blonde poker forum

I see these situations on TV and also in Live Games (when i was in the UK) and I would be interested in the thoughts of others on the reasons why they or think they are played as they are.

I accept the fact that different stages of a tournament call for different plays, but just in general.

You are dealt  Ad Qs and you pre flop raise,lets say minimum raise, one player re-raises all in, this calls for you to risk HALF your remaining chips if you wish to play. From what I see most players now go into the "think tank" and the MAJORITY of the players will now PASS this hand.

Now you have exactly the same scenario except for the fact that your hole cards are   Ad  Ks, at the point of the re-raise it seems the MAJORITY of players will CALL instantly, with no thinking time.

What is the major difference in the 2 hands? I see it as only being ONE HAND difference,(this is probably why i am not a winning player).

Because a very, very common hand for players to push all-in over the top of another player with is AK. Therefore AQ is in a very bad way. It will hardly ever be ahead and may be a mile behind.

Whereas AK is only in massive trouble against AA and KK, which many players are liable to make a smaller raise with, rather than push.

Still need to be careful with AK.. example last night late in GUKPT sat ... 2 raisers 3 times the blinds.
Myself in late position squeeze them by shoving all in with AK.

They both call QQ and JJ - no A or K on the flop - so sent to rail.

On other occassions would have spiked an A or K or got at least 1 if not both of them to fold.
Win the pot guaranteed seat.

???? why does that show that you need to be careful with AK? if I could be in that situation everytime I picked up AK I'd be delighted.

however you'd hate to have AQ here so this is a good example for Taximan of the difference between the 2

ok, maybe not delighted but I'm not going to be too upset about it

Well you are winning 36% of the time so as long as you are going to triple up then its ok, would rather have the queens though. 

You remind me of Duncan Bannatyne Andrew, just when i'm not sure how to word an answer you sum it up perfectly...

nice summation - my point is that AK sends a lot of the people to the rail against a made pocket pair in the hole - would still push again in that situation as approx 1/3 times you will probably take this huge pot down.

For me its player and read dependent.  I have been in situations both online and in live games where I have folded both Ak/AQ to any resistance and there have been times when I have been over aggressive with it and refuded to lay it down.

If I can put my opponent (s) on a range of hands that I am beating with either AK or AQ then I get my chips in, if at any point i think I am behind I pass.  There are situations when you may know your behind but the value of the pot dictates that you must make the call also.

With AK, the best you can hope for is dominating a weaker ace, or only giving your opponent one live card with him/her having Kx.

In terms of stack sizes, if you see a short stack pushing, then the both hands (AK, AQ)have pretty much equal merit. You're racing to a middle/big-ish pair or you're doing one of the above.

The strength of AK is in its value to be aggressive knowing your dominated by only two hands, your really looking to use this aggressive move when there is a good chance your not going to be called as its also only a small favourite against most other hands except Ax or Kx, but too often I see it missused by pushing all in when the blinds are still relatively low thus only being called by a Big Hand AA KK QQ for example.
AQ however is far mor vunerable due to the AK factor, we've all seen how many times these two hands meet as Novice palyers are only playing this type of hand.