QJ preflop

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
This is 2-4. Not 15-30

There are not that many players that are 3-betting to isolate. IF you are one of those players, than you are the exception, not the rule. The 1 time in 10 that it does happen, oh well, sometimes I win, sometimes I lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

Generally speaking, I'd expect at least 1 player at any 2/4 table who will see the pattern & want to isolate with a pretty wide range of hands. I may be overestimating my opponents, tho.

At any rate, even if you can get away with raising hands like these from EP on 2/4 full, it's a very bad habit to get into. If you're that confident in your postflop ability and/or that disdainful of your opponents', you should be limping these hands from up front, hoping to get a big multiway pot going that you can drag whenever you hit the board hard. By raising with a hand like this from EP, you are basically relying on one of two things to happen:

1) You improve to the best hand in a short-handed situation.
2) You push your opponent off of what will mostly be a better hand through sheer aggression.

I would suggest that in scenario 1, while you're less likely to win with more opponents, when you do win it'll be a pretty huge pot. So it's up to you--a few extra small pots, or a couple of really big ones. As for scenario two, you are rarely going to push your average 2/4 calling station off of a made hand, or even A high, just by betting every street.

[ QUOTE ]
I moved to the 5-10 6 max games so keeping the 2-4 databse wasn't an issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

On a 6max table, I will also open-raise these hands from UTG, most of the time at least.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
But with a hand like QJs and >3 limpers playing in front of you, you will be getting the right odds to call most of your draws on the flop anyway (some gut shots excluded) right?

I'm not the most experienced player so I think I also need some help understanding your logic. I think you are saying that if there is more money in the pot PF then there is more of a chance that continuing the hand on the flop will be a +EV play. But wouldn't the same thing be true of much weaker hands like 64s (i.e. if you put enough money in the pot PF then you can probobly make calling with 64s on the flop +EV)?

[/ QUOTE ]

TheHip already made the point about catching top pair, but there's more to it than that. KJ/QJ/QT/JT etc cannot make a non-nut straight when using both cards. So that means that when you catch a straight with one of these hands, you are going to win every time, unless someone else makes a flush or FH (or quads). This is not true of a hand like 64s, where you can catch a straight with a flop of 578, for example, but then the 9 comes on the turn and you're drawing dead to a JT, or the turn is a 6 and suddenly you're behind anyone with a 9 in their hand. King or Queen-high flushes are also far more likely to hold up than a 6-high flush (and a 6-high flush is almost never going to be good if the board comes 4-suited; you stand a pretty decent chance, especially on small stakes, of your 2nd or 3rd nut flush holding up even in these cases). This is why these hands play so well against a large field--you aren't going to hit the board big very often, but when you do, you're going to win a lot of the time. So you can afford to fold a lot of flops in exchange for the few huge pots you do win.

[TTChamp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But with a hand like QJs and >3 limpers playing in front of you, you will be getting the right odds to call most of your draws on the flop anyway (some gut shots excluded) right?

I'm not the most experienced player so I think I also need some help understanding your logic. I think you are saying that if there is more money in the pot PF then there is more of a chance that continuing the hand on the flop will be a +EV play. But wouldn't the same thing be true of much weaker hands like 64s (i.e. if you put enough money in the pot PF then you can probobly make calling with 64s on the flop +EV)?

[/ QUOTE ]

TheHip already made the point about catching top pair, but there's more to it than that. KJ/QJ/QT/JT etc cannot make a non-nut straight when using both cards. So that means that when you catch a straight with one of these hands, you are going to win every time, unless someone else makes a flush or FH (or quads). This is not true of a hand like 64s, where you can catch a straight with a flop of 578, for example, but then the 9 comes on the turn and you're drawing dead to a JT, or the turn is a 6 and suddenly you're behind anyone with a 9 in their hand. King or Queen-high flushes are also far more likely to hold up than a 6-high flush (and a 6-high flush is almost never going to be good if the board comes 4-suited; you stand a pretty decent chance, especially on small stakes, of your 2nd or 3rd nut flush holding up even in these cases). This is why these hands play so well against a large field--you aren't going to hit the board big very often, but when you do, you're going to win a lot of the time. So you can afford to fold a lot of flops in exchange for the few huge pots you do win.

[/ QUOTE ]

Alright, I think you guys convinced me. I think the mistake I have been making is that when I raise PF with a hand like this I feel compelled to bet the flop no matter what (in a futile attempt to make everyone fold). This is not a bad strtegy heads up or against 2 tight players, but when there are >2 limpers and I raise from late position with these hands I should just check the flop when I miss (i.e. no pair and no strong draw). Am I getting this right?