Marginal hand analysis 2flush+2big cards

The Marginal hand analysis of starting hands that contain two big cards and a two flush.


Synopsis : The first of a series of analyses of marginal starting hands.


The starting hand of two big cards with a two flush is one of my favorite marginal starting hands. I often play it both in ring games, and in tournaments. (Especially when I am playing in "crap shoot tournaments" See Mc Evoy's section on this topic in his book on tournament play)


And I also like to play this hand in loose ring games, which are characterized by a minimal amount of raising. (see loose passive game considerations in 7csfap 21)


The hand (Qh 9s) Kh would be a good example of this sub group of marginal starting hands


The characteristics that I look for are:


1. I want a live King Since much of the strength of the hand comes from


the King if another King is out I simply won't play


the hand.


2. I want a live flush draw I define a live flush draw as one, in which there


are no more than one flush card out. In this case


if there were 2 or more hearts out in other


Players hands I would not play the hand.


3. I want the Queen or 9 to be live If there is one 9 or one Queen out I feel


that the hand is still marginally playable


but if 2 are out I feel that the hand is


unplayable.(many good players insist


on both the 9 and the Queen being live.


4. I want to pay no more If the betting has been competed on third than the bring in, to play street or if I detect a possible raise behind

in this hand me I will not play the hand.*


* A powerful Stud tool (that I learned playing hold'em) is to always keep an eye on the two opponents on my right.(This is especially important in hold'em because if you can detect that your opponents aren't going to play their hands, you can often double the relative number of times that you have the button) Having trained myself to do this, when I play Hold'em, when I returned to stud it had already become an integral part of my game.


I feel that this technique is very important in marginal hand play. Because you REALLY DO NOT want to come into a hand and have the hand raised behind you. My technique (modified from John Foxe's) is to practice watching the HAND motions of the two players to my right, using only my peripheral vision. I have found this technique to be about 90% effective. And if you do this discreetly your opponents should not be aware that you are continualy monitoring their calling hands.


(Qh 9s) Kh


One of the things that I like about this hand, is that if it turns out that there are a relative large number of callers, then the flush component increases in value, and if there are only a few callers then the "Big Cards, pair draws" increase in value.


Requirements for continuing with the hand past fourth street


First you have to have improved on fourth street to be able to call a bet. If your cards are live by rank, you will have paired one of your cards approx 24% of the time, and if your flush draw is live you will hit one of your flush cards approx. 22% of the time.


Fourth street action strategy


1. If I hit my King or Queen, I of course, usually want to do what ever it takes to isolate my hand. I there by theoretically increase the probability of my winning the hand.*


* The key to playing this marginal starting hand, as a "multiple big pair draw," is the residual strength that big pair hands have on fourth street..


The relevant mathematics of fourth street "Big Pair" hands pair hands.


( Remember that when you start with a live pair of Kings, your hand will improve approx 65% of the time. (I am not positive of that percentage but it is very close. "The poker playing philosopher, Ray Zee, is quoted as saying "never trust an old man's memory for numbers")


BUT, and this is the key, when you start with a live King and you pair your King on fourth (and your cards stay live) you will still improve 62% of the time by the river. ( I am certain of that number Ray "it's out of a book so it HAS to be right!)


So when you pair a big card, you STILL have a relatively strong hand on fourth street, and you should play it as such.


2. If I hit my 9, I use the same strategy that I would if I started with a pair of 9s with both a King and a Queen kicker.


3. If my flush has improved to a three flush, Approximately 66% of the time I am going to continue to fifth street with my hand.


I seem to remember reading SOME WHERE, that you should usually continue with your 3 flush on fourth street "If your flush draw is live, If it contains big cards, If your odds are good, or If you also have straight possibilities"


OH! NOW I REMEMBER, where I saw it. (see page 269, 7csfaps 21,

I might point out that, that this is the only place that I have ever seen this valuable advice printed, in any of the published Stud literature)


And I calculate that I have made well over $1,000 dollars off this one tip alone. And yet I feel that I owe Ray and Mason nothing, since I have purchased 3 copies of 7csfap since 1989. ( so it sounds like we are about even, to me)


When to get away from the hand


I have already discussed several critical points about playing this marginal starting hand. But one of the most important points, is that you must be a good enough player, to muck the hand, if your opponents boards and or actions become dangerous on fourth street.( Not doing this is the main reason novice players loose money playing all of the members of the marginal hand complex.)


Examples of dangerous fourth street conditions would include :


1. When a player pairs his door card and comes out betting.


2. When a player spikes an ace and comes out betting.


3. You hit your two flush draw making a 3 flush draw, but you are looking at an opponents possible bigger 4 flush draw. If you aren't waving good bye, if a bet is made under these conditions, you should never play this category of hands


4. When a player bets and a player with "rags " raises (You may already be "badly beaten already" in this situation.)


5. When a player bets in front of you, and you have one or more dangerous boards behind you. Examples would include when you are sandwiched between. (suited connectors, paired door cards, and or new over cards.)


Summary :


If you are going to "really" make money at Stud, you have to be able to play marginal starting hands. And you have play them extremely well.


The most important points concerning this hand is to know when not to play it, and to know when to get away from it.


If you try adding marginal starting hands to your strategic arsenal of plays, and you find that you are loosing money playing them (that's what originally happened to me) back up, slow down and after a while try reintroducing them into your strategy, one at a time.


Marginal starting hand play now makes up a significant portion of the profit I generate each year from playing Stud.


I would appreciate any opinions and or criticisms from the forum members.


I also would appreciate learning the opinions of our the other forum members concerning this interesting class of starting hands. And as to whether they play them, and if so which ones.


In particular it would be interesting to know what you feel is the weakest marginal starting hand that you can play and have it be profitable for you over a long period of time.


As I said this topic it isn't covered fully in any book, because the topic is simply so complex, that you could write an entire book on this one topic alone.


Well that's one Marginal starting hand down. Now we only have a half dozen or so more to review.


Most sincerely,


Doc AZ

Forum Friends,


When I wrote out this post, I did it on my portable computer at the Casino,waiting for my game to get called down. I wrote topics 1-4 with introductory statements, and then next to them I typed my explanation in horizontal columns.


It realy looked nice, I thought.


But when I transferred the post to twoplustwo I wasn't aware that having the two computers interface with each other would "blend the statements with the columns" And I am sorry to say that I didn't proof my post after transferring it.


For example topic no 4 originally said :


4. I want to pay no more than the bring in to play this hand. If there is a raise in front of me or if I detect a possible raise behind me I am not going to call with this hand.


But in transferring these thoughts the two computers blended the statements into a mix.


I apologize for the confusion. And will proof my posts "After" I have transferred them to twoplus two in the future.


I am afraid that I should also report about the tragedy that occurred yesterday,while I was buying Christmas presents. And that was that Sadam dropped another two grand at the Stud table.


The tragedy of course was that "I WASN'T THERE."


"Look Sadam I told you, that only the LOW card was a forced bring in, and that you don't have to call every hand. So don't blame me."


"And yes I know that you get feed back about 2+2".


"But just may be, if you had started participating in the discussions " yesterday never would have happened."


PS. May all of you have have happy holidays, and may God bless you all.


Most sincerely,


Doc AZ

I consider (Qh 9s)Kh to be a fairly reasonable marginal hand at the lower limits however it can become very troublesome if you hit an offsuit 9 especially with lots of players in the pot, which you can expect at these limits.

But take a hand like (6h 8s) 9h. Not as good as the first hand but it should be easier to release if you pair up.

John..

Dear John,

You make a good point. I choose that hand to start our discussion of "marginal hands" exactly because it is at the stronger end of the series.


And I agree with you about the 2 suited 689. When Tom Mc Evoy would hit a third suited card with that hand he use to call it his "whipsaw hand"


Most sincerely,


Doc AZ

Hi Doc,

First let me start by saying how appreciative I am of your participation in this forum. Your insights and deep thought about the game have greatly improved the play of many people who spend time understanding and processing the information you offer.


I currently play a relatively unimaginative game of stud at the 10-20 and 15-30 level in CT. My starting hand requirements are tight but loosen as my 3rd street position improves relative to the bring in and the amount of players in the game as well as where I think I will act (position) on fourth street.


My question concerning your post is in relation to "what your opponents think you have when you limp with a high card". I absolutely understand that you want to play marginal hands cheaply but does limping give away your hand to your observant opponents.


How often would you limp with split kings? I must assume that often enough so that you can't always be put on other draws. How often would you raise the marginal hand on 3rd street, if at all? With a King up, you most likely lead on 4th street and it puts you in first position.


I much prefer my marginal hands to be more hidden, like the 2 flush to be in the hole or the lower card of the marginal hand to be exposed so that it becomes more difficult for my opponents to get a good read on my hole cards and gives me more options those times that my other opponents must act in front of me.


The problem of playing some marginal hands isn't necessarily the marginal starting hand itself put how these hands effect the other hands one plays and how your opponents react to your play and how it fits with your overall strategy.


I find that I get myself into difficult situations later in a session if I have been folding a lot on 4th or 5th street after limping. My opponents should react by bombarding me with chips, reraising on 3rd street, etc. which makes it much more difficult for me to "know where they're at". Because I know this is a weakness, I find more aggressive play with marginal hands suits my overall play better. I also must limp enough with good hands as well as marginal hands so that my play is varied.


I know poker is not one stop shopping but do you think these ideas have validity or do you think that by being aggressive with marginal hands, that most players are just giving money away?


Thank you,

John Gaspar

Hello,Doc,

With this type hand,I would sometimes limp and sometimes raise in a tight-passive game.

In a loose-passive game,I would limp.

In a loose-aggressive game,I would fold.

In a tight-agressive game,I would raise or fold. The big cards should do better against few opponents.

The question is:under what conditions do I fold or raise?

If I have two and only two RED CARDS,I raise;otherwise,I fold. Therefore,the decision to raise or fold is out of my hand.


Sitting Bull

Perhaps the best advice for a hand like this for most players is simply to muck it. Hands like this get you into a lot of trouble, especially when you pair the lower card and get heads up. Also I would much prefer the 9 to be the up card, and the two suited in the hole. You should seldom limp with split kings, but many players will limp with split 9's. So if you catch a nine your opponents will fold and that is good. If you catch a q or K and the pot was not raised on third street then you may be in very good shape unless you are against tricky opponents.


Also this is a much different hand than if the 9 is an 8 or lower, and dead cards make a tremendous difference in this hands value, probably more so than most players realize. Most players just cannot appropriately value this hand. I would also be less apt to play the hand at higher limits.


Pat

Hello,Pat,

I would be more inclined to play this hand in a higher limit game that's tight-aggressive ;NOT in a loose-aggressive game.

The higher the limits,the more dead money in the pot ;hence, the looser one should play.

In a no ante game,I usually muck these hands unless the game is tight=passive or tight-aggressive;in which case,I fold or raise.

If you're going to increase your hourly rate,you need to play these marginal hands sometimes--under the right circumstances.

The question is:what are the right circumstances?

I believe that these type hands are great semi-bluffing hands against players with underpairs and 3-draw starting hands. There are other potentially profitable situations that I do not know about ,but would like other members to elaborate upon.


Sitting Bull

Yes but at higher limits in a tight aggressive game you will often find yourself heads up against a big hand. Basically I think you can try to steal with this hand in late position but if you are played with you generally should fold unless you are against and aggressive player who overdefends against a steal. With this hand the one hand you play can cost more than you steal. I agree that it can be played but you must be judicious when deciding when to play and it really should be onlywhen there is a good chance to steal.


Pat

Dear John,


Thank you for your kind thoughts, about my participation in our Stud symposium.


I learn so much here, thanks to you and the other participants, that I consider it the most valuable that time I spend studying the game.


To answer your basic questions. During a game I repeatedly ask myself. How will this table react to my actions?


The reason I repeatedly ask that question, is that in some games the dynamics of the table can change every 30 minutes or so.


The table may start loose passive, and then two new players can come in, and our loose passive table can suddenly become a tight aggressive one.


The next important question I ask myself is: HOW WILL THIS TABLE REACT IF I RAISE ?


I like to play in loose passive games. And my usual plan of attack is to play tight and aggressive, out of early positions.


Now that usually works well for me, because, the table usually responds, to my raising,bt letting me get either heads up, or in a 3 way pot. Which is exactly what I want.


But there are some days when if I raise, 70% of the time the entire table will drop.(often when I have been consistently winning for some time)


And then there are other times when my raise, out of an early position, has very little impact on the table (often this is early in a session with players that don’t know me well)


So the next questions I ask myself are : WHAT DO I WANT WITH THIS HAND? and WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENT POSSIBLE WAYS THAT I MIGHT NEED TO PLAY THIS HAND ON THE NEXT TWO STREETS?


For example today I was at a loose table when I was dealt a (Qc, Kd) Js as my starting cards out of a mid position.


Now I use to play on a chess team, and one of the things you have to do (to do well at chess) is to anticipate all of your possible moves for multiple plays in advance. So when I read my opponents cards as their doors came out 3c Ks 6h Ad Js(QcKd, me) 9d 6c 5h


I thought to myself:


1. The way that this table has been playing, most likely the King, Ace, 3c and maybe the 6h will limp in, and in that case I will just limp in behind them.


2. But if the King raises and the Ace re-raises, I’m gone.


3. Even if the King raises and the 6h Ad drop out, I’m also gone. Because in that case my needed kings are probably dead, leaving me with an almost in inside straight draw, and I’m not going to play this probable inside straight against an over-pair, especially when I don’t know what my implied odds might be since I don’t know what the actions of the remaining players behind me are going to be.


4. But (and this is what happened) if the over-cards drop and I now have 3 over-cards to the board and I WILL PROBABLY RAISE. And see if I can get this hand heads up. If I do get it heads up, and hit a scare card on fourth I am going to come out betting, and if I hit another scare card of improve on 5th, I’ll bet again.


As it turned out, to my surprise, the King, Ace, and 6 all folded, I raised. And got the hand heads up against the 5h. I hit a second Queen on fourth. 5h hit a Jd. I bet, 5h Jd called. And then I hit hidden trip Queens on fifth at the same time as the 5, unfortunately for him, hit his door card.


But the key to the hand was that I was prepared to limp in, fold, or Raise all with the same hand, at the same table and out of the same position.


So in my opinion I feel that the key question always should be : WHEN THE ACTION GETS TO ME, WHAT CAN I DO TO MANIPULATE THIS TABLE, TO GET THE EXACT OPPONENTS THAT WILL MAXIMIZE MY POTENTIAL PROFIT FROM THIS STARTING HAND.


And if I CAN'T accomplish that now, would it be more profitable for me to go for a value raise now, or delay my raise, so that a raise or check raise on fourth or fifth street could isolate my hand.


As to your other questions : How often would you limp in with split Kings?

Only if I was under the gun and thought that there was a good chance that the entire table would throw their hands away. (which occurs about 10% of the time) If I already have a limper in front of me I am going to raise.


The other time I would limp in, is if I'm in last position and I have many callers already in, My opinion in that position is that I'm not going to get any isolation. All I am going to do is make a large pot that ends up devalueing my big pair. And if an opponent pairs a door on fourth and comes out betting another paired door or a new ace re-raises I'm gone.(which is not all that uncommon in large multiway hands)


Does your limping in give away too much? Answer it should, but it doesn't. But I don't play high limit poker. The highest levels that I play at are 30/60 and those players are often weaker than the 15/30 players, who are often no better than the 6/12 players.


Its not uncommon for there to be only 3 or 4 really observant players at my table.


And as you know, our playing strategies are often much different in loose games and against less observant players, than they would be against tighter more sophisticated players.


How often would you raise with a marginal hand on third? Answer: If I thought that I could get the hand heads up. And I have 3 BIG cards.(I want that triple big pair draw, with a tree top straight draw.)


The reason that I much prefer to have that third big card is because I would much rather have the greater probability of having a strong hand ( made big pair) on fourth


I don't want to raise, and then be hopeing to hit some runner runner 2 card drawing hand, that even if it hits the runner runner still has to hit a third drawing card to have a made hand. Thanks but no thanks.


Summery : John you make excellent observations through out your post. As you know the most common mistake that our opponents make, is playing too loosely. Section 4 of 7csfap21 is the best material ever written on playing against loose opponents..


Thank you for raising these interesting topics.


Most sincerely,

Doc AZ

Dear Bull,


You make some excellent points.


Like you I feel most agressive about playing the two big cards with two live flush cards marginal hands in two different situations. One is the loose passive game with big pots. In those types of games the flush draw becomes the name of the game.

Because:


1 You often need a big hand to win the pot in these big multiway hands.


2 Flushes (ever since 1864) beat straights (both above and below thew mason dixon line). Unifying the nation as to which was stronger the flush or the straight was one of the most important out comes of the civil war.


3 Flushes are mathematicaly easier to fill than straights (since you have one more out to fill a flush than you do a straight.


So like you with my two big cards and a live two flush I like to limp in and take those nice low implied odds in those loose passive games. If I hit my hand I'm off and runnin. And if I miss I'm just off.


And like you the other way that I like to play this hand, is if I am in a verry tight game, and I have a big card up, and can jam the hand to either steel the antes, or get heads up against a pair smaller than one of my big cards.


In that situation of course the value of my big cards goes up.


And like you in the in between situations. I'd rather stay away from the hand. And under those conditions if I do call with the hand and it gets raised I often will just muck it.


(which reminds me of a poker story. You don't have to read this if you don't want to.)


President Nixon,Marginal starting hands ,and the KGB


Years ago my wife Honey and I were playing Stud at that big Indian Casino east of San Diego.


And there was a great big guy, with a snow white beard sitting between Honey and I.


This guy was an excellent Poker player, and a lot of fun, and before long Honey, Santa (he looked a lot like Santa Clause anyway) and I were having a great time playing cards and laughing about one thing or other.


Well the game was one of those verry loose and agressive games, that it would have beeen easy to get trapped in with marginal starting hands.


Because you would call, and then some baby card would raise and if you called him, someone behind you would re-raise. And if you wern't careful you'd end up turning into a cheese sandwitch.


Well after about an hour Santa (I am afraid I forgot his name, if you read this Santa I'm sorry) Santa and I, after originaly calling had both mucked our hands when they were raised,.


And he looked over at Honey started to laugh and said "You know Honey, I knew Doc was a very good player after we had only been playing together for a fewminutes."


"Honey" I said "you should listen to this guy not only does he have a good sense of humor, but he is obviously blessed with an unusualy keen sense of observation." I laughed.


Just out of interest xxxxx (I forgot his name) could you tell me what you found so funny about that last hand we played?"


"Sure" he said "I got to laughing, because I haven't seen a player that could drop a weak hand faster than you, since I played with my old friend President Nixon."


Then he pulled out his wallett and got out a picture of himself and President Nixon with their arms around each other.


It turned out that this guy (Santa) was the director of poker instruction at the Casino. And that he had played Poker off and on with President Nixon for some 30 years.


Santa then said, that one time when Nixon was President he (Santa) had been traveling around the Soviet Union in an old Volkswagen Van.


Anyway he got lost and somehow got on to a restricted road (probably to some old military base) that he wasn't supposed to be on.


Any way he got arrested and was taken in to custody. He said that after a while they called him in to a room to "interview" him.


And while one officer was asking him questions another one was going through his personel belongings.


As the officer that was searching his stuff was going through his wallet when he came across this photo of him and Nixon together.


On the back of the picture it said something like "Thanks for sharing a lifetime of joy with me, and for always being a best friend.

Signed Dick Nixon.


Well anyway the officers took him to another rooom, and he could hear them making some phone calls, and then after about an hour they politly returned his things and released him.


But he said that from the day that he was arrested onwards he was followed where ever he went.


If he'd go for a drive, way back in the distance there would always be someone tailing him.


If he went in to a restraunt there would always be someone follow him in, and someone elce in a car parked not far from his.


Well after about three days, he said that he had gone into a cafe and shure enough after about 10 minutes here came the guys that had been tailing him.


Well he said that he finaly just couldn't take it anymore. And he went up to the two Russians and asked them if they were tailing him,


"Why yes" said one of the Russians in perfect english.


Are you with the KGB he said "You might say that" said one of the Russian"


Well Santa just could't take it any more he explained all over again how he had gotten lost, and how he didn't know that that road had been restricted. And that he was no danger to the Russian people.


Then he said that one of the Russians looked up at him and said "We understand that you and The President of the United States are old Poker buddies"


Why yes Santa said, whenever he's not been in Washington we have played together for years."


"That's why were here the Russian said. We aren't worried that you might do any thing wrong.


"We have our orders to see nothing happens to you as long as you are in our country!"


So I guess there are some benefits to haveing poker pals.


Your "poker pal"


Doc AZ