has to be near the bottom. If the game is especially loose passive I'll limp behind a limper up front as long as the hand has some nuttiness. To me nuttiness is a lot of connection or and/or pairs above tens and/or a suited ace. But if the weaker hand I limp gets raised once or twice and I'm no longer getting a good price I'll ditch it pre flop. I believe this really cuts down on having bad swings.

I look at low suited hands more as something you might back door with another primary draw or as blockers to an opponent's nut suited draw. Heads up or short handed it's different but with three or more opponents making small suits a primary draw is horrific. I think of small sets the same way. If I'm betting a small set I have other good features in my hand. or I'm against one or two opponents who play almost face up.

In these loose games the hands I avoid are low card hands and hands with low to medium pairs. Set over set is common and it's hard to apply pressure with third set on the flop.

I sort of disagree with Wazz (otherwise one of my favorite posters of all time) regarding post flop edges. I find I'm sometimes getting it in with huge draws against weaker draws or current nuts with redraws to another nut or two against opponents who only have the current nuts. Here your post flop advantage is enormous and can lead with some luck to enormous wins with little downside.

Let's get specific. 100bb stacks, CO open, SB 3Bet.

• We should 4-bet around 7.5% of the time (6014 combos), and 78% (4698) have AA in them. That means 22% don't.
  
• Of AA hands we would call 32.5% and 4-bet 67.5%.
  
  • AAds leans towards calling here 66%
    
  • AAr leans towards 4-bet 84%
    
  • AAss leans towards 4-bet 68%
    
  • AAA is a pure 4-bet
    
  • AAK is a pure 4-bet
    
  • AAss with wheel cards or connected cards likes to call
    
  • AAss with disconnected cards likes to 4 bet
    
  
  

It's a clear pattern and somewhat different than the responses. In this scenario, in position, you want to call AA with lots of playability and 4-bet without playability.

What about oop? Let's say you open CO, BTN 3-bets, blinds fold, and back to you? You 4-bet 14% of the time (almost double 11,125). For AA hands you fold AAAA and 4-bet the rest. So we are essentially pure 4-betting AA oop, but it only accounts for 6960 combos (62.6%) so you should be 4-betting with A LOT of other hands. Let's be clear, we are 4-betting way more AA hands (all of them) but AA represents less of our 4-betting range. 4-betting oop with a 100bb stack is great for the reasons Wazz sited - you get to play short stacked postflop negating the positional disadvantage somewhat.

edit: This changes a lot of you are talking about deepstacked play - all of hte above was for 100bb stacks.

Ty middlebridge.

MarkD this starting coming to my mind when I had a 700bb stack. I was kind of thinking the opponent just wanted to flip with a good run down at 200bbs. Thinking this situation might come up fairly often. But, he could ve been 4 betting with a hand like you said to keep his range along the lines that you Saif but I'd "think" this happens more at 300bbs+ deep than what he had which was 200bbs.

What is the exact question? Give somethign specific but i think the answer is yes.

AA is just really good.

What is the exact scenario? He has 200bb so it doesn't matter what you have. IP you should still be 4-betting 70% of AA combos and oop you should still be 4-betting 93% of AA combos.

Thank you that's what I was wondering in the question.

So, I mean at say 400bbs deep are we lookung to g.i.i. with only really good aa?

Is theyre basically any set rules that plo pros adhere by? I'm guessing like jazz said that you basically are supposed to g.i.i. no matter what.. I just feel like (results oriented) that in certain lineups where you can chip up and isn't that tough of a table that it's just hard to "flip," for 200bbs or so...

So, yeah is theyre basically a strat. That seasoned pros follow with aa at certain amounts of bbs?

Appreciate the information on what was already Said but, yeah was wondering 8f theyres more to be said.

Just dawned on me the 70 vs 93 percent unsure if above anything still needs to be said.

Is theyre a site that could tell you odds of 1 pair plus fd hitting or 1 pair plus straight draw? Is theyre something like that out they're? Just to kind of internalize those stats