Any 2 suited from the BB - re: Shants recent post

[Garbonzo]

Long time listener, rare poster, here to chime in.

Please read the following link:

http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/...page=&vc=1

I apologize for the link being long and fuxxoring up the thread, but honestly have know idea how to post links correctly. Someone please feel free to instruct me.

As for the link, Peter_rus, long time stat king in the Mid High forum, according to his analysis, claims to play any 2 suited profitably from the BB when 3-way, and especially 4-way.

While it possible that his information is wrong, or not entiely accurate, chances are he has a greater understanding of this topic than many of the posters who claimed Shant's preflop call is terrible, horrendous, disgusting and the such....

For those of you who take the time to review the thread by Peter, after doing so has your mind changed at all redarding this issue?

[Danenania]

Something to keep in mind is that postflop skill has a large impact on the profitability of these borderline hands. I'm not talking about playing flushes and flush draws. I'm talking about when you call with 72s or whatever and flop a pair of 7's with a few other players in, figuring out how strong your pair of 7's is relative to your opponents, the betting action, and the board, and responding appropriately. I know from reading lots of Peter's posts that he has a good grasp on making these sorts of determinations. If you yourself feel very uncomfortable or clueless in these spots then the preflop call may not be profitable for you. Though it never hurts to get a bit of practice.

[Garbonzo]

I agree completely. However, many posters here are making strong efforts to improve their game and move up in levels. My understanding is that to do this one must start finding and pushing the marginal situations in order to add to the bottom line.

The main point of my post was to only say that Shant's preflop call likely was not "terrible" or "horrendous". Perhaps marginal, perhaps even slightly EV if we allow that Peter is NOT correct.

As I strive to improve my game, I find that I need to make very conscious efforts to break out of patters that develop in my game and style of play. Part of this maybe finding situations, such as this, where the public notions about a play, or situation is strongly opinionated....perhaps incorrectly so.

I want to stree however, that I believe you are absolutely correct, in that playing marginal situations poorly can be a disaster.

[SeaEagle]

IMO, the most important comment from Peter in this entire thread is when he says:
[ QUOTE ]
If you don't mind to play your trashy flopped pairs never - this play start to be -EV as only flushes and 2pairs trips can't make this play +EV. So if you feel uncomfortable and don't know what to do with your 37s when flop is 36Qr you better just muck it preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]
I play a lot of suited cards from the blinds with 2 or more callers, but I muck the true trash because I'm a poor enough postflop player that I'm losing money if I try to play third pair/no kicker against a PF raiser and two others.

[theghost]

[ QUOTE ]
IMO, the most important comment from Peter in this entire thread is when he says:
[ QUOTE ]
If you don't mind to play your trashy flopped pairs never - this play start to be -EV as only flushes and 2pairs trips can't make this play +EV. So if you feel uncomfortable and don't know what to do with your 37s when flop is 36Qr you better just muck it preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]
I play a lot of suited cards from the blinds with 2 or more callers, but I muck the true trash because I'm a poor enough postflop player that I'm losing money if I try to play third pair/no kicker against a PF raiser and two others.

[/ QUOTE ]

He doesn't say you *have* to play it, he says "if you don't know what to do with it."

Depending on how many opponents and what are their playing styles, you can probably figure out a sensible line for this flop (which could include a check/fold).

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
He doesn't say you *have* to play it, he says "if you don't know what to do with it."


[/ QUOTE ]
I think his statement pretty clearly implies that if you can only c/f the flop in question, then calling PF is -EV.

I'm sure that there are people who can make money calling 7[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] against a raise in a 3-way hand. Peter_rus is apparently one of them. I strongly suspect that most people who frequent this forum, including myself, are not.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He doesn't say you *have* to play it, he says "if you don't know what to do with it."


[/ QUOTE ]
I think his statement pretty clearly implies that if you can only c/f the flop in question, then calling PF is -EV.

I'm sure that there are people who can make money calling 7[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] against a raise in a 3-way hand. Peter_rus is apparently one of them. I strongly suspect that most people who frequent this forum, including myself, are not.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am pretty sure that I could make this call +EV live, but not online. Especially given that I 8 table.

[baronzeus]

yes, the idea is that these can be profitable. i play these because i am trying to get better postflop, and i think it is ok to play these.

the only reason i posted in shant's defense in the other thread is because everyone was assertively saying that two suited cards cant be played profitably 3 way, but indeed they can with good postflop play.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
the only reason i posted in shant's defense in the other thread is because everyone was assertively saying that two suited cards cant be played profitably 3 way, but indeed they can with good postflop play.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not trying to be beligerent, only inquisitive: what evidence do you have, besides the Peter_rus thread, that these hands can be played profitably?

[jason_t]

Don't you all realize how little value suitedness adds to a hand?