Any two suited revisited

Following the threads of "SomeGun"? and the earlier thread on calling a raise in the BB with any two suited cards, I thought I'd run some simulations on TurboTexasHoldEm(V4).


Results are for a relatively loose, not particularly good lineup.


First, looking at button play with 4 limpers: $10-20 game, approximately 10000 trials/starting hand, and typically ~$35 invested per hand. Thus the random uncertainty should be ~$35/sqrt(10000)=$0.35 (Larger systematic errors may come from vagaries of this particular lineup.) All results in dollars.


In this case, all aces were profitable (A2s=+2.63), all kings except K2s(K3s=+1.32, K2s=-.17),

Q7s=+.94

Q6s=-.84

J8s=+1.7

J7s=-.11

J6s=-.89

For connectors:

54s=+1.37

43s=-.71

One gap:

53s=.56

42s=-1.83

Two gaps are somewhat non-monotonic:

T7s=-.85

96s=-1.35

85s=-.02

74s=-1.71 perhaps I need to tweak to post flop play for these, or maybe the lowers benefit from fewer players playing their cards (with better kickers). A similar, though less dramatic effect occurs for the one-gappers.

The lowest three gapper that is profitable is Q8s=+2.67, though J7s=-.11 is close.


Continued in next post ...

Now looking at button play with 2 limpers (as opposed to 4 above). (BTW, all results are without rake and toke)


I ran this one longer, so random error is ~$0.13.


Again, K2s=-.06 is slightly unprofitable. (all other kings and aces show better than ~.50)

Q5s=.19

Q4s=-.46

J7s=.70

J6s=-.06

For connectors:

76s=+.26

65s=-.46

54s=-1.03

43s=-2.67

One gap:

97s=+1.31

86s=-.42

75s=-.88

Two gaps are fairly regular:

T7s=+.50

96s=-.44

85s=-1.63

74s=-2.07

The lowest three gapper that is profitable is J7s=+.7


Surprisingly, there are some significant differences between these 2 and 4 limpers: suited Q's and J's gain value, suited connectors and one gappers lose as the # of limpers decreases.


In case anyone who is still reading is curious,

Button won with:

bust 12623

pair 172531

2pair 242278

trips 67623

str8 79891

flush 189661

full 52951

4kind 3121

S8 FL 2337


and lost with:

bust 63314

pair 383723

2pair 230120

trips 23329

str8 13815

flush 35405

full 8043

(these results would be much more meaningful if they applied to a specific hand, but I haven't done that yet, these are totals for all suited hands that were limped in with)


Now that I've done the work, I think it is of questionable value, since, as Mason said, small adjustments in preflop play around the marginal hands (like these) have marginal effect on your bottom line.


Craig Howald


PS Just in case I haven't bored everyone away, I'll post some results for BB play below

Marginal hands for big blind to play against 4 opponents for 1 raise to him (may have to call another raise):


here, random error should be ~$0.35


72s=-.31 (accounting for the fact that folding costs $10)

83s=+.21

t4s=+.78

92s=+1.12

82s=+1.40

94s=+1.45

j2s=+1.47

t3s=+1.67

t2s=+1.87

j3s=+1.90

j7s=+1.91

93s=+1.92

84s=+1.94

j6s=+1.96


Note that most of these differences are small compared the uncertainty, so the ordering may be off. And the 72s might even be profitable.


Thus, any two suited will do, for calling a raise in the BB in a weak, passive game with 4 players already in. In addition, similar results hold for completing a single bet in the SB.


Cheers,

Craig Howald

So does that mean one should always call a raise with any two suited cards in a big blind with 4 players? You are saying that if BB folds the hand the evaluation is -$10, while calling with any two suited cards it's almost break even instead ??


Interesting analysis btw.

Curious asked

"So does that mean one should always call a raise with any two suited cards in a big blind with 4 players? You are saying that if BB folds the hand the evaluation is -$10, while calling with any two suited cards it's almost break even instead ?? "


YMMV, but with the possible exception of 72s, each hand is at least marginally profitable (assuming reasonable post-flop play). 2) No, in the convention I am using, folding is $0.


Craig

Thanks for the clarification. I suppose if the opponents are tough, it's probably better to fold them, but if the opponents are weak, then they are playable hands.