Do I have enough odds to call the flop?

[BookOfIcculus]

foe is a frequent semibluffer after he raises.

Party Poker 5/10 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed)

Preflop: book TEbook%%%%%9/images/graemlins/spade.gif, T/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
UTG folds, book calls, CO <font color="purple">(bets when checked to)</font> raises, Button folds, SB folds, BB folds, book calls.

Flop: (5.40 TEbook#####) 7/images/graemlins/club.gif, 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 3/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="blue">(2 players) </font>
book checks, bets when checked to bets, book calls.

Turn: (3.70 TEbook*****) 8/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="blue">(2 players) </font>
book checks, bets when checked to bets, book raises, bets when checked to calls.

River: (7.70 TEbook*****) A/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="blue">(2 players) </font>
book checks, bets when checked to bets, book raises, bets when checked to calls.

Final Pot: 11.70 TEbook*****

[naphand]

Yes.

You put yourself in the same position, bets wise, as if you were in the BB, plus in this case you have additional equity from the folded blinds. This is an easy call, and you have a hand which is probably not dominated and has many ways to win.

T9s wins more than its fair share of hands SH, you have an opponent who is pretty much guaranteed to let you CR him should you hit, so you will get paid when you do.

Flop you have 2 weak draws, plus two overcards to the board which are probably good if either pairs up, you have no reason to suppose CO has anything more than overcards, so no problem peeling off one more here. Turn plays itself given your read.

Nice River CR.

[JustPlayingSmart]

[ QUOTE ]
T9s wins more than its fair share of hands SH

[/ QUOTE ]

I was playing some 6-max on Intercasino today to do the KK bonus and monthly 300 hands, and I had a few questions. My table was fairly loose and very passive. I was the only person raising anything other than high pocket pairs or AK (and some people weren't raising those either). Am I limping T9s UTG? If so, is that the bottom limit of the suited connectors that I'm playing, or can I go lower? What am I doing if folded to in the cutoff with T9s?

[naphand]

You can limp UTG if you are limping better hands as well, otherwise folks will pick up on your limps as suited connectors. In the right game, T9s UTG limp is OK, and from your description of the game, it is probably OK.

Personally I prefer to play suited connectors from the CO, rather than EP, but game conditions can dictate otherwise.

Folded to you in the SB - raise with anything playable. I think in this position it is raise or fold, you cannot let in the BB for nothing here, and you actually have a pretty good HU hand. Your raise means BB will want a friendly flop to call you, which means most flops will favour you as the aggressor. Obviously play overcards carefully.

Most of the non-broadway connectors (inc. T8o, T9o, J9o) have a win % between that of 33 and 44 SH, which does not make them great hands outside the blinds. In the right game, you can add considerably to your bank by playing these hands lightly PF and carefully but confidently post-flop.

T9s is the first connector I feel confident about raising outside the blinds (it wins about the same as A2s and JTo). T8s, T7s, 98s, 97s, 87s - marginal, and I think you would need a high % of no-flop hands to raise these. My preference is to call from the blinds, and maybe limp after limpers outside the blinds.

High card strength really matters HU, so in blind -vs- blind situations, favour the stronger hands. If your opponent calls most raises, and almost never raises, you can consider limping in with weaker connectors, though I expect to get flamed for saying so.. /images/graemlins/wink.gif. You are getting 3:1 for the limp, and with no risk of a raise you can easily see a flop and quit if you miss and get bet into. I know this contradicts what I said earlier, but as with much of what you do, it depends on who you are raising.....

[Clarkmeister]

Fold or raise preflop.

Call or checkraise the flop.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Book...:

Yes, it's an easy call. Part of the reason for this is that if it goes check-check on the turn, you may be able to steal on the river with your ten high.

However, and this is a little player dependent, but a better strategy might be for you to lead on the flop. This would be especially true if you often lead on the flop in similar situations where you have a made hand, such as a pair.

Best wishes,
mason

[kiddo]

Good post. I agree.

But I am not sure about what you said at the end. You wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
High card strength really matters HU, so in blind -vs- blind situations, favour the stronger hands.... You are getting 3:1 for the limp, and with no risk of a raise you can easily see a flop and quit if you miss and get bet into

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess you mean favour high-card hands before drawing hands like connectors and suited? I am not sure from which position you will limp and then fold if you get bet into on flop? I thought you was talking about SB, but no?

If you are first in from SB with middle conectors against a loose BB you can try limping, and then bet out flop almost no matter what (not a really trashflop that dont hit you because he will call, you need at least 1 high card to scare him of). In my experinece a lot of the loose but not very strong players will give up then because "they havent invested anything and dont want to do it with nothing". And because you are aggressive and almost always raises in this position he will think this is some kind of tricky slowplay.

In my pokerstats there is a considerable difference between T9s and T8s. And also between 98s and 97s. 1-gappers is much weaker. Not to talk about 2-gappers.

Everytime I sit at the table I can see the importance of a good kicker to your pair and a lot of other things. But the difference between no-gappers and 1-gappers is difficult becuase if you hit your straight , you normally win with both no-gapper and 1 and 2-gappers. Its only that you dont hit so often.

How big is the difference between nogappers and gappers? What is the probability of flopping a draw with connectors? Nogapper, 1-, 2-gapper? Anyone knows?

[BookOfIcculus]

Wow clark and mason in the same SH thread. I'd hope you will both start posting here more often.

[ QUOTE ]
Fold or raise preflop

[/ QUOTE ]

What particular reason would I raise? I don't see any benefit to limited the field as sooted connceters play much better multiway.

And I not quite ready to build the pot yet as most flops are unfavorable for this hand. Especially since raising will often lead to me buying bad postion against a better hand.

Is there another reason to raise besides limiting the field or building the pot? Perhaps it's just one of those never limp 1st in deals, I have yet to buy-in to this idea.

Best Regards,
book

[BookOfIcculus]

Hi Mason, Thanks for your post.
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, it's an easy call. Part of the reason for this is that if it goes check-check on the turn, you may be able to steal on the river with your ten high

[/ QUOTE ]
On the days I'm playing well I'd try something like that. I wasn't quite playing that well on this day. Otherwise I may have bet the river even on the turn check/call. I was fairly certain I was up against overcards.

[ QUOTE ]
but a better strategy might be for you to lead on the flop

[/ QUOTE ] It's not often that the turn and river come perfect, perfect. So I do need to look for some more times where I can put myself in a postion to take down the pot unimproved. I do think this particular opponent would have taken 3 bluffs to get rid off. Against others it would have only taken 2.

Best Regards,
book

[BookOfIcculus]

Hi naphand,
thanks for replying.

[ QUOTE ]
you have an opponent who is pretty much guaranteed to let you CR him should you hit, so you will get paid when you do

[/ QUOTE ] Certainly against other oppenents who are more like to have a big pair and not overcards, I think I have to fold this gutter. But the implied odds where just so great with this "tight predictable" that I took a stab and the turn and river came perfect, perfect for me.

[ QUOTE ]
Nice River CR

[/ QUOTE ]
I was particularly impressed with this one.

Best Regards,
book

[naphand]

Yes it was cute.

In fact it was so cute I used it when I was HU against a player yesterday (same situation, A falling on the Turn, only I had trips 8s /images/graemlins/cool.gif).

[naphand]

Raising and being the aggressor HU is very important (not so important against players who know how to play HU and know raises can mean lots of things) for the simple reason that your opponent only hits the flop about a third of the time, as do you, but by taking control you stand to win most of the time the flop misses you both, as he folds to scare cards.

This is not the case with calling stations, clearly.

This was the point Mason was making (about getting the chance to steal) although it was not obvious from the way he said it. You get a chance to steal on the Turn as well /images/graemlins/wink.gif. Where you choose to steal, and how many barrels you fire is very opponent dependent, and very dependent on what/where you have been raising previously.

[naphand]

Hmmm...looks like I got a bit lost in my long post. This line looks a bit wrong. I think, though, you have quoted out of context by putting these two together.

What I was trying to say was - high card strength counts a lot HU due to possibility of winning unimproved. So raises with strong PF hands are a must. Suited connectors have to be played carefully at the best of times, and usually have the odds to call a raise (from BB). Against a passive opponent who does not fold much, I think you can limp in from the SB with these hands. I think raising suited connectors is a valid play only where you have an opponent who folds too much, but even if he re-raises you, your hand can still win in many ways as it is unlikely dominated by power hands/broadway cards.

I'm trying hard to make this sound coherent, it's not easy, but I think if you think enough about it, and have read the relevant posts on the forum already, it should be clear why.

You are right though, about betting out on the flop from the SB (though this would be more the case if you had raised PF). After limping, against a passive player who only bets the flop with a big hand, I see no harm in checking the flop and betting the Turn if checked behind.

As for 1-gappers and no-gappers (suited) there is difference: the gappers win a little more than their fair share, the no-gappers win a little more again, but it amounts to TWICE the profitablility on the hand (in terms of winning over the average by opponent). I'm no expert on this, and a lot depends on how you play the hand. 78s looks nicer than 97s, but in fact they win about the same. From the figures I have, a 1-gapper wins the same as a no-gapper 1 card below: so 98s wins the same as T8s, 97s wins the same as 87s. 2-gappers it is not so clear as, by definition, 2 gappers start to have more high-card value more quickly. I'm not keen on 96s, though I know at least 2 2+2 players who like this hand (someone even raises it unsuited UTG...lol) though I suspect this has more to do with it being 69 than actual value.

But when you think about bluffing, and how even trash can be played for profit under the right circumstances, then a hand with some value (97s) will be more profitable when played strongly and confidently. It is very hard to make a clear distinction on this, as it is so game dependent, and indeed mood-dependent. The suited no and 1-gappers under J are trouble hands but also sneaky, trapping and potential big-hand winners, esp. for a player who is aggressive and showing down a lot of big hands. The mistake most players make is over-valueing the suitedness, but the suitedness is what makes these hands playable when 78o and T9o are not. The suits give enough extra value to make them playable in the right place.

That said, hands like Q4s and J6s win at a similar rate to 78s, and I pretty much auto-muck these hands due to being dominated so easily. It makes me wonder....

I think what makes the lower suited connectors (78s, T8s) playable in more pots (as opposed to Q4s, J6s) is that you are more likely to have unique cards so are not going to be dominated so many times, and can get to showdown with pairs on ragged boards, when the PF raisors are paying off with their overcards.

This has been a rambling monologue, my apologies, but I am just starting to put together my thoughts on this, and comments from all and any contributing to the discussion would be most welcome. I am not an authority by any means, more like groping in the murky depths trying to pan some gold....

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]
I think raising suited connectors is a valid play only where you have an opponent who folds too much, but even if he re-raises you, your hand can still win in many ways as it is unlikely dominated by power hands/broadway cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

It also allows you to get away with buying more pots when you raise your AQ's PF. Take a simple example:
You open raise T9s in CO. Flop comes 9-high, and your opponent plays back at you. You and opponent get to showdown, YHIG. Now, opponent remembers this. Later on, you raise AQ and flop comes 8-high. You bet. It's much harder for your opponent to play back at you on raggedy flops. I think you'll get away with winning more pots uncontested if you do occasionally raise more suited connectors, just so your opponent cannot assume a 6-9 high flop missed you because you raised PF.


[ QUOTE ]
I think what makes the lower suited connectors (78s, T8s) playable in more pots (as opposed to Q4s, J6s) is that you are more likely to have unique cards so are not going to be dominated so many times, and can get to showdown with pairs on ragged boards, when the PF raisors are paying off with their overcards.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is one of my chief reasons for often defending from the BB against a frequent raiser with these types of hands.

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, it's an easy call. Part of the reason for this is that if it goes check-check on the turn, you may be able to steal on the river with your ten high.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO, in live play, this will work much more frequently than online in the Party 5/10.

That isn't to say that it wouldn't still be a +EV river bet on Party -- just that, you're almost always going to get called by a decent ace-high and sometimes even king-high. So it's substantially less effective there versus live games.

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow clark and mason in the same SH thread. I'd hope you will both start posting here more often.

[/ QUOTE ]

I second this. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[naphand]

Phew - yes.

Meta game considerations add a great deal of value to playing hands like these. I think this was touched upon in another thread (in fact several), which is why I did not specifically talk about it.

With these marginal hands it is very much a case of playing the players, as well as the cards. More so than other hands. Knowing how to extract money from other players is key to making these hands pay long-term. In the example posted here, hero has a player who very likely to allow him to get extra bets in the pot during the course of the hand for the times he catches the right flop.

Something that is less obvious, is how some of the other players (such as strip/nate/schneids/ulysses/soda) understand this, and exploit the right opponents when opportunities arise. Phrases such as "I raise with this 30% of the time, and fold the rest" is a reference to having the right conditions, not just a random "maverick-style" feeling (or if it is this, it is likely based on their understanding of game conditions/image, which has been developed over years of play).

In addition, in lower limit games where players are more passive, it is much harder to make these hands pay off, as there are just a lot fewer players who aggressively raise pots with vulnerable hands, and the general passivity of play makes it harder to get reliable reads; the opponents often resemble massed ranks of idiots where you make plenty just betting your hands for value, than trying too hard with marginal holdings. The "churn" on lower limit tables is much greater and you rarely face the same players again, nor do they stick around for long periods, or even have the savvy to observe what you are doing. These are important considerations, and also the reason why solid play and avoiding marginal hands continues to bring home the bacon. It is worth keeping certain plays in mind and looking out for conditions which merit them, though the opportunities to exercise these skills may be few and far between.

[kiddo]

[ QUOTE ]
As for 1-gappers and no-gappers (suited) there is difference: the gappers win a little more than their fair share, the no-gappers win a little more again

[/ QUOTE ]

I have problems with the middlesuited 1-gappers in my 5/10, 6max game, not to talk about the 2-gappers like J8s and T7s. But maybe its me.

I think you are right about a hand like 76 is better then Q5, because you are likely not dominated if you hit.

I also think its true, as was said in another post, that against a thinking player its good to raise theses hands to protect your other raises. But in my normal 5/10, not to many players are thinking and not to many are adjusting their play.