Loose table, putting $10-$15 every hand preflop..

EP raises to $10, 4 callers, I make it $60 in BB with AA and everyone folds..

I'm doing it particularly because of 2 or 3 fishy players who are $300-400 eff and will call smaller with any piece to outflop me/hit their sets/etc..

Obviously, I should be doing this with lots of bluffs if they're folding here a lot, but I just want to avoid any kind of bluffing vs these players and take them to value town..

Yeah it's a good result to take $40-50 in dead money preflop, but it feels like leaving so much value on the table by playing "scared" with AA...

OTOH raising to like $40 can start a chain of callers and make us lose our stack postflop..

I don't think ur sizing is too outlandish btw. How deep are you?

This sizing is fine, not even a pot sized raise and definitely not playing "scared". You are offering the first caller 2.2:1 on his money and you should expect to get 1-2 callers here often at a standard table. Them all folding and you winning $50 is a much better result than you making it $30 and going to the flop 6 ways.

Raise whatever size you think will keep the fish in the pot. If it's 60 its 60. If it's less it's less. Low stakes fish aren't going to see a small raise as strong IMO.

$60 was fine -- good sizing. I'm amazed they all folded. I don't really want to play AA out of position against a bunch of callers, anyway (One or two would be good, but the results you got are good, too.)

samplesize?

wp, you´re getting action here a decent amount of the time by described players imo

I think you don´t really think about situations like these the right way. yeah, they folded this time, so what?

think about it like this imo: you are facing a preflop situation, and like in any other spot, you have several options. in this spot, you posted the bb, it got raised, your options are to either raise, fold or call. so you will have a calling range, a folding range, and a 3betting range.

if you call or fold, action is over, if you decide to raise, you have to keep track of different stack sizes, and in general, you want to raise a little more than the size of the pot, being out of position and denying villains correct odds to call.

now you have to think about how to construct your 3betting range, do you want to just 3bet for value or do you think you´d be in a profitable spot if you mix in some bluffs as well? in either case, AA will be in your 3betting range, so it isn´t like you are making a mistake whatsoever by 3betting.

these are just some general thoughts on how to imo approach situations like that, after the game goes on and you develop some reads, you can start to exploit your villains weaknesses whatever they may be by for example only 3betting premium hands if you feel they are too sticky, by 3betting a ton if you think they are folding too much, by raising very big for straight value against terrible calling stations, etc...

in this particular hand, you look down at your cards after pretty heavy action, you are lucky enough to see AA, a hand you want to have in your 3betting range, so you go ahead and 3bet. it´s really not like you made a mistake here, you are 3betting for straight value and it´s the most +ev move you could make at this point.

also, in vacuum leaving all those things behind, you get more money in the pot with the nuts, you don´t want to play this hand multiway oop vs 6 opponents, it drastically reduces the chances of you making mistakes, you really have to raise, and your sizing is fine.

it is a standard spot, you played it standard/well, you only have to be cautious not to fall into the trap of questioning it too much only bc it didn´t get the results you wanted. it still is the best way to play in this situation.

$350-400

totally fine to raise 60 here.

Your raise size is A+ then. Raising any less than $60 here while 200bb effective is a massive mistake imo. Enjoy your variance free 25bb!!

yeah the 25bbs variance-free is def good... but it doesn't make up for the times when I raise pre and have my cbets fail 5/5 times after that.. lol

This can be an annoying spot because your stuck between raising big and pushing everybody out of the pot most of the time and raising small and getting a bunch of callers.

If you can setup a small SPR on the flop it can be more profitable to raise small and create a bloated pot. You will be stuck shoving most flops and variance will be high but profits will be even higher because you will be more then doubling up when your hand holds up.

If you are deep raising big to deny everybody odds is better. You don't want to be caught having to play this OOP against multiple opponents if your going to be doing anything but shoving the flop.

Then squeeze big without a premium hand once in a while, too.

If it wasn't just an anomaly for them
All to fold them you should think about doing it with way more than just premiums. If you know they're folding a lot them polarize your range big time. Monsters and junk. Either fold or call with the stuff in between.

If you raise, they're going to put on AA/KK anyways if you have a tight image, so you might as well raise to an amount where you don't care that any caller will put you exactly the hand you have.

Another idea would be to raise to $100 and make it seem like you have AK and don't want to see a flop.

This sounds like a table where you should c-bet less. I like to establish that I don't auto cbet after flopping two overs to the board, then working in cbets with less than top pair once I establish that I bluff less than usual.

If they are all folding like that, definitely raise smaller to like $40ish. Getting 5 callers with guaranteed overpair is awesome. No one is going to fold top pair to you, but get ready to ride a variance train when some one has top pair and another guy has a flush draw and you are 50% to triple up!

Would it be an option to raise smaller pf ($30)

If raised then jam, if called multiway then jam flop regardless?

I think $60 is probably too big of a raise. Try $45.

This brings up the debate of effectively balancing your ranges vs playing optimally given current players and table dynamics. Personally, when playing cash it's usually vs complete unknowns; I think playing optimally far outweighs balancing when playing unknowns you'll probably never see again.

You raise to $60 because there's a fair chance you'll get called in a spot or two. Same applies when you're sitting there with 79s and then you're just pissing money away.

What

What's the problem again?

They probably all just literally had absolute dog**** for hands. I've seen players who are notoriously tight get ridiculous amounts of action vs inferior hands, and it was all because those fish just had something that was worth a certain amount to them. My guess is you got unlucky here in the sense that nobody had anything worth a damn so they all folded. Just keep at it and I'm sure you'll get paid.

nothing wrong that I can see, sometime people just dont have a hand

This is basically what I was trying to say but he's a little more articulate

http://http://www.cardplayer.com/cptv/channels/3-strategy/poker-videos/5144-poker-strategy-daniel-negreanu-on-balance-vs-adaptabiliy