I don't have the HH for either of these hands but I would like to know your thoughts.

Both were at $25 NL levels, full tables.

The first hand I have AA and raise it up to $1 in early position. I was surprised to have three people call since the table had been tight. The flop came 993. I made a pot sized bet of $4 and was called by one player. At this point I was certain he called with trip 9's. The turn brought another 9. So here I am with 9's full, but my instincts told me I was drawing dead. I ended up playing it out and as I expected, I lost to quads and doubled the player up. He started the hand with about $20 and I had $30 so I didn't go completely bust.

Later in the night I was again dealt AA, in the BB, and found myself in another sticky situation. A player UTG+1 raised to $0.75 and a player in the cut off reraised to $1.50. I repopped to $3.50. UTG+1 folded and the cut off called. I figured one of two hands were likely here. KK or QQ. I knew AK was possible but not as likely since I had two aces. The flop comes 664 and I bet $7 into an $8 pot. My opponent called with little hesitation. Being that he had been playing solid I figured KK was most likely and that he would have either folded or pushed with QQ. The turn brought a K and my gut told me I just got sucked out on. I reluctantly bet half the pot and was called again. Although I felt behind, I figured I again needed to play the hand out. We got all-in on the river and he showed down a set of kings to scoop a $60 pot.

My question is, should I have slowed down on the turn with either of these hands? I was about 90% sure in both spots that I was beat. $25 NL isn't exactly a rock garden and we often see people calling off all their chips with only a pair or busted draw. Had I listened to my gut I could have saved myself about $20-$25 between these two hands. Should I be kicking myself, or should I have listened to my gut and laid either of these hands down?

Thanks.

You should kick yourself for losing, but don't kick yourself for playing wrongly. I'd bet half the pot and wait to see if you have any callers. If you do, then slow down because either they are bluffing or they have something. It is also good to raise preflop. Raise a high amount preflop and then again on the flop, if someone bites both times, you have to take them serious and if worst comes to worst, lay down your cards, don't dig yourself deeper. Of course it depends on who you're playing against. If you're playing an idiot who raises on anything than keep going, but if your opponent is tight then you have to ditch the cards.

In hand 2 I raise more pf. The CO likes his hand. Make him pay for it.

(ONE) Why pay off quads unless he has an ultra-mini-stack? Giving up any more $ this pot negates a good xxx hands of grinding.

(TWO) He had a boat, not a set.

One observation: Aces are not bullet proof once you've seen a flop. They're just another hand. I'm happy that I don't get them very often (seriously) and when I do, I play them hard. If there's a raise, I triple it. If it's all limpers, I quadruple the amount in the pot. If I'm UTG, I MIGHT limp them, but them I push all in to any raiser. I just do. So yeah, I don't disguise them at all -- when I've got them, people know it. BUT I haven't have them cracked in a long, long, long time. And I think that's the point of getting AA. I should say that's all in cash games. Tournament play is so different it's not even funny. I will play them differently in a tourney.

Second observation: I don't fire second bullets when my first one's been answered on paired boards. In fact, I checked a lot of paired boards ... just let em go. It's a good way to get stacked. Your case is a little different because you have an overpair. Your case is a little different, because you had a solid read, but then, why not rely on your read and fold when you think he hit his KK? ... I'm just saying ...

Anyway, I may be weak-tight, but I'm willing to fold decent hands in the face of pressure on paired boards. There'll be other spots, but only if you have chips left.

I'm beginning to think this weak-tight play might be ideal for mini stakes NL cash games considering the type of players there, problem is I usually don't have the disicipline to stick with this method, I end up getting weak-loose which is horrible.

No.

The point of getting AA is to maximize the value of having a dominant hand preflop.

I love this comment. Great work.

You did the right thing in playing aggressively, OP, and it appears that, at least subconsciously, you answered your own question. At the turn in both cases, it was clear that the other guy had a hand given he called your aggressive bets both pre and postflop, and probably even had you beat. With a tight player, a check fold escape on the turn isn't a bad play at all in these cases. With a looser player, you could well stick with it and have the hand won, but it's a risky call. It's, of course, a matter of the player and your read.

Hmmm. I see your point.

I guess I should lose with them more.

In case 1, theres no way of knowing that he had a 9. You raised to $1 and he could have been calling with 1010, JJ, or any mid pair. Once the flop came, he called your raise, so you can expect him to have a mid pair. With another 9 at the turn, its juss unlikely that he has the case 9. You played it agressively, and I dont think ANYONE here could have laid that down. Its a hand where u gotta go broke.

In Case 2, You can easily put him on KK or QQ, which you did. The flop was junk, but once that King came, you bet out, which I think is still the right play. Now once he called, you can almost be sure that he has either KK. The other possible hands would be AK or QQ. But he couldn't have QQ because with all the agressive raising and betting, and with the K on the turn, he would have laid down QQ. Its also unlikely that he has AK because I don't think he would have called the third reraise at preflop with it. He also wouldnt have called the flop bet either.

This would be a hand where you *MAY* be able to get away from at the river, although I think most people would pay him off. I probably would.

I had a smiliar situation happen to me to some extent. This was limit game. UTG raised, and I'm dealt AA so I 3bet it. He calls. Rag flop. He bet, I raise, he calls. The turn is a king. He checks, and I bet, and he raises, I call. At this point, I was 90% sure he had KK. River was blank, and he bet, and I called. He showed KK and raked it in. I know nolimit and limit is entirely different, but I was just saying that even thought I knew he had KK, I still had to call him down.

I know this is more extreme than what you were saying, but:

Winning the blinds 100 times and losing 0 times, is not necessarily maximizing your return.

Losing a few hands with AA doesn't offset the fact that you make more money when you get calls from worse hands over the long run.

There's a reason why the smash method was critiqued so much. It's because it doesn't maximize your return. It wins money, but it doesn't win the most.

- Zach

Thanks for the replies everyone. The second one was probably an easier hand to lay down than the first. I just wanted to know if I was an idiot for considering folding either of these.

I haven't commented on the hands, so I will now.

First hand, folding doesn't cross my mind. We have the 2nd nuts, I'm not mucking.

Second hand, maybe, but I still don't fold. How did the river go? Was it c/c? If I really felt I was behind, I would probably check the river and see what he bets.

I think I had about $6-$8 behind me and I put it in on the river. The pot was over $45 when he put me all-in, I felt committed to call.

Oh well, ya, in that case.