ATo vs. A9o

[RandBriscoe]

Looking thru the ol' DB today, I noticed that I'm a pretty decent winner with ATo (as one would expect) and a significant loser with A9o.

My VPIP/PFR for the two hands are 57%/44% and 5%/3% over roughly 300 hands each. This is an enormous disparity (probably partly due to suboptimal pf play on my part).

Don't you think that the difference between ATo and A9o can't be so large as to justify A9 being considered trash. It's weaker than ATo for sure, but by how much? I mean, how often do we run into the nut straight?

It's been pretty much an auto-muck for me and I'm wondering if I'm not losing a chunk of EV by neglecting this hand...

Any thoughts?

[jrz1972]

FWIW, I muck ATo in early position. If I'm opening with it, I'm open-raising. In 6-max, I raise it from all non-blind positions.

Normally I muck A9o. In 6-max, I open-raise it from MP or later and I convert with it from the blinds.

The main reason why these hands are different is because it's a lot easier to win a pot by making a pair of Ts than a pair of 9s. The straight possibility isn't really the thing.

[RandBriscoe]

I get what you're saying but is that weakness so pronounced? Does it justify a difference of 50%/40% between the two hands? My stats on AQ and AK are much closer (obviously) and a pair of Queens can lose to a pair of Kings...

ATo - 281 Hands - $122.61
A9o - 311 Hands - -$28.00

I agree that it's significantly weaker but surely, A9o if not played stupidly can be at least BE...

Maybe I'm wrong. Anybody else have their stats on this?

With ATo I am 74/40 (.16BB/100)
With A9o I am 32/16 (-.03BB/100)

Over about 65K hands, about 600 hands each, all full ring, with about 45K at 1/2. And I think I play A10o way too much. Like jrz said a pair of ten's is more likely to win, you are a little less likely for someone to have a higher ace, and at full ring I think that the str8 does add a lot of value. I think the biggest thing though is that people at micros LOVE to play hands like j10, q10 and k10, suited or not, and you get paid off more when you hit your pair of tens than when you hit a pair of nines.

[RandBriscoe]

Well said. I suppose you're right, since you voluntarily play A9o and its still a slight loser. Having said that, I would think that that for nearly everyone A9o is a pretty significant loser while for you (with a much higher VPIP for A9o), it is nearly BE...

You should definitely be playing A9o a little more in blind stealing situations and to isolate weak limpers.

[Eeegah]

While for a while ATo was my worst performing hand, it's gone back up and now has a positive BB/Hand, if still a negative net. A9o performs just the same for me.

That said, I consider A9o to be purely a trash hand with the exception that I can steal with it from the CO or Button, at least in full ring. I won't even complete with in in the SB, though I wouldn't hate it. ATo I'll fold early but raise in MP1+ or so.

[Aaron W.]

[ QUOTE ]
I get what you're saying but is that weakness so pronounced? Does it justify a difference of 50%/40% between the two hands? My stats on AQ and AK are much closer (obviously) and a pair of Queens can lose to a pair of Kings...

ATo - 281 Hands - $122.61
A9o - 311 Hands - -$28.00

I agree that it's significantly weaker but surely, A9o if not played stupidly can be at least BE...

Maybe I'm wrong. Anybody else have their stats on this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your sample size on A9o is far too small to be of any value here. 311 hands, with a 5% VPIP is about 15 played hands.

Your ATo sample is a bit better, as 57% of 281 is about 160 played hands.

I think you're drawing a false conclusion ("significant loser with A9o") based on bad data (well... insufficient data).