An Interesting Hand, AA vs. KK vs. TT vs. 86s

Here is a hand from the Turning Stone Casino at the $100 NL Hold Em table (blinds are $1/$2). The player under the gun raised to $12. Normally that is a strong raise, but this player didn't know what he was doing. He called an all-in re-raise with pocket 4s (he was up against AA but spiked a 4 on the river).

So anyway, the player to the right of the raiser called, then the next player raised to $22. A player in late position called the $22 raise. Here is what they had. Their likelihood of winning is in parenthesis.

Under the gun raiser: AA (51.2%)
Early caller: KK (17.5%)
Early re-raiser: TT (13.6%)
Late caller: 86s. (17.5%)

I wouldn't have called with 86s there, mainly for fear of a re-raise, but that doesn't mean it was a bad call. The player was sitting next to me and remarked that he knew he was beat. He also knew the pot was going to be huge. At the time he made the call of $22, there was already $49 in the pot. Now since the initial raiser obviously didn't know the value of hands as demonstrated by his all-in call with 44, the player with 86s could have assumed that he raised with a weak hand and would call the re-raise. Since the early caller already called one bet, it was very safe to assume that he'd merely call the bet. This would make the pot $20 large for a total of $69. With a $69 pot, the pot odds for a $22 call would be 3.14 to 1. The player with 86s was a 4.71 underdog to win the pot. According to pot odds, it wasn't a good call.

HOWEVER, the implied odds were ridiculous. It was pretty obvious that at least one, probably two, and maybe even all three of the other players had high pocket pairs. This would make them difficult to fold. A hand like 86 suited has potential to be a giant killer. If it hit two pair, or a flush, or a straight, it can crush a pocket pair. Since the other players in the hand were so strong, the potential size of the pot at the end of the hand was enormous. I'd say it could be estimated at least $200 more and probably a great deal more, going into the hand (the under the gun raiser, the early caller, and the early raiser all had sizeable stacks of chips in front of them). Let's estimate the size of the potential pot to be around $270. This would make a $22 call result in 12.27 to 1 implied odds. Again, the 86 had a 4.71 to 1 odds against chance to win. This would make the call correct.

Unfortunately for my friend with the 86, the under the gun raiser re-re-raised $80 more to make the total bet $102. The early caller (the one with Kings) called. The early re-raiser (the one with 10s) made a good read and folded. The decision came back to the late caller with 86s. Now the pot was up to $251, but it now cost $80 more to see a flop. Since the pocket 10s folded, here are the new odds:

Aces: 63.0%
Kings: 17.0%
86 suited: 19.6%

Throwing in $80 for a $251 pot results in pot odds of 3.14 to 1, ironically the same pot odds that the player with 86s had before when the raise was $22. Of course, the implied odds increased as it became blatantly clear what the two other players in the hand had. The guy with 86s, whose name was Rob, leaned over to me and said "I know they have Aces and Kings." Knowing this, he knew that this hand would result in an all-in one way or the other. After calling the $80, he would have about $130 left. If he hit, and both the other players went all-in, he'd get double that barring an outdraw. This made the implied pot a whopping $511 for Rob. $80 into a potential $511 pot equates to implied odds of 6.39 to 1. With the 10s gone, Rob was 19.6% to win which means the odds against him were only 4.10. Considering the inevitable size of the pot, and the fact that there would be no more preflop re-raising if Rob called, Rob's decision to call was justifiable.

The hand went to a flop three handed. Aces against Kings against Eight-Six of diamonds. The size of the pot at this point was $331. The player with Aces had about $200 left, as did the player with Kings. The flop went like this:

Ten of hearts, 9 of diamonds, 6 of clubs. The player with 10s would have made top set, but he made the correct fold. The player with Aces moved all-in on this seemingly blank flop. The player with Kings called. The pot was now somewhere in the $700, $800 range. For Rob, the pot was about $590. Rob had a pair, a gutshot straight draw, and a backdoor flush draw. He also had a hell of a decision to make.

For $130 more, Rob could gamble hoping to hit one of his 9 outs (the three 8s, the two 6s, and the four 7s) or maybe catch a runner-runner flush draw. On the T-9-6 flop, here are how the odds stacked up.

Aces: 54.5%
Kings: 8.9&
86s: 35.3%

So Rob was not that much of an underdog to win the hand. The odds stacked up against him were only 1.83 to 1. The pot odds ($130 call into a $590 pot) were 4.54 to 1. Rob knew he was crushed, but he also knew he had outs and had GREAT pot odds. He called. Sadly, the turn was a 3 of clubs. Rob was now only 21.43% to win. The river was the Ace of hearts (which would have trounced the set of 10s folded by one of the players) and pocket Aces held up. The pot wound up being about $900, a monster pot for $100 NL.

For Rob, the problem with the hand was a mathematical quagmire. Poker is a game of time, and over time it can be argued that Rob made the right decision. Supposing the exact situation occurred 100 times, from the flop, Rob would win 35 times and lose 65 times. The 65 losses would result in a loss of $8,450 (if all the stack sizes were the same), and the 35 wins would result in a gain of $20,650. Over the long run the call results in a $12,200 profit for Rob ($122 per hand on average). After the flop he made the right decision. Risking $130 for an average profit of $122 is a good move.

The call of the $80 re-re-raise preflop is less clear. In 100 identical situations, Rob would win 20 times. He'd lose 80 times. Let's say the potential pot was about $590 for Rob. The 80 times he lost would cost him $6,400. The 20 times he won would earn him $11,800. This means a total profit of $5,400, or $54 per hand. Risking $80 for an average profit of $54 is slightly less of a good move.

The problem with the 8-6 was that in order for playing it against AA and KK, you've got to be willing to lose more times than win. Even after the nice flop, the 8-6 still loses 65 times out of 100. You must have the sufficient bankroll to gamble thusly in order for the move to work out. Poker is a game of time and playing like Rob played in this hand requires patience, the ability to calculate, and a hefty bankroll to absorb the inevitably large number losses. In fact, your bankroll would need to be about $15,000+ in order for this type of play to really work out for you.