WAS DOYLE WRONG?!? or is this the dumbest post ever?

Yo russff. In this case, there are only 2 people playing, no more no less. Naturally, the strength of any pocket pair depends on how many people are calling/raising. KK pre-flop against one caller is much stronger than AA pre-flop against 8 callers. 22 is a terribly weak pocket pair but if that third 2 hits the flop, you're now sitting at the table atop an invisible nuclear weapon.
I guess in a nutshell, you should never assume that any 2 cards are "good" or "bad". Certainly some look better initially but it all comes down to how they fit the flop and how they are played against.
Btw, I don't necessarily think you meant it so literally but I would avoid saying (and definately thinking) that anything 'never happens" or 'happens all the time' unless I'm using that to falsely advertise myself as being a weak player. One of my favorite poker sayings is that over the course of a lifetime, we all get the same cards. There's only 52 you know

Cha-ching, he's got it.

heads up, real cards, the pocket dueces are the fav.

Notice that in his passage Doyle does not emphasize the suits of any of the cards. He does point out that the bet is even money (and regardless of the suits, I'd say the computed odds are close enough to be called 'even' in the context he meant it in.) Then he goes onto expound about how his 2s whipped up the AK. His opponents went and double-checked the odds and came back to receive more of a beating.
So what was his point here? It really would appear to be that even though the 2s are the lowest (weakest) possible pocket pair, in this specific setup they gain their advantage because they are a "made hand" being played against a drawing hand. Yeah, the AK have a lot of outs but they must improve to win.
Now the real poker student in me says "ok but if the odds are pretty much 50/50, the twos should not really have much significant advantage even though they are a made hand." Odds are odds right? This naturally makes me consider the algorithims being used by (was it Fonz's?) calculator. If they are correct, then why does Doyle seem to be saying that the 2s won so decidedly?
Hmmmmmmmm. I'm probably gonna get slammed here... this really started out as a joke. Oh well, I'm all-in in the dark !! lol

I have to agree with Doyle, pocket 2's have won a lot of pots for me, I like to say 2's and q's like me Pocket A's on the other hand at least for me are the worst possible hand I can get. I can't count on all the digits I have how many times I have been beat with pocket A's.

Well, that proves another of Doyles' points. Realistically AA is an awesome starting hand yet so many people complain about it "always getting beat." The reality is that with pocket 2s, someone is 1) less likely to commit much money or 2) less likely try chase with so you typically lose less with them. With the pocket aces, you tend to either win very little, win a lot, or lose a lot. Memory is definately going to go back to 2 of those outcomes as they will be pretty frequent, especially in online play. They might be a great pair but alone, they are still only 1 pair.

If on-line players didn't have this mindless big hand all-in preflop attitude they wouldn't have the huge losses refered to in the previous post. If you want to commit to throwing away any control of the outcome by doing that then you have only yourself to blame for your own lack of understanding and imagination when it goes pear shaped. See thread on handling AA for full reasons.

Is the odds different if AK suited vs. os?