You talk about two common mistakes in judging risks: taking big risks with bad odds (breaking the “fold pre principle”) or playing it too safe with good odds (breaking the “pocket ace principle”).
In poker, these ideas can clash. If you follow the “fold pre” rule and always fold bad hands, then when you finally play your pocket aces, other players will likely just fold. Plus, if you’re up against 5 players with pocket aces, your chances of winning not so high. So, I don’t think these are universal combo rules. It always depends on who’s at the table, the blinds, and the stack sizes.
When it comes to marriage, friendship, or work, I can’t imagine anyone sizing up their partner or job like they’re pocket aces or 7-2 offsuit! I doubt you’d ask someone out or take a job if you thought of them as 7-2. I’m not even sure you can rate things like that in life.
I totally agree that sunk cost is a big problem (it’s a common thinking trap), but you can’t just boil it down to “fold pre” or “pocket ace” principles. It’s oversimplification.
When you say you often see people playing bad hands, that’s just your view. Let me tweak a saying: “Don’t judge someone until you’ve played their cards.”
In today’s digital world, going for a “pocket ace” strategy, like picking an obvious, “strong” business or idea -throws you into crazy competition. Everyone’s chasing those aces, and it’s super expensive to even get in the game. But now, with tech being so cheap and accessible, you can take a small risk and play something like suited connectors. Those “weaker” ideas might just turn into a royal flush—what startups call a unicorn! So, I’d say young people should play their “bad hands” and go for those wild, less obvious bets. Haha!
In today’s digital world, going for a “pocket ace” strategy, like picking an obvious, “strong” business or idea -throws you into crazy competition. Everyone’s chasing those aces, and it’s super expensive to even get in the game. But now, with tech being so cheap and accessible, you can take a small risk and play something like suited connectors. Those “weaker” ideas might just turn into a royal flush—what startups call a unicorn! So, I’d say young people should play their “bad hands” and go for those wild, less obvious bets. Haha!
Good business ideas everyone knows about are aces on the board, not pocket aces. The pocket aces are ideas with alpha, not merely good ones.
“So, I don’t think these are universal combo rules. It always depends on who’s at the table, the blinds, and the stack sizes.”
This is an extremely minor nitpick but it is almost always +EV to get your money in pre-flop with pocket aces in No Limit Holdem, regardless of how many other players are already in the pot.
The only exceptions to this are incredibly convoluted and unlikely tournament spots, where the payout structure can mean you’re justified in folding any hand you’ve been dealt.
The only exceptions to this are incredibly convoluted and unlikely tournament spots
If I may nitpick your nitpick, it’s possible to justifiably fold AA preflop in a cash game, right? Say you’re on a table full of opponents so bad that you’re almost guaranteed to win most of their money by the end of the night just by playing conservatively, but the stakes are very high and you could lose your entire bankroll by getting busted a few times. Depending on the exact details (maybe I need to go further and say your entire bankroll is on the table, or at least you have no way of accessing the rest of it tonight), I think you could legitimately nope out of a 9-way all-in pot preflop without even looking at your cards.
Or, for a case that doesn’t depend on bankroll management: let’s say you’re on the big blind (which is negligible compared to everyone’s stack size), everyone is all in by the time the action gets to you, and you have an extremely good read on every opponent: you know Andy would only ever push preflop with AA, and Brenda, Carl, Donna, and Eoin would not have called without a pocket pair. I haven’t done the exact maths, but if the others all have unique pairs (including Andy’s aces) then I think your AA has negative EV in a 6-way all in; if you can’t rely on the pairs being unique, I’m not sure whether that tips the balance, but if necessary we can work that stipulation into the story. (Let’s say Andy still definitely has the other two aces, but Brenda acted first and you know she would have slowplayed a really big pair and would have tried to see a cheap flop with a small pair, whereas Carl wouldn’t have called without Kings or better… and Donna has a tell that she only exhibits with pocket 2s...)
(I’m saying this all for the fun of nitpicking, not to make any serious point!)
edit: I guess there’s a simpler case too, if we’re talking about cash games in a casino! You just need to be playing heads up against Andy (who only ever shoves with aces), and for the rake to be high enough relative to the blinds.
(I’m saying this all for the fun of nitpicking, not to make any serious point!)
A more realistic case is that you are on a huge tournament bubble with the shortest stack and 2 players in front of you have gone all in, and although calling with AA would be +EV in a cash game, if you take into account ICM considerations, it’s no longer worth it for you personally to join them (if the bump from 3x-ing doesn’t matter that much bc maybe all other players’ stacks are bigger than yours).
You talk about two common mistakes in judging risks: taking big risks with bad odds (breaking the “fold pre principle”) or playing it too safe with good odds (breaking the “pocket ace principle”).
In poker, these ideas can clash. If you follow the “fold pre” rule and always fold bad hands, then when you finally play your pocket aces, other players will likely just fold. Plus, if you’re up against 5 players with pocket aces, your chances of winning not so high. So, I don’t think these are universal combo rules. It always depends on who’s at the table, the blinds, and the stack sizes.
When it comes to marriage, friendship, or work, I can’t imagine anyone sizing up their partner or job like they’re pocket aces or 7-2 offsuit! I doubt you’d ask someone out or take a job if you thought of them as 7-2. I’m not even sure you can rate things like that in life.
I totally agree that sunk cost is a big problem (it’s a common thinking trap), but you can’t just boil it down to “fold pre” or “pocket ace” principles. It’s oversimplification.
When you say you often see people playing bad hands, that’s just your view. Let me tweak a saying: “Don’t judge someone until you’ve played their cards.”
In today’s digital world, going for a “pocket ace” strategy, like picking an obvious, “strong” business or idea -throws you into crazy competition. Everyone’s chasing those aces, and it’s super expensive to even get in the game. But now, with tech being so cheap and accessible, you can take a small risk and play something like suited connectors. Those “weaker” ideas might just turn into a royal flush—what startups call a unicorn! So, I’d say young people should play their “bad hands” and go for those wild, less obvious bets. Haha!
Good business ideas everyone knows about are aces on the board, not pocket aces. The pocket aces are ideas with alpha, not merely good ones.
“So, I don’t think these are universal combo rules. It always depends on who’s at the table, the blinds, and the stack sizes.”
This is an extremely minor nitpick but it is almost always +EV to get your money in pre-flop with pocket aces in No Limit Holdem, regardless of how many other players are already in the pot.
The only exceptions to this are incredibly convoluted and unlikely tournament spots, where the payout structure can mean you’re justified in folding any hand you’ve been dealt.
If I may nitpick your nitpick, it’s possible to justifiably fold AA preflop in a cash game, right? Say you’re on a table full of opponents so bad that you’re almost guaranteed to win most of their money by the end of the night just by playing conservatively, but the stakes are very high and you could lose your entire bankroll by getting busted a few times. Depending on the exact details (maybe I need to go further and say your entire bankroll is on the table, or at least you have no way of accessing the rest of it tonight), I think you could legitimately nope out of a 9-way all-in pot preflop without even looking at your cards.
Or, for a case that doesn’t depend on bankroll management: let’s say you’re on the big blind (which is negligible compared to everyone’s stack size), everyone is all in by the time the action gets to you, and you have an extremely good read on every opponent: you know Andy would only ever push preflop with AA, and Brenda, Carl, Donna, and Eoin would not have called without a pocket pair. I haven’t done the exact maths, but if the others all have unique pairs (including Andy’s aces) then I think your AA has negative EV in a 6-way all in; if you can’t rely on the pairs being unique, I’m not sure whether that tips the balance, but if necessary we can work that stipulation into the story. (Let’s say Andy still definitely has the other two aces, but Brenda acted first and you know she would have slowplayed a really big pair and would have tried to see a cheap flop with a small pair, whereas Carl wouldn’t have called without Kings or better… and Donna has a tell that she only exhibits with pocket 2s...)
(I’m saying this all for the fun of nitpicking, not to make any serious point!)
edit: I guess there’s a simpler case too, if we’re talking about cash games in a casino! You just need to be playing heads up against Andy (who only ever shoves with aces), and for the rake to be high enough relative to the blinds.
A more realistic case is that you are on a huge tournament bubble with the shortest stack and 2 players in front of you have gone all in, and although calling with AA would be +EV in a cash game, if you take into account ICM considerations, it’s no longer worth it for you personally to join them (if the bump from 3x-ing doesn’t matter that much bc maybe all other players’ stacks are bigger than yours).