Why not play any two suited cards?

Was playing around with some numbers, and I am starting to wonder why I dont start playing any two suited cards in some passive low-limit games. I know it goes against everything I have ever read...But I am getting sick of books...Read every book out there, I am still losing, and seeing the flop 18%-24% of the time is boring..so here it goes.


Playing any two suited cards, the remainder of the deck looks like this

Bad Cards : 33, Pair Cards : 6, Suits : 11 so...


Breakdown of what you are likely to see on the flop.


Trash/Backdoor flush

67584/117600 - 57.47%


One Pair(No Four-Flush)

32076/117600 - 27.28% or 1 every 2.666 flops


Two Pairs or Trips(two on board)

3960/117600 - 3.37% or 1 every 28.7 flops


Four-Flush

12870/117600 - 10.94% or 1 every 8.14 flops


Flush(This could suck)

990/117600 - .84% or 1 every 117.8 flops


Monster(Quads/Full House)

120/117600 - .1020408 or 1 every 979 flops


So...Lets say you threw away 1 pair every time, then you would throw away 84.68 percent of your hands post flop. So 84.68 percent of the time your cost is 1-2 SB(much closer to 1 if you find the right table)


3.37 Percent of the time you have two pair or trips. I would have to think this hand is good 80% of the time...Getting you a decent pot.


You will get your four flush about 11% of the time. On this hand you will have 9 (or 14 the 15% of the time you have a four-flush and a pair). I have to believe this is a profitable situation. Obvioulsy you cant be overly aggressive with 96s, but how often does a flush get beat by a bigger flush? Not enough to not make this profitable.


About 1% of the time you get a flush. Its a good thing this doesn't happen often, cause when you are sitting there with 4 6 suited, the last thing you want is that 4th flush card to hit the board. But even if you only win these 1 out of 4 times, I think you would still be ahead of the game...In the loose passive games I have seen, anyone with an A/K/Q is hoping that 4th suit hits the board.


Monster - Full house or quads.....Just try to figure out how to get the most money into the pot, given that the flop looks ragged and scary at the same time.....


I am sure I am not the first person to do the math...So I am wondering what the problem is. This doesn't even account for straights. The play will be somewhat deceptive, as people wont know if you have 72suited or AJ when you limp.

Boredom doesn't exist any more. In fact, you have the added bonus of doing something that in your heart feels wrong(That's always so much fun, isn't it?). Also...Think of all the people holding AK, or AA that you'll tilt when you take it down with two pair.....nines up.


Please...Someone talk me out of this, cause I'm ready to give it a try...


Thanks,

-JC

"Please....someone talk me out of this."


Don't worry, you'll talk yourself back out of it after your bankroll takes a beating.

No offence, but that is some of the most assanine nonsense I have ever read.


You know, there has to be something like a billion + possible permutations of hands and boards in a 10 way game. There's NO book out there that's going to describe every possible situation and how you need to play through it. So, reading books like you were studying to take a test is probably going to get you in more trouble than if you didn't read one at all.


Perhaps it's not your pre-flop play (you assume that just by seeing 18-24% PF play makes you "good" PF) that's making you a losing player? Perhaps your post flop play is what's killing you and you are laying down winning hands or playing to weak-tight, etc...


I think THAT'S where you need to look at your game and start fixing the holes that exist there.


Like Clarkmeister says - feel free to go ahead and try out your new strategy. You'll only THINK you were a losing player before.


Get back to basics and for your own good don't attempt this ludicrous idea that you've stumbled upon. You certainly don't have to have a Phd in math to figure out that there is no valid basis for your argument.


Happy pokering.

No offense...but I am looking for the specific hole in my argument. Would you mind showing it to me. Mathmatically, it seems to make sense. if you are in a passive game where a fair number of people take the pot, and people take hands a little to far(pretty common in low limit games).


I just don't believe playing loose pre-flop is that terrible a strategy, if you you are cautious afterwords. I've done a little work on the some of the equations and here is what I came up with


Assumptions

-You can see the flop for 1.5 small bets on average

-You throw away all backdoors and single pairs.

-When you flop two-pair/trips you will win 70% of the time and lose 30% of the time. When you lose, you lose 5 big bets, when you win you win 10 big bets.

-When you flop 4-flush you will lose 80% of the time and win 20% of the time, when you lose you will lose 5 big bets, when you win you will win 10 big bets.

-When you flop a flush you will win 40% of the time and lose 60% of the time. When you lose you lose 5 big bets, but when you win you win 10 big bets.

-When you flop a monster Boat/Quads, you will win 90% of the time. When you win you will win 14 big bets and when you lose you will lose 10 big bets.


The following assumptions give you a +ev of .117066 per hand. Which of the assumptions is totally ridiculous? These numbers don't even account for the straights you may fall ass backward into, or the times when you may want to keep top-pair. I am not looking for people to tell me I'm an idiot because I am going against conventionaly wisdom, I am looking for people to tell me the error of my ways.


Also, I feel I must defend myself... I am not playing a weak/tight game. If anything I am way too aggressive. When I go into a stretch where I haven't played a hand for two or three orbits, I tend to try to run over the table when I do get a hand. I realize my problem, but I would rather treat the root cause(boredom). Well, I got 185 big bets left in my poker accounts, and I might just put this thing to a trial. I will be sure to document every hand that I "normally" wouldn't play to see if it is costing or making me money.


Comments still appreciated....Someone please show me the error of my ways...


Thanks,

-JC

JC,


My math may be fuzzy, but I will use your numbers. If you play 100 hands, you will throw away 85 of them. -85 SB's (no raises). 10 more SB's for the big blind and 5 for the SB. -100 SB's.


you will play 15 hands post flop. I'll give you 4 two-pair or better hands that win 100%. Lets say 4 on the flop, 2 on the turn and 1 on the river, +5 BB's (10 SB's)


11 four flushes, 4 of which will hit. 7 don't hit - 3 SB's each to get to the river, -21 total,


4 that hit + 10 each.


Looks to me like


-100 seeing the flops

- 21 four flushes that miss

+ 40 monsters that stand up

+ 40 flushes that stand up


I think your still down 41 SB's for your 100 hands and that's if there are no raises.


Does this help??

Well, I see your point, but the blinds should not count. I am not talking about only playing these hands, I am talking about playing these hands in addition to what I usually play....


And the games I am talking about usually have three or four passive players on the turn, so I am figuring on having flushes pay off well. I could even see trapping 4 or 5 people in for two bets on the flop for value.


I have done simulations before, and it seems like this type of play rewards poor post flop play. I also think that this is one of the better areas to concentrate on, since most players have their starting requirements memorized, but are unsure about post flop play....

JC


I can't quote any statistical data to support the fact that playing any suited cards is a losing proposition. You said you are sick of books because you are still losing inspite of what you've read. My question is are you learning from what you read and do you apply them? Seeing flops 18-24% which you say is boring (?) is waaayyyy too high which tells me that you're too loose and undisciplined. Looks like you are interested in more action and you are looking for someone to agree with your mathematical approach which I dare not to disprove and no amount of argument will make you change your approach.


So ere's my 2 cents: Play your suited cards as often as you want to and record all the wins and losses. Just like what Clarkmeister said, you'll convince yourself when you realize that your bankroll is leaking like a sieve.

The math seems right but Ive seen this strategy in action and it doesnt work. About half the people i normally play against will play any two suited cards. Not one of em is a winning player. It works out good for me because them playing so many hands lets me take their money in a much shorter amount of time. BTW, can I be the first person you test out this strategy against?

I just dont see how 18-24% is too high....People have said this before. I often get a free flop from the blind. Here are my starting requirements.


Early : Raise/Limp with AA-TT AKs->AJs, KQs KJs, AKoff


Middle : Pairs to 88, ATs, ATo,AJo, Axs KTs, QJs,QTs,JTs


Late : All pairs if no raises, T9s J9S T8s K9s, KT, QT, JT off


I just cant see how this is being too loose preflop. And before you ask, no, I don't cold call raises with the Middle/Late hands unless I have an idea the raiser is raising light.

I see what you are saying, but I think the key is having the discipline to throw away hands on the flop. Particularly top pair, middle kicker.


I tried this out tonight, and found it to be tough, but...I was seeing about 30% of the flops...It was great....I got suited cards I normally would not play about 30 times(I was playing several tables). Of the 30 times I mucked about ten pairs without even thinking twice. 3 of those were top pair on the board, but I jumped ship with the slightest amount of action as I had a terrible kicker.


I probably spent about 40 sb's getting in to see the flops(I am reconsidering doing this UTG, having two people act before might be a change to my plan).


Of this I flopped two pair once on a board of rags and dragged a 18BB pot (got lucky, one guy had JJ was on overpair to the board and another guy limped with AK from the small blind..Pissed off both of them showing down 84s).


Caught 2 flushes, that I would not have caught for another +16BB(One was about 10BB, and the other 6) of profit.


Also won another pot, where I had a four flush and on the river had a 9 that paired, my opponent was on a busted straight draw...Yahoo another 5BB...Never really considered this aspect of the plan. Anyhow my net


I realize that 30 hands does not prove anything, but hell it was a lot of, I made a few bucks, and pissed off a bunch of people in the process....


Towards the end of my session, people were starting to notice what I was doing. Got lots of comments from people saying that I loved rags.....Toward the end I got real tempted to bluff a ragged flops. Just thought it was kindof interesting.


I can only hope that things go this well in the future.

JC-


I think in the right kind of games your reasoning isn't too bad. IMO, the problem is that such a game is more rare than you think. Playing suited cards can lead to big losses in a medium tough game. It only takes one or two new players to change the character of a game significantly. One person on a rush or someone whose mood changes can really change the pot odds against suited cards. I don't think that 50% of the hands you play are games where your strategy works.


Also, I think you miscalculate how many callers you will get on the hands where you flop a 4 flush. With 2 suited cards on board you get fewer callers than you estimate. Then when you get the callers, someone has a higher flush and you lose big with your second best flush. Whenever I see someone lose with 7-5s I mutter to myself, "That's why you don't play suited garbage." That's to remind myself not to get tempted to play these cards. So I think you over-estimate how much you'll win on the winning hands and you under-estimate how much you lose on the losing hands.


In summary, I'd say you can play lousy suited cards if you are 90% sure that there will not be a raise pre-flop and there are 4 players in addition to yourself. So, except for the most unusually loose passive game you must play these cards only from very late position. Then if 4 or 5 people limp ahead of you, say to yourself, "WTF, everyone else is going in and you never know what the flop may bring, so I'll toss in a small bet." These conditions don't happen very often so you will probably play only a few more hands per day so your boredom problem still exists.


Here's how I figure. The average pot has about 10BB's. The odds against suited cards getting a flush are about 20-1. So if you invest 1 SB, the odds are there if you are getting enough action to win an above average pot. If you have to pay 2 SB, then you need 20 BB in the pot and that's rare and when you get 20 BB's in a pot it takes more than a 9 high flush to win.


So, suited cards have small positive ev when there is no pre-flop raise. Against a raise it's a terrible bet.


Another thing. Playing marginal hands increases your variance so your losing streaks would be larger. Forget the odds for a second. Remember this: FLUSHES ARE HARD TO GET. THAT'S WHY THEY BEAT 2 PAIRS AND 3 OF A KIND. You can go days sometimes without hitting a flush.


When I see somone losing several nights in a row at low stakes holdem it's often because they draw for too many flushes. At odds of 20-1, it's not that unusual to play suited cards 100 times before hitting a flush. That's 150 SB's, or $600 in 4-8. It can add up.


BTW, I don't think what I just said contradicts what's written in HEPFAP. This is part of varying your play and playing loose games.

"Here's how I figure. The average pot has about 10BB's. The odds against suited cards getting a flush are about 20-1. So if you invest 1 SB, the odds are there if you are getting enough action to win an above average pot. If you have to pay 2 SB, then you need 20 BB in the pot and that's rare and when you get 20 BB's in a pot it takes more than a 9 high flush to win. "


I agree with this...for the most part. I think if you break even on the "extra" flush draws you are going for, you are doing okay. The real increase comes from the trips, the two pair, and the straights that no one will ever put you on. I'd get so angry when I would have my aces or cowboys cracked by 57 off, flopping some ridiculous straight. But it sure feels good to do it to other people.


I haven't been beaten by a bigger flush yet, but I am getting ready for it. Don't think I will play my 92s as aggresively as I would my K2 or A2, but only time will tell.

I won't argue with results. I know I don't play optimally pre-flop, but overcome it by outplaying a lot of opponents post-flop, so if your opponents are really bad it makes sense to want to be in a lot of hands with them.


Some big name pro (Doyle Brunsson maybe) claimed he could beat people without looking at his cards as long as they didn't know he hadn't looked, so there's an argument for playing anything if you are that good post-flop.


Good luck to you. My gut tells me it won't work as you described it and will have to make some revisions to the strategy. i hope you'll keep us informed as to the evolution of the JC System.

JC

If you are playing in a regular 10 handed game and playing 18-24 % of the hands you are dealt, you are definitely playing too many hands. And the wrong hands, at that.

In a 10 handed game, if you played every had you were dealt to the river, you could logically expect to win 10% of them over time.

If you really are a tight agressive player, you should be playing somewhere closer to 7-12 % of your hands, and playing them very agressively. Of course, anytime you get a free play in the blind does not count. If you tighten up your starting requirements, when you do play, you'll be able to steal more pots as people will put you on a hand.

Because you are involved in so many pots, your opponenets are going to regularly call you down on the end, and so they will always pick off your bluffs.

In late position, you can play more hands in a passive game (suited connectors, etc), but to play them upfront, you'll never get the right price on them and when you do hit, you won't get the action you need to make them profitable.


If you are insistent on trying out your new theory, step down in limits, or else you won't be playing poker for much longer.

Ok, let us run through this over let say...1000 hands to make it simple.


Assumptions

-You can see the flop for 1.5 small bets on average

-You throw away all backdoors and single pairs.


You flop only trash or one pair 85% of the time (per your original post). That is:


(850 * 1.5sb) = -1275 sb


-When you flop two-pair/trips you will win 70% of the time and lose 30% of the time. When you lose, you lose 5 big bets, when you win you win 10 big bets.


You flop this 3.4% of the time, thus:


(34 * 10sb * .7) + (34 * -5sb * .3) = +238 - 51 = +187sb


-When you flop 4-flush you will lose 80% of the time and win 20% of the time, when you lose you will lose 5 big bets, when you win you will win 10 big bets.


flop 4 flush 10.9%, so that gives:


(109 * 10sb * .2) + (109 * -5sb * .8) = +218 - 436 = -218sb


-When you flop a flush you will win 40% of the time and lose 60% of the time. When you lose you lose 5 big bets, but when you win you win 10 big bets.


This is .8% of the time, so:


(8 * 10sb * .4) + (8 * -5sb * .6) = +32 - 24 = +8sb


-When you flop a monster Boat/Quads, you will win 90% of the time. When you win you will win 14 big bets and when you lose you will lose 10 big bets.


Tiny .1% so this is irrelevant, but:


(1 * 14sb * .9) + (1 * -10sb * .1) = +13 + -1 = +12sb


TOTALS:


You lose 1286 sb over 1000 hand, or EV -1.286sb/hand.


These are your own numbers and assumptions. Clear enough now? Actually I think your assumptions may be bad too, but it wont change the end result that this is -EV. Specifically I think your average wins are a bit too high and your average loss a bit high too. No changes in your assumption will overcome the huge -EV all the times you fold on the flop.


Treefrog

JC:


I'm going garage-sailing in about fifteen minutes, but here are some preliminary remarks. You're starting hand requirements, if anything, seem too rigid to me. If I'm on the button (or in the cutoff preflop and the button is getting ready to pitch), and there are 4 or more limpers, I'll play most suited hands besides connectors and Ax: Jx, Qx, Kx, 53, 64, 63, T7...


Also, if there is little pre-flop raising and lots of limpers, I'll weave in many of these hands from middle and even early position. I will play any pair regardless of position unless it's coldcalling a raise or reraise (then it depends on how many are already committed to seeing the flop).


I used to play tight aggressive in low-limit and did O.K.; now I play looser both preflop and postflop and the difference has been dramatic.


If there are many limpers, I will frequently raise with any pair on the button as well as with suited connectors and Axsuited.


Flushes in low-limit are much more profitable because of the chasing and there are plenty of boneheads who will bet into your obvious flush and call a raise just to keep you honest.


Cheers.

I seem to remember there being a book for sale by someone on how to play non-traditional HE hands. I can't remember the name of said book, and I can't find a reference to it on Conjelco, but if someone can provide the name and author, it might be something worth looking into in your position.


Just my $.02 (about what I would pay for said book)...


Big John

I haven't read the other responses so I don't know if anyone has said this yet but...


YOU SHOULD PLAY ANY TWO SUITED! The reason has nothing to do with good poker. You should play any two suited because it sounds as if you will like it! You will enjoy the game more! It doesn't sound as if you are playing for the money, but as a hobby and for the fun of the game.


"and seeing the flop 18%-24% of the time is boring.." Nuff said. You don't want to play winning poker because it negates the reason you want to play poker, to enjoy yourself! It's not fun to not play a hnd, so play those hands you want to. Have fun. Not everyone has to win at poker to love the game.


Maybe after playing how you want for a few sessions you'll find that you can sit back and play how you know you should for a few and win some money.


Regards,


Paul Talbot


PS. another perk!: 2+2ers will start giving you all sorts of game invitations too!