fives and tens

illmatic · #1 10-30-2003, 02:31 PM

I was reading through the old posts and came across a theory that was mentioned and sort of glossed over. It was that:

"Connectors containing either a 5 or a 10 are more valuable than other connectors, since straights can only be made using a 5 or a 10."

Some other users quickly dismissed this theory because other connectors can make just as many possible straights as connectors that contain a 5 or a 10.

However, I think this way of thinking about it is too simple... Yes, the number of possible straights is the same, but if you have a 5 or a 10 connector in your hand, that leaves fewer 5's and 10's out to hit the board. So, if you fit your flop for a straight draw, and other straight chasers do too, they will eventually need a 5 or 10, one which you have in your hand, reducing their odds to complete.

This is a very small benefit, but I think it does exist.

I wonder if it may be applied to the value of 55's and TT's. On the one hand, straights will have a hard time completing against you, however, if you hit your set, the straight possibility is live.

Am I way off here?

illmatic

Nottom · #2 10-30-2003, 02:59 PM

I think the advatage is right up there with prefering KK to AA because it is easier for a set of Kings to be the nuts on a King-high board than a set of Aces because the A makes more straights possible.

drewjustdrew · #3 10-30-2003, 03:14 PM

Well stated. I was thinking the same thing. If you had a 6 as a connector, and a 6 was needed to complete the straight, that is one fewer six in the deck for someone else to have. I would say all cards 5 through 10 have the same value when considering the straight possibility. Although, the 10 is involved in more nut straight possibilities than the others, since A-J with a lone ten is the nuts. There is no other single card that completes the bottom end of a straight and makes it the nuts.

baggins · #4 10-31-2003, 04:41 AM

i agree. it also kinda smells like the 'straights should beat flushes' thinking...

crockpot · #5 10-31-2003, 07:55 AM

when you are comparing the straight potential of hands like 54 and 76, the benefit of having the 5 in your hand is exactly counterbalanced by the lack of 5 in the deck.

it is easier to just not think about this at all, since the advice is obviously wrong.

as for your 55 and TT question, cloutier believes TT is a better no-limit hand than AK, because "you can still make five possible straights with it." whether or not you believe TT is better than AK, this is a prime example of why i go to 2+2 for poker books instead of cloutier.

the extra straight potential afforded by a 55 does pretty much account for all of the difference in value between 55 and 22 preflop in hold 'em, although the set-over-set possibilities do present some risk at big-bet.

illmatic · #6 10-31-2003, 01:06 PM

>as for your 55 and TT question, cloutier believes TT is a better no-limit hand than AK, because "you can still make five possible straights with it." whether or not you believe TT is better than AK, this is a prime example of why i go to 2+2 for poker books instead of cloutier.<

Starts a new discussion!... Yes, I do believe TT is a better hold em hand than AKo, especially in fishy limit hold em where raises don't thin the field much. It beats AKo head-to-head of course, but mainly, it's better against any n random hands. In big-bet, it's a toss-up, but depends on your style. You win more money with AKo, but conversely will rarely go broke with TT. Cloutier is a good book. It's not HEPFAP, but they're written from the perspective of two very different playing styles.

illmatic

AliasMrJones · #7 10-31-2003, 01:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, I do believe TT is a better hold em hand than AKo, especially in fishy limit hold em where raises don't thin the field much.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the low-limit online games I play in TT is basically only good when you hit your set. So many stick around that if any A, K, Q, J hits the board you're dead. A pair of Aces or Kings hit with AK will often hold up, however.

Copernicus · #8 10-31-2003, 02:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, I do believe TT is a better hold em hand than AKo, especially in fishy limit hold em where raises don't thin the field much.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the low-limit online games I play in TT is basically only good when you hit your set. So many stick around that if any A, K, Q, J hits the board you're dead. A pair of Aces or Kings hit with AK will often hold up, however.

[/ QUOTE ]

TT is a favorite over AK until it gets to 7 handed. While both big and small limt games can be 7 handed, betting is going to thin the crowd less in LL, so I would rather have AK in a full table LL game. TT can cost a bundle even when low cards flop 2 pair, so not only are overcards a threat but low connected cards. AK has to be played carefully too but at least it doesnt have the overcard threat when an A or K fall.

AliasMrJones · #9 10-31-2003, 05:37 PM

I may be playing TT too timidly, but it just seems so rare that TT would win with people seeming to play almost any A, K or Q and many other garbage hands.

I raise JJ, but limp with TT and hope to hit a set. If not, and the flop is all lower than T, I'll bet and see what happens. (Though I'm usually expecting a higher card to hit the board and if it does and someone else bets out in front of me, I'll fold.) Knowing that I play Party $2/4 and that 45-50% seeing the flop is the norm, should I be raising TT pre-flop?

Nottom · #10 10-31-2003, 05:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Knowing that I play Party $2/4 and that 45-50% seeing the flop is the norm, should I be raising TT pre-flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe not from EP, but if you are first in from MP or in LP after a couple (or a whole lot) of limpers you probably shoud be.