A9s UTG

[sublime]

Do you call?
I did and there was a raise for UTG+1, I figured I would call him and see the flop. Which I missed. He bets and I fold.

Thoughts?

[Festus22]

There's many here who advocate playing any suited ace UTG assuming the game is typical loose, passive. I personally have bagged playing A-7s and lower from the first 3 postions based on my PokerTracker stats. So, I think the limp is fine. Assuming everyone folded after UTG+1's raise, you're getting 4.25:1 to call. I'd call.

[Tosh]

I always play a suited in EP unless the game is poor, in which I'd be leaving soon anyway. Pokertracker says in 387 times I've had A9-A2s UTG or UTG+1 I am averaging 0.07 per hand. I would say it is certainly a limp, even in EP.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
I always play a suited in EP unless the game is poor, in which I'd be leaving soon anyway. Pokertracker says in 387 times I've had A9-A2s UTG or UTG+1 I am averaging 0.07 per hand. I would say it is certainly a limp, even in EP.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'd say you're damned by your own post. A9s is much better than A2s. Even A5s is much better than A2s. If your overall profit on Axs is this small, it's difficult to escape the conclusion that A2s and some of the other small suited aces are money losers that are being carried by the larger aces.

Note that I am not expressing an opinion on the merits of playing Axs UTG. Just pointing out that your evidence supports an opposite conclusion from the one you are drawing.

My personal choice is to play A8s under normal circumstances. My definition of normal includes the somewhat higher-than-Party levels of preflop aggression in the Paradise games where I play.

BTW, there is a strict you-limp-it, you-bought-it policy. If you open a hand in good conscience you need to call a single raise.

[Tosh]

My sample size is small and so is the profit but they are playable in early position. Any profit is enough for playability.