Is AK an overplayed hand?

While I can see every merit in 4 betting and 5 bet shoving AK, to me it seems very much like a semi bluff. You've got 2 blockers to their calling range, but you don't beat anything that's likely to call you. If you are called then you're 50/50 against QQ and AK, and losing to everything else.

So obviously, if you're the aggressor then your fold equity tips this in your favour. But if you 3 or 4 bet with AK, and then someone shoves over the top, the only thing that you're beating with a call is a bluff, so if you know the guy that's just shoved is only doing so with AA/KK/AK/QQ then what odds do you need to justify the call?

I will often fold AK to huge shoves pre, is this usually the wrong thing to do?

Edit: I guess that QQ falls into a similar category?

Yes I think you should fold to huge shoves pre. I think a lot of AK's profit comes getting your opponent to fold AQ and AJ

If you personally feel that getting all in pre with AK is over playing it, I won't argue with you. But if that's how you feel, don't put yourself in that position. Play the hand slower. If you go so far as to 4 bet AK (with ~100BB), you simply can't fold after that.

There are situations where calling AK/QQ pre is fine and situation where folding are fine. For the most part, you need to get them in preflop. If your only getting AA/KK in preflop, your going to be really easy to play against.

I will happily get AK / QQ in on the flop if I'm the aggressor. The query is more about calling someone else who's just got their stack in.

open 3 bbs, 3bet to 10, 4bet to 22, surely it can still be ok to fold to a 100bb shove?

Before you 4 bet with AK ask yourself, am I willing to call a shove. If the answer is no, don't 4 bet.

It's perfectly OK to 4 bet 72o and fold to a shove.

If I've gone as far as the 4 bet, then I'm usually going to call the shove unless we're mega deep. It's more the huge shoves that I'm querying. I'll happily call a 100bb open shove from an agro fish with AK. But let's say I've 3 bet to 10bb and a TAG shoves over the top for 100bb, then I don't see that as being a profitable call.

If your read on this villain, player notes/HUD stats/observations, says that he is so tight he will only shove with AA, then you probably shouldn't be 4 betting him.

If you know he'll only shove AA then 4 betting his is the perfect thing to do, if he shoves, you fold, otherwise you take the pot.

If you suspect this mega nit has prob got AA and you call, then you're in an even more difficult situation.

You didn't make this distinction in the OP. If we're mega deep, yes it's quite different. But again, if you're 300BB deep, perhaps you shouldn't be 4 betting AK?

If he only has AA in his 3bet range, just fold AK, easy game.

Don't 4bet/fold AK, that is just gross.

I said that wrong and you're correct here. What I meant was, if he's that tight, do you really think his 3 bet range is much looser?

That's what I meant.

If he's only ever got AA then you've got 6% equity calling his shove, not great.

However you want to look at it, 4 bet bluffing with AK is just bad.

Ask yourself why am I four betting AK? I mean if you are 4 bet folding to a player, then as bartlett points out you may as well do this with 72o.

A few things to look at is YOUR 3 bet range, when facing a 4 bet from a known opponent they will obviously have information on your own 3 bet range, if you are too narrow with that range you are decreasing the likelihood of villains having AQs,JJ-99

I get what you're saying but this is a pretty terrible example.

We shouldn't even be opening 72o in the first place unless we're on the button and both blinds have a ridiculously high fold to steal % and/or low 3 bet % over a significant sample. And if that's the case we absolutely should not be 4 bet bluffing at all. And especially not with a hand like 72o which has no blockers whatsoever and very poor post flop value for the occasions where the villain does decide to flat our 4 bet (which is something I see regfish doing all the time, even OOP and 100BB deep).

It's simply an extreme example, not a terrible example. *shrug*

unless he folds so much to 4bets that open/4betting 100% is +EV

4 bets are rarely called, players will usually either fold or shove, so surely a 4 bet with AK is always a semi bluff, as you're unlikely to get called by anything worse. You're relying on your fold equity to make this move profitable.

Or am I just totally misunderstanding this situation?

Just to clarify, I'm not saying you should then fold to the shove, hence the semi bluff as opposed to bluff.

If villain is 8/6 then 4 betting AK might fall under the category of 4 bet bluff.

If villain is 28/24, it's a straight value bet.

Everything in poker is situational.

We want our 4bet/folding range to contain hands that we don't want to defend a 3bet with. Since AK is pretty much the top of our defending 3betting range, we should either never defend a 3bet, or we should never 4bet/fold AK.

I prefer the latter.