AK or QQ?

[Leafs4Prez]

Say, my friend swears that QQ is a better starting hand than AK suited. I saw somehwere where you can rank your pocket accordinig to points and AKs is worth 37 and QQ is only 36.
So is this system whack or is my friend? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

[Dynasty]

QQ is a considerably better hand than AKs. JJ is also better than AKs. TT is a little better.

I glanced at the system on that website. It's stupid. Never use it.

Here are two better links which show through simulations and real-life data that QQ is better than AKs.

http://gocee.com/poker/HE_Val_Sort.htm

http://www.pokerroom.com/games/evsta...hp?order=value

[rigoletto]

I think QQ is the best hand on average and I don't think it's close. The ranking system you're refering to is just an approximation of values based on som very simple notions of valuable elements. A comparison based on thousands of live games can be found here .

[rigoletto]

[ QUOTE ]
I think QQ is the best hand on average and I don't think it's close. The ranking system you're refering to is just an approximation of values based on som very simple notions of valuable elements. A comparison based on thousands of live games can be found here .

[/ QUOTE ]

Well Dynasty beat me to it!

[Doc JS]

At the bottom of that piece it says:
This system has been devised by Edward Hutchison who invites your comments.

I think you should tell Edward you'd be happy to play him straight up for any amount of money as long as you got QQ and he got AK for starting hands every time...see how he likes that! [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[Analyst]

Very interesting and useful, perhaps much, much more than is obvious at first glance. It's important to remember that this table takes into account how the typical person plays the hand, not just the intrinsic value of the cards (if such exists in a vacuum).

[Styles]

[ QUOTE ]
Say, my friend swears that QQ is a better starting hand than AK suited. I saw somehwere where you can rank your pocket accordinig to points and AKs is worth 37 and QQ is only 36.
So is this system whack or is my friend? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

That's wacko! I don't see anyone using that system succesfully.

Gimme QQ, also.

Looking at PokerTracker. QQ not only wins more pots than AKs for me about 55% vs 48%, but, the monster pots I win with QQ are FullHouses vs Flushes with AKs. My FH pots on average are 50% more profitable than my Flushes.

So wins more pots, and can win a larger pot. Seems better to me [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[bvaughn]

For me, I am still trying to figure out how to play QQ. According to my pokertracker, I am only winning 47% with QQ and actually losing money overall with QQ being dealt to me about 40 times. Of course, this is because I have a real hard time dropping it against 1 or 2 opponents with an A or K on the board...so I'm misplaying it badly. Most times it seems I am firing bets into my opponents with the A or K on the board and getting called down by weak A's and K's. Of course, it doesn't help that I've lost 14 out of the last 16 times I've had QQ, but I could definitely learn to lose LESS money each time I lose with them.

With AK, I'm winning 52% with AKs and 57% with AKo. I get away from these hands much easier if an A or K doesn't flop or turn (if I get to the turn). Of course, when that A or K does flop, I'm getting paid off by the same weak A's and K's that are beating my QQ.