This question has been around for a while and I've heard both sides of the argument several times. A case could be made for folding if you are at a table that is easy to run over and double your chips safely.

Well, with the presence of Ivey and Hansen, you can forget the easy double up, lol. If you think of it in these terms it will help:

About 6 out of 10 WSOP's you'll start with 20,000 in chips. That should increase your equity enough to override the fact that 4 times out of 10 you'll be walking back to Houston.

In order to win the WSOP you pretty much have to put yourself in several positive equity positions and hope that you come out ahead. Making mathematical errors where you continuously fold while getting the best of it will catch up with you in the long run.

I would say that a 60% favorite is too good to pass up, while something like a 55% favorite is something you could argue is a fold you could make. Again, that's provided that you are at a weak table.

It's even more +EV when you live 5 miles from the Rio! That way, those 4 times don't seem as bad on the long ride home.

I came to Vegas in a $70000 Mercedes.

I left in a half-million dollar Greyhound.

MAN, you must be awesome at poker!

I find it interesting that 60 percent of those who answered would call as well as the percent to win being 60ish percent.

Gunn

You stole my line!!!

maybe everybody did what i did:
dealt out 5 cards and voted based on that...

Interesting tactic. I wonder if they let you do that at the series, ya know, before you call. Just run it out and see if you really should call. It'll reduce your variance.

Daniel,

I might fold based on the fact that Ivey and Hansen are at the table.

I would not want to be a target.

Wouldn't you want to be in every pot against some crazy player who called all-in on the first hand with AK (an unmade hand)

I am not sure I would want Phil and Gus going after me in that respect.

I would LOVE for a player like Ivey or Hansen to THINK I'm a maniac because I called an allin with AK - they don't need to know that I called because I knew I was ahead 60-40....if they have a false perception about my play, and they want to attack me with stacks half the size as mine, I'd be the happiest man on Earth.

Like shpaget, I am confused with your reasoning. Are you an actual crazy maniac at the table? If not, then your reasoning makes no sense.

I'd Like to play you heads up...

I would call in this position..im here to gamble and win some money..gotta put you cant win what you dont put in the middle..

simple simon, what would gus or phil do?

GUARANTEE CALL!!!!

Honestly, isn't a fold the best option?

Sure, you're a 60/40 favourite, but think of it in tersm of the long run.

A) You could tell the person "hey, I'm folding AK," and he may use that to be very aggresive agaisnt you, and honestly, I'd love for that to happen, because it's a perfect set-up for the future.

You have pretty close to nothing invested on calling a huge raise. Regardless, why gamble on something your barely losing anything on?

C) "Big Slick" is often over rated. Sure, it is a huge hand, but its also a huge hand thats consistantly overplayed.

Personally, I see it easier to fold.

So you admit to not paying attention to all the reasons why your argument sucks?

Yeah, consistently calling bets when you're a solid favorite is bad business. *cough* sarcasm *cough*

You can't overplay a hand by calling when you're ahead.

I am thinking the long run.

If you play this hand ten times, your profit is 20000 chips.
100 times, 200000 chips.
1000 times, 2000000 chips.

See? It's called math.

A. yeah, perfect...he now knows you're weak, and will raise with a wider variety of hands...and you, being weak, will fold most of the time...but will happily wait for him to raise 200 times before you get your AA.

B. By this logic you should fold AA for the same reason...that's intelligent

C. How do you overplay a hand where you're a 60/40 favourite with no more action?

Remember, AK is just a drawing hand. Why get allin on a draw this early?

Of course...I keep forgetting that AK isn't a made hand...even against QJ.

Now you're getting it. See if this was 22, you'd be fine calling. 22 is a pair, and therefore a made hand.

I have much to learn about this game.

Because AK is a made hand against QJ.

But it's only ace high. How can ace high be a made hand? You haven't 'made' anything. Remember that. How often do you see players call off all their chips on a draw? Don't be one of them.

A made hand is one which currently wins over another hand if the showdown was made with no more cards showing. I don't need to draw to anything, I win right now without seeing another card.

Let's take another example:

Do you prefer 22 vs KQ or AK vs KQ? Both 22 and AK are made hands over KQ. However, you prefer to have AK rather than 22. AK is more "made" than 22.

I wasn't being serious. Just so you know.

Okay =) Hard to tell sarcasm sometimes.

In either case, I think what I'd do in this hand is first think it out like we did here, then say, "I saw your cards so I call. Let's check with the tournament director to see if my seeing your cards makes the hand a misdeal." This way, you develop an image as a thinking player and an honorable player while making the correct move. I think that would strike the right balance of fear and respect into your opponents.

I think....hope....can't say pray, Im an atheist, that he was being sarcastic.

I'm fairly sure you're safe with that assumption.

This year was my first World Series of Poker. I sat at that table scared @#%less for 9 hours. The best hands i saw were 99 and AK, played them both so poorly I cringe everytime i look back and wonder what could have been. 9000 people? Phil Ivey AND Gus Hansen at my table? No question i'm taking the gamble right then and there, at least that way I've got some ammo that can threaten Phil and Gus and if i have a good starting hand i can employ a "kill phil" strategy against them without risking my tournament life. $10,000 is a lot of green to put in play for the average college student (or regular person, i guess) but the lesson i learned for next year's WSOP, and of more immediate importance the WPT event at Borgata... is that it's a tournament, the buy in is history, might as well play to win!

Phil

Why on earth would anyone think it would be a better call with 22? With AK, you already have QJ beat. To beat you, they would have to catch at least a Q or J. NOW, say they were to catch a Q or J on the flop, if you had 22, you would have significantly less outs to improve on the turn or river, you only have 2 more 2s to make trips. With AK, however, you have 3 As and 3 Kings left in the deck, so you have a far better chance to draw out and beat the QJ on the turn or river.

If you were to know your odds, 22 against QJ is actually the slightest underdog. QJ wins that race just over 52% of the time.