Playing K(x)s in no limt rings

jinxy · #1 03-25-2005, 01:44 AM

How do you play hands like K(x)s, Q(x)s, J(x)s in nl ring games... Should you even bother playing these hands? the hands im talking about are: K(9s) and below, Q(9)s , and below and J(9)s and below

PoBoy321 · #2 03-25-2005, 01:45 AM

[ QUOTE ]
How do you play hands like K(x)s, Q(x)s, J(x)s in nl ring games...

[/ QUOTE ]

It's easy. I don't.

EDIT: OK, I won't be a dick. K(x)s, Q(x)s and basically any X(x)s are stupid to play because you're playing them purely for flush value, and you'll get them rarely. When you hit top pair you can't be confident in your kicker, and even when you hit your flush, it's a non-nut flush. I can see an argument for playing hands like J9s because there is the straight draw to go along with it, but I only like to play them in multiway limped pots in late position.

kurto · #3 03-25-2005, 02:01 AM

Like he said... "I can see an argument for playing hands like J9s because there is the straight draw to go along with it, but I only like to play them in multiway limped pots in late position."

Note... the worst hand you listed I would play on the button with passive players on the buttons is Q9 suited.

I wouldn't even complete the small blind with a J4 suited unless I was going to be heads up against a weak passive BB who might fold to a raise.

BillUCF · #4 03-25-2005, 02:06 AM

I only play K9s in LP when the pot is multiway...I throw all else away...

PoBoy321 · #5 03-25-2005, 02:15 AM

Why play K9s? You're drawing to a non-nut flush with a small, non-nut straight possibility. If you play K9s, why not Q8s? J7? 73?

kurto · #6 03-25-2005, 02:27 AM

I don't think 2nd nut flush is so bad. The odds of there being 2 flushes are pretty rare as it is... even if there are 2 flushes, more times then not, King his is enough.

I just checked my stats on K9s on poker tracker (granted, I only have 3600 hands)... I've had K9s 13 times (twice in the blinds) and I'm averaging 2.97bb every time I play it.

jinxy · #7 03-25-2005, 02:44 AM

So basically.. Never play K(x)s and if you do want to play it anyways, make sure its in cutoff, limping, and multiple limpers ahead you you....?

I think i just might erradicate these hands completly from play list

kurto · #8 03-25-2005, 02:51 AM

"So basically.. Never play K(x)s and if you do want to play it anyways, make sure its in cutoff, limping, and multiple limpers ahead you you....?" AND the limpers should have decent stacks.

"I think i just might erradicate these hands completly from play list" Aren't you the guy who talked about not playing AK and who limps with Aces and Kings? You should certainly lose Kx suited before you start tossing AK.

Most players problems are playing too many hands, not too few. It can't hurt to lose Kx suited.

poboy · #9 03-25-2005, 03:08 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Why play K9s? You're drawing to a non-nut flush with a small, non-nut straight possibility. If you play K9s, why not Q8s? J7? 73?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why play Kxs and not Qxs,Jxs,Xxs? Kxs can be profitable at SSNL because people will pay off with Qxs and less. Catching trips or two pair with Kxs ia obviously much better than Qxs on down. I think with position in a multi-way pot it's certainly worth limping. JMO

xorbie · #10 03-25-2005, 03:52 AM

Man, I feel so loose now. I will limp J9s and even T8s from almost anywhere unless the table is raising a lot PF. I will open raise from the button with 1 or 0 limpers with Q9s, K9s, J9s.

By the way, are you the same kurt that's been sitting with me a couple times recently?