Unsuited broadways question

[DarkForceRising]

With typical full game conditions (generally loose-passive but someone usually throws a raise in somewhere) how are we treating our off-suited KJ's down to our J10's these days? Although it's just anecdotal evidence, I've been dumping them more and more in late position (with the exception of bling stealing) and really don't feel as if I'm leaving anything on the table.

What do the big databases have to say about this? Kind of a general question and I realize every situation is different but any feedback would be appreciated.

[PhatPots]

Those are folds. JTo is a fold. KJ is very marginal, if there is one limper to you and you are in late position, you raise it, 2 limpers and you can just call it. QJ is a fold always. For me I fold it when it is suited unless there are a lot of callers and I am on the button or CO. KTo is a fold, QTo is a fold. These hands are -EV. But blind stealing is good.

POts

[DarkForceRising]

I've been limping in early with J10s through K10s and raising KQs, KJs. However, I've been getting over my lust for A little suited. Too loose for games that are loose? My SSHE is out on loan. /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[galahad_187]

i play KJo all the time and after 70k hands i've made 8 bucks. i play it more than i should. I raise with it in any game that is weak/tight post flop from any position and fold around till mid/late position in any other game and limp in. I'll raise in late in the above game if its been folded to me.

like i said, i play the hand too much.

[Niediam]

You are insane. All unsuited broadways are +EV in LP in a loose passive game.

[wrto4556]

[ QUOTE ]
You are insane.

[/ QUOTE ]

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
Those are folds. JTo is a fold. KJ is very marginal, if there is one limper to you and you are in late position, you raise it, 2 limpers and you can just call it. QJ is a fold always. For me I fold it when it is suited unless there are a lot of callers and I am on the button or CO. KTo is a fold, QTo is a fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

Other than KTo, I play all these o/s hands in LP and later.

Way too tight. Especially if you're folding QJs in MP against no raise.

Work on your postflop game if you think you're losing too much money on them.

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
I've been getting over my lust for A little suited. Too loose for games that are loose?

[/ QUOTE ]

No.

I think you'd be served well by studying why you play some hands on certain tables in certain positions. In many games, Axs is playable. Along with any pocket pair.

You do realize why loose, usually passive, games are goldmines, right?

b

[DarkForceRising]

I'd like to see Phat Pots stats vs. the looser players. I totally understand the value of suited Aces and small pp's in loose games but, if I am not mistaken, large databases are showing them as losers from EP.

If you are quite sure it is going to be 4 way action or better, but someone will most likely raise, is it right to limp with these hands? Full game remember-not SH.

With the unsuited broadways, I seriously doubt much is left on the table by dumping them unless when going after the blinds, heads up or 3 way.



I'm open to criticizm and appreciate the feedback but if you want to call me "insane" back it up with some stats (or at least an explaination).

[elmitchbo]

i'd like to see stats too... mostly because my initial reaction was you're insane. are we talking NL or limit here? my thoughts are coming from a NL view.

i play all of those hands, and raise with them most of the time. i also play just about any suited ace and any pair in LP, and most of the time any suited K or suited connector. basically, any hand with any value at all i'm open raising in LP.

i'll toss KTo, KJo, and QTo off in EP. but i don't mind raising in early position with KJs or QJs.

i'd like to see some stats, because that might be stupid of me. i definitely feel like i'd be leaving money on the table if i folded all of those hands. those hands are far better than a random hand, which is what i assume everyone has until they do something that implies they have something better.

how often do you think your dealt KJo and it's the best hand at the table, or at least even money? i would say a fair amount of the time, but i'd like to see some stats.

[DarkForceRising]

[ QUOTE ]
i'd like to see stats too... mostly because my initial reaction was you're insane. are we talking NL or limit here? my thoughts are coming from a NL view.

I play all of those hands, and raise with them most of the time. i also play just about any suited ace and any pair in LP, and most of the time any suited K or suited connector. basically, any hand with any value at all i'm open raising in LP.

i'll toss KTo, KJo, and QTo off in EP. but i don't mind raising in early position with KJs or QJs.

i'd like to see some stats, because that might be stupid of me. i definitely feel like i'd be leaving money on the table if i folded all of those hands. those hands are far better than a random hand, which is what i assume everyone has until they do something that implies they have something better.

how often do you think your dealt KJo and it's the best hand at the table, or at least even money? i would say a fair amount of the time, but i'd like to see some stats.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm talking limit. Actully, aside from the unsuiteds up front and mp, this is pretty much in line with my play.

I'm not saying that I never play them but after 4-tabling for some time now, logging a decent sample size, and winning at a decent rate (shocking to me, too) I just don't feel as though those hands are giving me anything but problems.

There are exceptions, to be sure, but the less I limp early with Ace little suited, smallish pp's and medium offsuit broadways the better my results seem to be.

And how many of us are reading so well that we are folding K 10 off after we hit top pair and are raised with an otherwise benign looking board? How many of the people that think I am nuts are accurately putting their opponent on KJ and are laying it down? Oh, they can't possibly have a better hand because they are donks and retards and we're 2+2er's. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Niediam]

I suggest you study the preflop chapter of Small Stakes Hold'em by Miller, Sklansky and Malmuth. Don't worry about the charts but instead try to understand the concepts behind the charts.

[sthief09]

they're good to raise with and they're decent with position if you get in cheaply.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
And how many of us are reading so well that we are folding K 10 off after we hit top pair and are raised with an otherwise benign looking board? How many of the people that think I am nuts are accurately putting their opponent on KJ and are laying it down? Oh, they can't possibly have a better hand because they are donks and retards and we're 2+2er's

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe instead of 4 tabling, you can learn how to play some extra hands. How to read hands. How to use table texture to your advantage.

Again,
1) learn why some hands play better in some situations tablewise.

2) Work on postflop play.

[ QUOTE ]
Oh, they can't possibly have a better hand because they are donks and retards and we're 2+2er's

[/ QUOTE ]

imo, This would mean someone clearly has a gap in their game about reading hands. Winning players don't think this way.

b

[DarkForceRising]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And how many of us are reading so well that we are folding K 10 off after we hit top pair and are raised with an otherwise benign looking board? How many of the people that think I am nuts are accurately putting their opponent on KJ and are laying it down? Oh, they can't possibly have a better hand because they are donks and retards and we're 2+2er's

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe instead of 4 tabling, you can learn how to play some extra hands. How to read hands. How to use table texture to your advantage.

Again,
1) learn why some hands play better in some situations tablewise.

2) Work on postflop play.

[ QUOTE ]
Oh, they can't possibly have a better hand because they are donks and retards and we're 2+2er's

[/ QUOTE ]

imo, This would mean someone clearly has a gap in their game about reading hands. Winning players don't think this way.

b

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for taking the time to reply, Bernie. I've always enjoye your posts. As I luker I followed you Bad Beat jackpot hit and quitting your job threads with great interest.

Although I am not married to my beliefs regarding these hands and do understand that different situations provide opportunties to employ different stategies, for me these hands just seem to invite irritating situations and increased variance with an insignificant rate of return. And, yes, multi-tabling makes it tougher to play them.

Stupidly, I do not yet have PT (gonna fix that this week). After I get it I am going to experiment with some super-tight play vs. some Laggier play over a decent sample size. We'll see what happens.

I was in Vegas the week after Christmas last year and it was interesting to play live after only playing online for the previous 6 months. The 2+2 lurking had me playing many more hands much more aggressively- reading far more accurately with the slower pace and killing the $10 $20 game. A small sample size, no doubt, but I felt the most confident I ever had in three years of play.

Then again, maybe it was double fisting the Coronas! /images/graemlins/cool.gif