22 Weeks to the WSOP Quest and win rates

[dogmeat]

Good morning - I think. My three-year old daughter got me up before 7AM again this morning, and I am still half asleep. I don't drink coffee so any night's sleep of less than seven hours is tough for me. How much sleep do you guys get - want - need to be at your best? Do you still perform well when short on sleep?

I put my weekly $170 into savings for the WSOP 2005. I've saved for 24 weeks and have $4080 and will save another $3740 over the next 22 weeks for my tournaments and other expenses. You can do it too - just start saving!

I also have been looking at my win rates and wonder how the stats can be of use to me. I'm definitly anal about my stats, but still wondering about these, which are the actual winning percentages for various hands.

I win 75% of all pots I play when starting with AA. Well, I'm gonna play those all the time - duhh /images/graemlins/smirk.gif But what about a hand like 87s?

Now my stats tell me I win 21% of all pots when starting with 87s. Granted, this rate is for 100K hands in poker tracker and therefore includes heads-up through six and even seven callers to the flop, but, could I simply assume that this hand is not worth calling with unless I can make a very good "guesstimate" that I will get 4-1 on my money? Yes, and I don't play this hand unless I am in the CO or on the button or the blinds, and, this is the lowest suited connector that I win over 20% with.

My real problem here is that as I have moved up in limits, I often find myself getting trapped with hands like this. Example:

Two limpers from MP and it gets to me in the CO, I call and the button raises. Both blinds fold, both limpers call and I? Well, hell, I'm getting 8.5-1 for my call, so I call. However, unless I flop two-pair, my hand is usually crap and I've wasted a full big bet on it.

Here is what usually happens: I flop nothing and take my loss, I flop middle or bottom pair and make a single call hoping to trip-up, or a straight draw flops and there is a face card. If the MP bets, I get trapped when the button raises, or it gets checked, the button bets and the MP check-raises and I have to call two-small cold with a chance of getting reraised. Essentially, the other players are playing well and if I do call, and manage to make my hand, I am just barely getting the right odds - and this is when I actually make the hand, and it is actually good.

Perhaps I am missing something funamentally here, but I don't see how lower suited connectors can be played in games where on average there are 25-30% to the flop with aggressive players. Anybody want to explain to me how they get 7-6 suited to be profitable?

Dogmeat /images/graemlins/spade.gif

[TimM]

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps I am missing something funamentally here, but I don't see how lower suited connectors can be played in games where on average there are 25-30% to the flop with aggressive players.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just stop playing them in games that are aggressive post-flop. With these hands, you obviously need a cheap flop with many players, to see if you can flop a draw worth continuing. But when one of these hands hits the flop, you still only have nothing but a draw most of the time. You will then want cheap and free cards after the flop, to see if you can hit the draw. If you know that seeing the turn and river isn't going be cheap, better to not invest any money in these hands in the first place.

[cov47]

Well, if you are using your win rate to determine the merit of the hand you have to assume you're already playing the hand perfectly. I could envision a player who plays a particular hand terribly and thus has a lousy win rate with it saying "this hand just isn't any good, here are the stats to prove it," when really he just needs to fix the problem in his play of the hand. I don't mean this as a criticism of your play as I don't know anything about it - just saying that using a win rate to determine if a hand is good is a bad idea if there is any doubt in your mind as to your ability to play the hand.

To me the question of when I play a suited connector has more to do with looseness/passivity of the table than position. I wouldn't mind 76s UTG if you could guarantee me that 5 more people would limp behind me and nobody would ever raise. And even in the CO I don't really want to be the first one into the pot with 76s. It's about building a pot. Most of the time you're going to lose a little when you miss the flop and fold. To make up for that you really have to win a big pot when you hit, and you have to drag as many people into as many bets as possible to bloat those pots.

If you're getting constantly trapped by solid aggressive players when you play these hands, I see no reason to keep playing them in those games. I typically 4-table party 2/4 or 3/6, and in most of those games I feel I can play the suited connectors profitably. Your mileage may vary.

[dealer_toe]

I just got done reading thru SSHE, the section about these kinds of hands. It bluntly advises to stay away from these kind of hands if it can be barely profitable for you to play. So just stay away from the hand when you think you might just barely make money off of it, doesn't seem the risk.

[dogmeat]

My mileage has definitly varied. I think the main problem is that I am weak post flop with these hands, much like my play of medium pocket pairs when I find myself heads-up with them. Because I don't know where I am, I sometimes even trap myself by being too aggressive. I see the "quicksand" notice, but still wade-in to my knees before I start searching for a swinging vine to save my sorry ass.

Thanks for the responses, guys! /images/graemlins/smile.gif Anybody else? Got a rope?
Dogmeat /images/graemlins/spade.gif

[sthief09]

yeah suited connectors really aren't profitable unless played in the right situations. you want position, you want a big pot, you'd prefer passive players, and you almost never want to pay 2 bets. sometimes you'll limp on the button or in the CO and someone raises behind you. there's nothing you can do about it, but at least you have good relative position, that is, if you flop a draw you can raise for value, and you'll usually be closing the action on the flop, so you can make some semi-loose calls. also, you need to discount your 2 pair outs. If you're holding 87s on a board like QT7, your two pair outs aren't worth all that much, because you'll be facing a scary board. also, if there's an A out there and you have middle pair with T9s in a multiway pot, your two pair outs aren't worth as much since AT and A9 are popular hands. it seems like you realize they aren't profitable and you're being delicate with them, so you'll probably manage to turn a decent profit with them.

[Punker]

I think a basic problem of your philosophy is that you seem to operate from the premise that you must hit your hand to win. If you are playing correctly aggressively, you should be able to semi bluff and win some of the "draw hits" that don't turn into "made hand hits".

You may also not be factoring correctly in the chance of getting raised on some hands.