How much better is AT than A9?

[AA suited]

I've read somewhere that if the cards are suited, it only adds 2% to your odds.

Just curious how much better if there's a straight draw possibility? ie: A9o/ATo vs Top25% hands?

And how about A9s/ATo vs Top25% hands?

[KJL]

ATo vs. Top 25% ATo has a 54.5% equity
A9o vs. Top 25% A9o has a 49.8% equity
A9s vs. Top 25% A9s has a 52.5% equity

[pzhon]

The two-card straights are not the only way AT is better than A9. The higher kicker and the ability to make higher pairs also matter.

According to the PokerRoom stats, ATo wins 0.08 BB/hand and A9o loses 0.03 BB/hand. These are averaged over all positions, levels, and players who held the hands, so they do not necessarily apply to a particular situation.

[AA suited]

[ QUOTE ]
ATo vs. Top 25% ATo has a 54.5% equity
A9o vs. Top 25% A9o has a 49.8% equity
A9s vs. Top 25% A9s has a 52.5% equity

[/ QUOTE ]

wow.. having the straight possibility is better than having a flush possibility?

and link to program that calculated this?

[KJL]

As the another poster said, It is not just the staright that increases AT's odds, it is the fact that the cards are higher.
I used pokerstove for this: pokerstove
---
5,856,079,680 games 9.985 secs 586,487,699 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 50.1816 % 46.81% 03.37% { 66+, A2s+, K6s+, Q8s+, J8s+, T8s+, A7o+, K9o+, QTo+, JTo }
Hand 2: 49.8184 % 46.45% 03.37% { A9o }


---



---
5,712,246,144 games 8.828 secs 647,060,052 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 45.4936 % 42.33% 03.16% { 66+, A2s+, K6s+, Q8s+, J8s+, T8s+, A7o+, K9o+, QTo+, JTo }
Hand 2: 54.5064 % 51.34% 03.16% { ATo }


---



---
1,952,026,560 games 4.312 secs 452,696,326 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 47.5379 % 44.35% 03.19% { 66+, A2s+, K6s+, Q8s+, J8s+, T8s+, A7o+, K9o+, QTo+, JTo }
Hand 2: 52.4621 % 49.28% 03.19% { A9s }


---

[Dan Mezick]

Both of these are a piece of cheese in full games, and playing them is a huge leak. I am sure a great many will say this is way too tight. OK, we disagree.

Unplayable:

ATo
KTo
KJo
QJo
JTo

If you use PT, take the time to see how profitable these hands haveactually been for you. (Almost anything that improves these hands also improves better hands, leaving you outkicked/outdrawn/ etc.)

I notice there is a world of diffence between ATo and ATs, for example in HPFAP Sklansky lists ATo in GROUP 6 while he lists ATs in GROUP 3. This is a big promotion by virtue of being suited.

Similiar differences exist for

QKo vs KQs
KTo vs KTs
KJo vs KJs
QJo vs QJs

These hands when suited go from "unplayable from any seat" to "playable from a middle seat" in my view. They all go rom GROUP 5/6 to GROUP 3 when suited.

IMO, being suited only increases a starting hands winning potential a few percent wrt the offsuit hand, but those extra 2% of pots won are won with a flush and have the ability to take down huge pots making them so much more valuable to your bankroll. Q.

[mosdef]

Note that AA suited is a regular STT player as well - these hands are relative monsters among those hands which we (STTers) are pushing at the bubble. So while these hands may be "unplayable" in a cash game, knowing the subtle differences between their values preflop vs. calling hands is all important to us.

[AaronBrown]

Don't you get shot if you showdown two Aces of the same suit?

[Abbaddabba]

[ QUOTE ]
Similiar differences exist for

QKo vs KQs
KTo vs KTs
KJo vs KJs
QJo vs QJs

These hands when suited go from "unplayable from any seat" to "playable from a middle seat" in my view. They all go rom GROUP 5/6 to GROUP 3 when suited.


[/ QUOTE ]

Im pretty sure KQoff (and to a lesser extent KJoff) doesn't fit under that umbrella. In an unopened pot, most suggest a raise from MP with KQoff (and KJoff if the conditions are right). From the button or CO, a raise with K10 or JQoff aren't unreasonable in tight/weak games.

Im talking about limit.