POkerboy's preflop debate #1

[1p0kerb0y]

KJo in early position. 1 folder in front of you, nobody in yet. How do you play this hand in (a) a loose game (6 or more seeing the flop) and (b) a tight game (4 or less seeing the flop). RKIRAY, I would love your response on this. Most likely I will disagree with you and we can bring back some of that spirited debate.

[bunky9590]

Fold in both instances. Though in the tight game if i Was getting major respect, I would raise and if called proceed very carefully..

[BigEndian]

A tight game is %30 flop or less imo. 4+ is loose.

Generally speaking, I fold these now 95% of the time. If I do enter the pot first in with them, I raise. But the table needs to be very tight.

- Jim

[MrBlini]

(a) Fold
(b) Fold

It might be playable at a tight passive table, say 26% or fewer seeing the flop. In that case, an open-raise might be OK, especially if you haven't been involved in too many hands in the last couple of orbits. At a tight aggressive table like the 2+2 table, this is a junk hand.

[Mike Gallo]

POkerboy's preflop debate #1

What information can you furnish to support your debate so that you may win the argument?

You can play those hands all you want. You will get no debate from me. I would prefer you play that way, that way your bankroll can find its way to me.

I suppose you will have to learn the hard way.

[Styles]

2 votes for fold here.

There are times when you can open-raise. Doesn't happen often. At True if the table flop % is <=39 AND the pot avg is <=2BigBets, I've gotten away with it. It's like a tight-passive depression hits everyone, sometimes.

[MaxPower]

You didn't mention whether the game was passive or aggressive. That makes a difference in the kinds of hands you play.

Either way I fold it in early position. If you are going to suggest playing this hand in early position, you are not going to get too much agreement around here. I seriously doubt you will convince anyone.

[Bob T.]

A-fold.
B-fold.

I think a loose game is one where four people see the flop. Where are you playing, Pacific Poker? Ok, maybe if you are playing 2-4 live, you see statistics like this. In that case, anything you do with KJ off, is probably ok.

[Vehn]

I find it odd that almost no one advocates folding KQo in early position, but KJo is like the leprosy of poker hands. Someone shows it down and you have a bunch people pointing fingers and saying "unclean!".

For the record I think both are dogshit in early position.

[Bob T.]

Hmmmm, thanks, makes you think, doesn't it.

[Ed Miller]

This question is specifically addressed in the preflop section of HPFAP. Yawn.

[BigEndian]

KQo is a borderline hand to me. I will always raise with it first in, call with it if I'm in LP and there's few limpers, raise with it if I can isolate on a single limper or 50/50 call/muck it with no remorse if there's a limp fest ahead of me.

But, if you want to mince words over the difference between KJo and KQo, how about adding AQo and AJo to the same mix. They all present basically the same problems if you hit the top card (the K or the A)on the flop.

Where is the line drawn for you?

- Jim

[DarkKnight]

Loose gaem - easy fold.

Tight game a bit closer, R or fold, I still lean towards a fold.

DK

[DarkKnight]

I'm with you on KQo. I can't find a way to
make it pay from EP.

DK

[Elizabeth]

I was just going to reply along the same lines. Whenever I get KQo early, I groan because I don't *want* to play it. In aggressive games I've started tossing it.

KJo is right out.

[AliasMrJones]

For me, a) Easy fold. b) Easy fold.

[Brian]

Hi vehn,

I think what to do with KQo in EP depends completely on the table you are sitting at. I often fold, limp, and raise with it. GuyOnTilt and I have had many discussions about this specific situation.

-Brian

[LetsRock]

OK - tie me to the whiping post....

While I am reducing the number of times I see the flop with KJo type hands, I don't think it's an "always/never" kind of hand. At an aggressive table it's an easy muck from EP, unless I've built a very tight rep and it's being respected, then I'll ocasionally (not often) open raise with it.

At a more passive table, I'll routinely (again, not always)limp with this hand in EP/MP. I don't hang on it too much with a piece of the flop and any aggression, put it can be a profitable hand in some situations.

I've read plenty of experts say that this is bad play hence my relegation of these hands (along with Axo) to "situational maybe" status, but I've yet to feel that it has made a big difference either way.

[Brian]

Hi LetsRock,

I find it amazing that you're more willing to limp with KJo when first in in EP than with T9s after 2 limpers in MP.

-Brian

[LetsRock]

I guess my "instinctive reflex" on this is the over-card problem.

The suited factor only adds about 3% draw value to your cards, so looking at it like that, T9 isn't that great a hand. If a KJ hand hits the flop pretty good (ie Top 2 pr), I'm less worried about a single card (A) making it a real tough spot. With T9 you could get top 2pr and there's 4 over cards that can make the hand suddenly troublesome, and if there are no overcards there's a good chance that somone else has built a straight.

Now, mind you, there's a lot of "sometimes" in my play and very little "always/never". I am working towards trying to "loosen up" a little with the medium suited connectors in LP and "tightening up" with gapped paint in EP, but they're both marginal (at best) type hands and are treated accordingly. My basic play standards are (based on Sklanky's groupings):

Groups 1-2 - Play pretty agressively most of the time (raise or call most raises)

Group 3 - Play with caution most of the time (call most raises in LP, call some raises from EP/MP, occasional open raise)

Group 4-5 - Mix them in sometimes, mostly from LP (call some raises, usually defend the blinds from 1 raise, maybe 2)

Group 6-8 - Mix them in very sparingly, almost always from LP (might defend the blinds from one raise with them)

Now, I know that table conditions and other variables call for different "mixes", but this is my "standard baseline" and adjust from there. That's where I am right now, but I'm still working on it. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Brian]

Hi LetsRock,

Theres no comparison to KJo when first in from EP to T9s when 3rd in from MP. You must fold KJo from EP no matter what type of game you are playing in. If it is loose and passive, you are creating a multiway pot out of position with a marginal hand. If it is loose and aggressive, you certainly don't want to be paying multiple bets to see the Flop and have to pay off all the way if you are dominated. If the game is tight and passive, KJo may be worth raising to steal the blinds with. If it is tight and aggressive, you are better off folding.

Simply put, KJo is an easily dominated hand. Much more easily dominated than T9s. I have no problem playing T9s in a raised pot (of course I wouldn't cold-call a raise with it, but if I had already entered the pot, and it was raised after, I am absolultey fine). KJo, I want to vomit when I see the pot being raised after me. Does he have AK? KQ? AJ? Any high pocket pair? I hope not.

T9s plays well in multiway pots, and in MP after 2 limpers, that is what you are getting. It is a suited connector that will occasionally make top pair. I think you are greatly underestimating the value of being suited. KJs I would normally play up front. KJo... no.

T9s has straight and flush potential. KJo has little of either. KJo will frequently make top pair and have to pay off to the river when it is dominated (and it is perhaps one of the most easily dominated hands in Hold'em, and why we advised against playing it in EP). The later your position gets, the more hands you can play. If you have KJo and there are 2 limpers to you in LP, then it's a perfectly playable hand. The odds of your being against a hand that dominate you have decreased dramatically, plus, of course, you will have great position on the Flop and beyond. But in EP... no thanks.

-Brian

[1p0kerb0y]

If you said fold in both instances, you are correct. I've seen several posters here advocate playing the hand in EP, which is why I brought it up. (Don't know where they are now). MaxPower, you are correct and brought up a good point when you said that aggressive/passive should determine the mix of hands that you should play. Unfortunately, this hand is not playable from EP in either type of game. Everything Brian said sums up exactly why you should muck these cards. I'll try to make my next post a little more stimulating, but I had to call out the people who said they play this hand.

[Joe Tall]

[ QUOTE ]
I had to call out the people who said they play this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I highly doubt this was needed because I'm sure that if anyone has posted/responded with such advice, they have been appropriately flamed.

Granted a good debate is needed around here once in a while; I just do not feel this one is warrented.

Welcome to the forum,
Joe Tall

[rkiray]

[ QUOTE ]
RKIRAY, I would love your response on this. Most likely I will disagree with you and we can bring back some of that spirited debate

[/ QUOTE ]

Cool. I love this. The problem with the large number of posts these days is that I can't read all of them (and I suspect I spend more time here than most). I didn't recognize your name, so I skipped this thread until I saw how many responses it got. I'm about done for the night, but I'll respond to you tomorrow. I love the attitude.

It's really simple, I never play KJo in ep in any game. This is slightly related to my thread that Ray Zee responded to. I dislike KJo almost as much as KTo and QTo the two worst hands in HE in my opinion. Basically because you are actually tempted to play them. I know I've lost a lot more money with KT and QT than I ever did with 27, especially before I understood what a trap hand is. ( I haven't read any of the other responses yet, but based on the number and the tone of this post, there's probably a lot of shots at me, if so I look forward to tomorrow).

[rkiray]

Darn,

I guess we agree. Too bad. This post so disappointed me I stayed online a bit longer than planned. Why did you think I'd disagree. Read the only thread I've started that's been on the front page today. I don't like KJo at all. I challenge you to find anytime I've ever posted to play it in ep. I still like your attitude and hope we can have some debates in the future. I don't really remember anybody advocating playing this in ep. Please point out who they were.

[rkiray]

Sigh, I've now read all the response, and no one took a shot at me. /images/graemlins/frown.gif I'm actually disappointed.

[LetsRock]

While I generally agree with your response, I'm a bit surprised by all of the Sklansky clones (not you in particular) who are basically completely ignoring Sklansky's play advice for EP standards (KJo falls in group 5):

"In a loose game, as long as the players are not too aggressive, you can add group 5 hands, especially the suited connectors." [Sklansky, pg 18 HEPFAP]

Obviously this is very conditional as is my approach to these cards. 90% of the time KJo is getting mucked from EP. Just not always.

[ QUOTE ]
I think you are greatly underestimating the value of being suited.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not MY estimation. I've read in several books that suited only adds about 3% draw value to the cards. We all love what suited cards look like, especially suited connectors, but making a decision based primarily on "suited" is, from my understanding, regarded to be a mistake by most "experts".

I may not be right, but in this case, I'm more of a messenger than an author.

[Jim Easton]

[ QUOTE ]
In a loose game, as long as the players are not too aggressive, you can add group 5 hands, especially the suited connectors

[/ QUOTE ]

The next line is "notice we said 'especially the suited connectors'. The game would have to be almost perfect for hands like KJo or QJo to be playable in an early position."

All of us unthinking, mindless Sklansky clones can actually fold KJo in EP and remain clones.

[rkiray]

Last time I checked KJo is not a suited connector. One of the first threads I read on these forums was Mason debating with someone why to never play KJo in ep. That was almost two years ago (they upgraded software in fall of 2002, so many people have reg. dates close to mine). The forum was small enough then that Mason could respond to a much higher % of threads. I thought it was a really cool thread and was immediatly hooked. I lurked for a couple of months then slowly waded in, look what that led to.

[LetsRock]

"...especially suited connectors..." does not specifically exclude the other hands. For the record, I DID NOT use the word "mindless" in my reference to "Sklansky clones"; that was your word.

It just amuses me that 90% of the flock here line up in Sklansky's corner (which is fine with me, there are much worse corner's to be in /images/graemlins/wink.gif) and then you argue against a "sometimes" play that has been "authorized" by the master.

I will say it one more time: KJo off early is usualy not a good play but there are times (rare as they may be) that it is not a mistake to limp in with this hand. Sheeeesh.

[Jim Easton]

[ QUOTE ]
I DID NOT use the word "mindless" in my reference to "Sklansky clones"; that was your word.


[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, so you meant it as a compliment?

[ QUOTE ]
It just amuses me that 90% of the flock here line up in Sklansky's corner (which is fine with me, there are much worse corner's to be in ) and then you argue against a "sometimes" play that has been "authorized" by the master.


[/ QUOTE ]


It amuses you when clones you expect to act like a flock don't act like a flock of clones? Perhaps your condescending characterizations aren't accurate.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
I will say it one more time: KJo off early is usualy not a good play but there are times (rare as they may be) that it is not a mistake to limp in with this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

it's one of my favorite hands to play. i play JKo from EP at times. though very rarely. i have to have a great feel on the table. but i wouldnt be caught limping with it from this spot.

it's raise or fold. with the greater emphasis on folding.

no way i would just limp with it in this spot. if you dont understand why not to limp, fold it until you learn why you should raise if you're choosing to play it.

b

btw... i cant think of anytime when i would choose to just limp with it.

[JohnShaft]

[ QUOTE ]
I find it odd that almost no one advocates folding KQo in early position

[/ QUOTE ]

They don't?
I wasn't even aware that KQo was considered remotely playable from EP by the masses. I haven't considered it so for almost as long as I've been playing.

As for "I hate it because I'm tempted to play it", well I'm just not. I think thinking that way suggests you have loose "I want to play hands" impulses.

I don't get to play in games good enough where limping in EP with KQo is a good idea (imo). Unless the games play like baby micro-limit, with horrible players, I can't think what would convince someone to play such offsuit tat from EP.

As for raising it, hell, I don't know I consider that much better either. And even moreso with KJo. If I see someone open raising with hands this weak from EP then I just hope I'm on their left, for when I have a real hand.

[JohnShaft]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm a bit surprised by all of the Sklansky clones (not you in particular) who are basically completely ignoring Sklansky's play advice for EP standards (KJo falls in group 5)

[/ QUOTE ]

Sklansky Clones. Hah. That's like almost cutting. I can't decide if it's really a backhand compliment, or a forehand insult.

Whatever it is, to be blunt, I don't really give a chit what David says about Hand Groupings. I totally respect his advice, but comeon, "Hand Groupings"?
I've always believed they were for beginners, and I'm sure that's their *intended* audience IIRC.

In fact I deliberately don't know the Hand Groupings. I've more or less avoided reading them. By the point I'd picked up the book, even though still in the micro-limits at the time, I was only interested in a hands intrinsic value.
If the advice indicates playing KJo (or even KQo) in EP, my response is "not in my games". I'd rather not bother. I have better things to do than get involved with weak offsuit hands out of position.
I don't know how loose it would have to be before I'd consider playing KJo in EP. But we're talking *very*.

As for the hole concept of 'clones' I don't think anyone should be concerned with toeing the party line. I'm not interested in spouting out chapter and verse on what is, and what is not, acceptable.
I believe the whole 2+2 catalogues advice (and Poker advice in general) is best viewed as "Not telling you what to think, but trying to get you *to* think"...

Maybe my perspective is wrong, but it's what I believe, and I'm sticking to it.

[rkiray]

Nice posts John,

I said we needed more attitude around here, and you are providing it.

[LetsRock]

[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm a bit surprised by all of the Sklansky clones (not you in particular) who are basically completely ignoring Sklansky's play advice for EP standards (KJo falls in group 5)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Sklansky Clones. Hah. That's like almost cutting. I can't decide if it's really a backhand compliment, or a forehand insult.


[/ QUOTE ]

I meant it as neither. It's merely an observation I've made. Anyone who has an opinion that is not that of the masses, gets pummeled by all the groupies: "There are no other ways to do this. Ours is the only way. Don't even try to think outside the box!"

It also amuses me when people will isolate a statement from a reply of a reply of a reply of a reply and hang an entirely new "discussion" on it. While I do loosely follow groupng advice (it's there for a reason), I don't live and die by it. Groupings are a guideline and a place to work from.

I used the "grouping" statement to support my position that my position on the original topic (what the hell was it anyway?) was supported by the master himself!

If you choose to ignore "grouping" advice, good for you. I hope it's working for you. I'm not an advocate of absolute cloning for a game like poker. You need to have a bit of your angle to be successful.

[ QUOTE ]
If the advice indicates playing KJo (or even KQo) in EP, my response is "not in my games". I'd rather not bother. I have better things to do than get involved with weak offsuit hands out of position.


[/ QUOTE ]

The book does not specifically advocate this play, nor do I most of the time. It merely suggests that it is not ALWAYS wrong to play these cards from early position. It requires a situation so specific that most of us wouldn't recognize it if we saw it and therefore it would be safest to muck them everytime and fuggetaboutit. But, my point was that Sklansky suggests that there are times when it is correct.


[ QUOTE ]
I believe the whole 2+2 catalogues advice (and Poker advice in general) is best viewed as "Not telling you what to think, but trying to get you *to* think"...


[/ QUOTE ]

I would like to say the same, but I find that many of the replys come off as "that was the dumbest thing I've ever seen. don't ever do this..." instead of "I do it like this..." or "maybe you should consider this..."

I'm here to get some other perspective but there seems to be one perspective here and the rest of us are just wrong. no gray area, no maybes, no sometimes, we're just wrong.

it's ammusing /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[LetsRock]

Jeez, did I hit a nerve? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

It wasn't meant as an insult or a compliment. It's just what I see. It's pretty obvious by reading the posts, that 90% of the folks here are doing their studies at the Sklansky PB Institution and are hardline Sklansky supporters. If one person gives an opinion that is different, they pummel them because "there is just no other way to do it besides ours!" I'm a Sklansky student as well, but there's always more than one way to do things, even if it's only sometimes.

[Jim Easton]

[ QUOTE ]
Jeez, did I hit a nerve?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it is called feigned innocence. It inolves making a statement you know is an insult then claiming you didn't intend to insult. If you actually are unaware that it is an insult to refer to people as clones or a flock, then I apologize.

[rkiray]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm here to get some other perspective but there seems to be one perspective here and the rest of us are just wrong. no gray area, no maybes, no sometimes, we're just wrong.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is depressing, but seems true. In the past it was not unusual to have three or four perspectives on a hand and heated arguments over it. Doesn't happen much anymore. Some of the most vocal of the old posters were (IMO) even more arrogant than most of the current posters, but a year ago the majority of hands posted would generate several different ways to play the hand. In NVG, I said it's like we are in the communist party. It seems like everyone feels they can't cross the party line. Guess they are all afraid of being shot or something.

[Jim Easton]

[ QUOTE ]
I used the "grouping" statement to support my position that my position on the original topic (what the hell was it anyway?) was supported by the master himself!


[/ QUOTE ]

* * *

[ QUOTE ]
The book does not specifically advocate this play, nor do I most of the time. It merely suggests that it is not ALWAYS wrong to play these cards from early position. It requires a situation so specific that most of us wouldn't recognize it if we saw it and therefore it would be safest to muck them everytime and fuggetaboutit.

[/ QUOTE ]


"A situation so specific that most of us wouldn't recognize it if we saw it" is not exactly "supported by the master himself!"

[ QUOTE ]
my point was that Sklansky suggests that there are times when it is correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

That might have been your point, but your statement was:

[ QUOTE ]
I'm a bit surprised by all of the Sklansky clones (not you in particular) who are basically completely ignoring Sklansky's play advice for EP standards (KJo falls in group 5):


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see how it makes your point.

You were attacked and you responded by attempting to say Sklansky supports your position - loose games = G5, KJo = G5 therefore KJo in EP is o.k.

If you would have conceded it isn't a great hand in EP but it can be played if the conditions are right, then supported your position, I believe the responses would have been different. You actually discussed the play of the hand in your initial post. It was your less than accurate reference to Sklansky's advice that caused the biggest problem.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm here to get some other perspective but there seems to be one perspective here and the rest of us are just wrong. no gray area, no maybes, no sometimes, we're just wrong.

it's ammusing


[/ QUOTE ]

Then you'll love this one: JJ in the small blind (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=301785&page=&view=&sb=5&o =&vc=1)

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
Then you'll love this one: JJ in the small blind

[/ QUOTE ]

now that's a classic.
heh heh heh

b