suited trouble hands

AT, KT, KJ, QT. How much value do these hands gain by being suited? Are these hands that should be played in LP after three or more limpers?


Although they have less straight possiblities than a meduim suited connector and are trap hands, the possibility of making a high flush(especially AT) merits a call with multiple limpers in front, correct?


Are there other reasons for playing these hands, other than stealing the blinds?

Mountain rat,


I think that all of the hands in your list can be played in late position after several limpers. I imagine that some people would even raise with those hands, given their position for at several reasons.


1) to build a large pot, in case they flop a draw and they want equity to draw to.

2) they have limpers in front of them and they might have the best hand.

3) they might buy the button, improve their position, or get control of the hand.

4) they might eliminate one or both blinds and improve their outs.

5) it might enable them to win the pot on the flop.


hmmm. Maybe you should raise with these hands in late position. On the other side of the coin, you are probably behind, and you might want to maximize your implied odds, especially if nearly all hands are going to a showdown.


If it is folded to you in late position, I would steal with almost all of these hands, it might not even be a steal, you may very well be betting the best hand.


Good luck,

Play well,


Bob T.

Are these hands that should be played in LP after three or more limpers?


In this situation, I raise with all these hands. Big suited cards are great multi-way hands. They can win by making a flush, a straight, and big pair/big kicker. Having multiple ways to win is what makes these hands great multi-way hand.


KTs and QTs are the worst of these big suited cards and can be difficult to play if all you flop is a pair (not even a backdoor draw). KJs is a bit better. I wouldn't hesitate to raise with AKs, AQs, AJs, KQs, QJs, and JTs.


There's a great discussion in the "General Theory" archives started by David Sklansky concerning ATs. The thread is titled "Rate These Hold'em Errors" and was started on 10/14/01. You'll get a lot of insight if you find that thread and read through it- especially the answers provided by Sklansky.


I disagree that these hands are trap hands. All these hands must be played in late position. If you're not comfortable raising with all of them, start by always raising in this spot with KQs, QJs, and JTs. Then, add in KJs and maybe KTs and QTs.

I agree with raising most of these hands, but which ones would you 3 bet with? I struggle with what to do with these hands in all positions when someone else raises.


KQs, AKs, and AQs are easy 3 bets for me in LP, but the rest get really fuzzy! Thoughts?


Paul

Dynasty,


In one of your previous posts you implied that you feel QJo is superior to KJo. Now you are implying that QJs is superior to KJs. I am curious why you feel this way. The only advantage that QJs has is that it can make three straights to KJs's two. In every other instance KJs is a heavy favorite:


1) it makes a higher no pair

2) it makes a higher top pair

3) it has a higher kicker if the J pairs

4) it makes a higher flush


Which hand would you rather have with the following flops?:


1) JXX

2) KQX

3) XXX with 2 or 3 of your suit

4) XXX low rags


What flops would you rather have QJs? Of course QXX but that is canceled by KXX. The higher card value of K vs. Q is simply more important that the one extra straight that you can make with the connector. Heads-up KJs wins 70% of the time against QJs.


Regards,

Hugo

Thanks for your reponse and direction to the Sklansky ATs thread, they were both very helpful.


I have one further question. KTo, KJo, QTo and ATo are all trap hands that are easily dominated so should never be played in EP. I realize that in late position, when these hands are suited, it is correct to raise after many limpers to ensure you get the pot odds if you flop a draw, to give you a bluffing opportunity or increase your chances of being able to buy a free card on the turn, and raised when opening because your hand is likely best.


Now suppose you are in MP, and to a lesser extent, in EP. Because of the possibility that you may be raised by a hand to act behind you that dominates your hand (as in the case of open limping in MP with KJs and being raised by AK of KQ) should these hands ever be played as an opener when you are not in LP. I rarely play these cards when they are offsuit unless I am opening in LP or in the blinds. Does being suited add enough value to allow these hands to be played as openers in MP, or should they be mucked like their offsuit counterparts in EP and MP.


Essentially, does the multiway benefits of being suited merit open limping or limping after an EP limper with 3 or more players to act behind? Thanks for all your great comments, they are appreciated.

AKs is the only hand I would always 3-bet with. 3-betting with AQs or KQs would require a very specific reason such as isolating a loose raiser.

The hands are extremely close in value. The difference is not substantial. I prefer the QJso because it is easier to release post-flop. A hand's value is determined not only by how much you win when you make the best hand but also by how much you lose when you make a second/third best hand.


It's interesting that QJs is rated just one spot above KJs in Sklansky's ratings. However, QJo is rated one spot below KJo.


Heads-up KJs wins 70% of the time against QJs.


This is irrelevent in determining the value of a hand. 22 will beat AK greater than 50% of the time but that doesn't make 22 a better hand.

I would always play ATs, even UTG. I know that Clarkmeister frequently (more than 50%?) raises with it in EP. However, I always limp with it in EP and open-raise in MP. Many other good players will raise in EP with ATs.


KTs and QTs are hands I will usually fold in EP unless two players have limped in ahead of me. KJs may be strong enough to play with just one limper. Remember, when you limp in EP, you are giving others the odds to play more hands in later position. Limping begets more limpers.


In MP, they are probably all worthy of making an open-raise.

The hands are extremely close in value. The difference is not substantial


I agree that they are close but KJs is clearly better so raising with QJs while limping with KJs under the same circumstances is a mathematical error.


A hand's value is determined not only by how much you win when you make the best hand but also by how much you lose when you make a second/third best hand.


Could you please explain your reasoning that KJs will lose more money when second best than QJs will?


I prefer the QJso because it is easier to release post-flop


This argument is absurd. QJs is eaiser to release because it is an inferior hand. Does that mean you prefer 72o since it is easy to release post-flop?


This is irrelevent in determining the value of a hand. 22 will beat AK greater than 50% of the time but that doesn't make 22 a better hand.


Your logic is flawed. Comparing KJs to QJs is meaningful because they are both looking for the same type of flop and play very similarly. AK and 22 are looking for completely different flops and play very differently.


Let's look at it a different way. The table below shows the win percentages vs random hands by number of opponents (1-9):


KJs 62.6 45.9 36.8 31.1 26.9 23.8 21.3 19.3 17.6

QJs 60.3 44.1 35.6 30.1 26.1 23.0 20.7 18.7 17.1


For a reasonable number of opponents the difference is in the 1%-2% range. This is not insubstantial.


Dynasty, you are rightfully one of the most respected posters on this forum but you are wrong on this one.


Regards,

Hugo