34 off suite or 95 suited

[Clarkmeister]

"I note that our hosts recommended precisely this 15 yeaers ago without the benefit of computer studies."

Yup, then their reccomendations were confirmed by computer sims, and now they are again confirmed by live game data.

So you still folding that 95s in the sb?

As far as my posting at the moment......

I'm doing a very poor job of concentrating on a cash flow model I have to finish for work tomorrow.

[Ed Miller]

This is exactly the sort of trash that keeps you ahead of me in the post count...

[Clarkmeister]

Don't worry, I'll let you know how it feels to be a "Poobah"

[Rick Nebiolo]

Andy,

You wrote: "I prefer to be pounding a guy from behind (no jokes please) than guessing from in front."

With one limper and a garbage hand you don't always mind being first to act post flop. Many of your wins will come from betting when the flop looks like it could miss your opponents. If you act last your opponents will have the chance to make that pot winning bet first.

In other words, in this scenario there are advantages to being "out of position".

Regards,

Rick

[asadyu]

In my humble and relatively inexperienced opinion:

I have to agree with michaeld on this one. In a situation with no variables and in clear cut black and white, then 95s is the answer. But when you look at where you are going to stand when you make a hand....then 34 is better. you will play that hand to make a straight and not much else. And if by some miracle you make the straight, you will know where you stand. On the othere hand with 95s you can make a flush and and easily be beat by a higher flush.

Now if you make a pair or two neither hand is any good. I'd rather draw to a lock straight than to a 9 high flush. A straight and a flush are really what you would want to make with those hands.

If someone put a gun to my head at a tournament and said pick one of those to hands to go all-in with. I would take the 95s, but in any other situation, if I had to make that choice, I would play the 34 and be sure of where I stand if I make a hand. You can play the small straight much better and with more confidence. And get more calls and bets out of it.


Asad

[Kevin J]

"In a situation with no variables and in clear cut black and white, then 95s is the answer. But when you look at where you are going to stand when you make a hand....then 34 is better."



But there aren't many variables and it IS pretty black and white. Are you saying we should pass up a better hand that's going to win more times for the sake of knowing where we stand? I'd rather win and take the money.

"you will play that hand to make a straight and not much else."

So if the flop comes Q42r, you're strategy is to ALWAYS check and fold against 1 random big blind and 1 middle limper? If you're this willing to fold when you might have the best hand, then you're reducing what little value the 34o had in the first place, and making it even less.

"On the othere hand with 95s you can make a flush and and easily be beat by a higher flush."

I have a problem with "easily be beat". It is not THAT easy to have a flush beaten. And in the example given, even a 4 card flush is gonna win enough times. Are we supposed to just start throwing away everything but suited aces, because... Everything else can be beaten by a higher flush?

I think you're putting too much emphasis into this "where you stand" business. Winning and more specifically winning money, should be your bigger priority. IMO-

[astroglide]

if you choose 34o in limit, it's because you don't know how to play well enough to make (more) money with 95s.

[DanZ]

Mike,

I am a huge fan of your posts and get a lot out of them.

I think there's something about this thread, and most threads on the forum, that is missing.

"how well do you play, how well do they play, and what do they think of you?" To paraphrase Mason's essays.

In this erxample, I would much rather have the 95s against weak players. I will be allowed to win with a pair more often, and I will be allowed to get away from a pair cheaply. THe will also not read the flush possibilities on board as quickly as a better player, and are less likely to be suited themselves becuase they overvalue medium to small pocket pairs and offsuit medium to high cards.

Among other things, ahving the 9 against someoen who will call you down with unimproved pocket 4s on a 9 high board is a nice bonus.

However, against tougher players, I might do better with the tiny cards, because my straights will be more deceptive than a flush, I am less likely outkicked,
and if I bet or raise with a bike draw, they might fold middle pair fearing I have an ace.

They will also be more willling to fold in general, so having a pair of nines or fives (versus 3's or 4's) to show down will not be as consequential.

However, if you yourself cannot lay down a hand, but your opponents are skillful, then I agree completely with your assertion to favor the 34o over the 95s.

Here's a simple example of this idea - I have J8s in the SB in a half bet SB game. A player I view as not very good has open limped from early middle position - about the last position at the table where I view this as reasonable, though still later than I would do it.

I played the hand, and the flop was J23 or something, rainbow. I bet, the BB folds, this player raises the flop, and I fold without hesitation. He shows me his offsuit jack with the better kicker to impress me with how well and tight he plays.

If one cannot make laydowns like this (safely), yet your opponents won't bluff or raise with worse hands so often that you profit by calling them down, then having a kickerless middle card to pair is often a detriment. This could be the case because you just can't make these laydowns or reads, or your opponent(s) plays very well and, at least sometimes, deceptively.

[Clarkmeister]

"if you choose 34o in limit, it's because you don't know how to play well enough to make (more) money with 95s."

This is absolutely true IMO. Similar to those who would rather have JTs than KJs in an unraised pot.

[DanZ]

Please see my resonse to Mike's post. I know you mean no offense, but you do word things very harshly, and seem to operate on a very narrow set of assumptions - that is, that your opponents cannot play skillfully at all, and play too loose. You also seem to imply that others are lacking for not coming up with the same "obvious" answer you did.

Rarely do the card values or, God forbid, simulation results, tell you the whole story or the correct play.

Especially in hold 'em, where the hand reading can get very precise, the pots often are fairly small, and the drawout factor is often tiny, there are often many answers to a strategic question. Which of these various answers depend on the playing style, skill, and psychology of the players involved, especially in heads up and shorthanded pots.

Obviously, these factors are much less important in multiway pots, or in huge pots, but they still have their influence.

To address a more general topic, if all of these things are so "obvious" and simple, then why are people able to win at these games? These plays would eventually become simple and obvious to anyone who put in any effort to learn the game, and we'd all play most of the situations exactly the same.

For example, I know on the surface my play of the 3 kings looks terrible, but it simply was not against a tight player who viewed me the same. I can't say I played it the best way, but I thought it was interesting because it was a very counterintuitive strategy that was not wrong by much (a fraction of a bet) if it was wrong, and may have been correct by a huge proportion (like I had almost no chance of getting action if I was ahead, but was getting raised if I was behind and must call it down).

This was a hand where the right play is very dependent on the opponent and the game situation, a lot more than the "hand values". Many, if not all of the hands posted here, have this characteristic. This is what makes them interesting, as figuring out the "hand values" in hold 'em is not so tough much of the time. There are exceptions to all of this, but please keep in mind that most of us can come up with the "obvious answers", so posting them with no explanation is not really adding anything to the discussion.