KQ vs QJs question

[Rook80]

At the WSOP Phil Hellmuth lost a hand to Sammy Farhad where Sammy open for 12,000 in and early postition and Phil raised for 35,000 - Sammy called. Sammy had QJs and Phil had KQ. On his web site Phil writes that "all champions and semi-champions know you don't call off your money with Q-J in a no limit Hold'em tourney", yet all references I can find list QJs as a stronger hand the KQ. I'm new to Texas Hold 'em so I was hoping someone could explain Phil statement - from a poker strategy persective.

Does it have to do with Sammy's postition on that hand? Any input would be appreciated.

[davidross]

I have zero no-limit expertise so I can't really answer your question, but I will say I read Phil's book this summer and found a lot of his advice surprising (Like calling raises with Axs). In fact I thought KQo is one of the worst hands to call a legitimate raise with.

I think it's similar to the phenomenom is professional sports where superstar players make terrible coaches or managers. They can't explain how they do the things they do. Phil is such a gifted hand reader that he can make plays the average person can't because he senses where he is at all times.

I saw the hand you described on TV just the other night and Phil did go off his nut when the cards were turned over, but I think that's just Phil. But in his defence, I think heads up in a no-limit game QJs is a pretty mediocre hand. I would much rather have the KQ for the extra high card potential.

[Moonsugar]

In a limit game where many people may see the flop being suited becomes a bigger advantage. (More people that see the flop and the longer they stay the more valuable being suited is.)

In no limit where it usually gets to heads up the rank of the cards are the most valuable thing.

[daryn]

pokenum -h kc qd - qs js
Holdem Hi: 1712304 enumerated boards
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
Kc Qd 1167017 68.15 504047 29.44 41240 2.41 0.694
Qs Js 504047 29.44 1167017 68.15 41240 2.41 0.306

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
In fact I thought KQo is one of the worst hands to call a legitimate raise with.

[/ QUOTE ]
1. Phil was not calling; he was reraising.

2. There are lots of worse hands than KQo with which to call a legitimate raise.

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
I saw the hand you described on TV just the other night and Phil did go off his nut when the cards were turned over, but I think that's just Phil. But in his defence, I think heads up in a no-limit game QJs is a pretty mediocre hand. I would much rather have the KQ for the extra high card potential.

[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't see this on TV. Could someone describe the action in more detail?

Or provide a link to discussion of it on the Phil Hellmuth web site?

As the hands were turned up, I assume someone was all in? Was this the hand Phil busted out on?

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
all references I can find list QJs as a stronger hand the KQ.

[/ QUOTE ]
Huh? KQo is the better hand in most circumstances.

There's a few things to clarify here. First, when we talk about one hand being "a stronger hand" than another, we are not saying anything about how the two hands do when heads up against each other. An example of this: I'd say 65s is a stronger hand than J5o. But if those two hands go against each other heads up, J5o is a big favourite.

Whether one hand is "stronger" than another depends on the game in general and on the particular situation. For example, suppose it's limit holdem, a loose aggressive player has limped in EP, and everyone has folded to me on the button. Here's one situation where I'd much rather have KQo than QJs. For one thing, my opponent could well have KJo. In that case, KQo would be a big favourite but QJs would be a big underdog.

In general, KQ is more likely than QJ to flop top pair. That's important in limit holdem.

Now take a different situation. Instead of a loose aggressive having limped in EP, it's a moderately tight aggressive player having raised in EP. Now, on the button, I really don't like either KQo or QJs at all, but if I had to choose I'd pick the QJs. For one thing it's a bit less likely to be dominated, because my opponent could easily have raised with AK or AQ but AJ is less likely.

In a multiway pot, as someone else in this thread has pointed out, QJs is often better because it's suited.

In the WSOP example, the concerns are a bit different because it's no-limit.

[rkiray]

cardplayer.com has it in the current issue.

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
cardplayer.com has it in the current issue.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, the Phil Hellmuth column in the current issue is a different bad-beat story, where his opponent was all-in with A7 and hit a 7 on the river for trips.

However I did find the story about the WSOP KQ v. QJs on Hellmuth's site, http://philhellmuth.com/hotw.html?hotw=07-17-1.html.

[M.B.E.]

I had a look at Hellmuth's column on this hand (http://philhellmuth.com/hotw.html?hotw=07-17-1.html). It's a bit hard to judge because Hellmuth doesn't say what Farha's stack was at the time. Anyway it seemed Hellmuth's preflop raise was pot-sized or a little more, meaning Farha was getting almost 2-to-1 immediate pot odds to call. Probably Farha thought he'd be able to outplay Hellmuth post-flop. Guess what? He was right! Farha flopped a gutshot and flush draw, and checked; Hellmuth, having flopped top pair, checked behind. Then Farha hit a flush on the turn, and Hellmuth paid him off on the turn and river.

To answer the original poster's question, neither QJs nor KQo is that good a hand in no-limit holdem. Of the two, however, KQo is better. But that doesn't mean Sammy's call was incorrect.

[ajizzle]

As I'm sure other posters have said, there is a concept in no-limit hold'em that doesn't really apply to hold'em. If you are the first one in the pot with a huge raise (most times all-in), your hodlings should not be as particular as when you are CALLING a huge raise. Since Phil was first in with the big money, he faults Farha for calling off money with a mediocre hand. COnversely, If Farha had been the aggressor, and made a huge move with any hand, Phil would have thrown away KQ. Phil is very right in saying that Farha mis-played QJs in that situation, but you must keep in mind that Phil is a huge whiner.

Secondly, QJs has a better chance of winning against ANY RANDOM hand, but heads-up against KQ, QJs is a huge underdog. When Phil makes a huge raise, like he did, Farha should know that he is up against over-cards or a big pair. I haven't seen many professionals make this type of call in a No-Limit tourney, and the reason is because it is THE WRONG PLAY. Once again, Phil is right, and whining about it.

[Rook80]

Thanks all,

I hadn't meant this as a specific question about the 2 starting hands heads up but more about these as starting hands in general. Not knowing what had transpired on the table earlier it's tough to say what motivated Sammy to play this way.

What is a bit surprising is Phil knows Sammy can be a very reckless player in No-Limit, he state that in his article, and didn't consider he might go in with a hand like this.

M.B.E. - I want to thank you for the effort you put into the analysis of this hand from the perspective of playing against someone in an early position.

This is my first posting on this sight. Your replies have given me something to think about.