I've just started at the 2-4 level, having done well at the $50 rush omaha PL table. I'm within my bankroll requirements and playing the 160 buy-in run it twice tables.

Please comment on the following.

I like AAxx but I look for more coordinated AA, such as AAQ9 or even AA45 single suited at least and in mid to late position before I open up for max raise, or a re-raise.

I think AAxx is the kiss of death very early position full game. Your raise screams AA and seems to attract alot of calls from rundown type hands such as 89TJ sorts. Out of position and you face any type of coordinated flop and it's difficult hand to bring home. A single bet often brings either a bluff/call forcing you to check the face a big bet, or you're looking at somebody with an overlay playing you down.

I've seen some pretty ridiculous plays that happen often enough to ask ... is this profitable over the long run?

For instance, I find myself in early position with AAxx of some sort. I limp, mid position raises, late position 3 bets and I have the opportunity to get all in. I make a substantial all in raise and find my self called by a hand like QT98 double suited. am I making a mistake or is my opponant? Most of the dead money is really his, not outside dead money.

What type of hands do I try and take up against AAxx when I'm in late position and they are in early and put in the raise?

correct me if im wrong, but getting it AIPF with aces is a pretty solid concept..maybe high variance in cases like the one you mentioned but still +Ev

When you can be sure than the player has AA nearly 100 % (not very likely but someone who raises 1-3% of all hands played has AA nearly always) whenever he opens UTG or UTG+1 i call with any 4 cards (no trips or quads obv.) on the button to take it away postflop.

When i have a decent hand that plays well against AAxx like a rundown or a doublesuited hand with some gaps i put in a min-reraise to get HU. and calling the 4 bet. Take it down postflop !!!!

There are only 3 times when AA allin preeflop is not + EV:

1.) Annother player has a dominating AA hand like AA72rainbow vs. AAJTds

2.) Two players have AAxx and a third player has a live hand without a pair

3.) Bad rainbow aces All in vs. the whole table with all your cards (+ all combination of cards covered) in their hands.
AA72offsuit vs. A789 , AKQJ, 789T, 2345,6789

Well, that's not exactly true, there are no hard and fast rules. For instance, this scenario doesn't apply to any of your numbers:

Omaha Hi: 500000 sampled boards
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
2s 7c Ad Ah 97749 19.55 401314 80.26 937 0.19 0.196
As 5s 4c 3c 154984 31.00 344079 68.82 937 0.19 0.311
9d 8d Jh Th 246330 49.27 253670 50.73 0 0.00 0.493

In general though, getting it in with AAxx is massively profitable, and I think that if the poster who was questioning aggressive play with AA would look at the winrates people have with AAxx over large samples that play them in such a fashion, he'd changes his mind about aces being "the kiss of death" or thinking that they might be unprofitable.

The only more profitable hand than AA** in my DB is middle connected suite double pairs... and the sample is small enough I suspect it's more variance than anything else.

Generally speaking people call too loosely preflop and end up giving reverse implied odds with their ****ty hands that flop more 60/40 dogs that get priced in on the flop.

as iggymcfly said there are some other theoretical situations when AAxx (bad aces) could be a dog and therfore beeing - EV in an Allin confrontation. Thanks for that calculations !

For what i have seen so far in my PLO life of ~ 500K Hands almost all of the -EV situations for AA were those 3 i mentioned.

Yea, given the opportunity to get it all in with AAxx pre-flop, I'm gunna try. But sometimes in early position you can't, and your left facing a flop of

7d8d10c ... you make a bet and get called. Your line falls apart most of the time mainly cause you can't improve

There's nothing wrong with check/folding crappy AAxx on T87dd.

+1. same thing in my db