Profitably LAGing

[shadow29]

(NL play)

As everyone knows, medium suited connectors are some of the best hands to take up against large pocket pairs and big cards. If you find yourself against an opponent who clearly plays on the 'big card' theory and is pretty much a rock, is there an optimum amount of hands you should play with him, such as 56s preflop? Especially if you are sure you can outplay him on later streets?

For example, if I am on the button and everyone passes to a fairly TPP who then raises you are certain he has a range of hands looking something like this: AA,KK,QQ,JJ,TT,AK,AQ,KQ,AJ,AT

Some of the time I am inclined to play with him with cards like 74s and 56s. Is this correct? Or is there a better strategy with the same premise?

[DonT77]

I was thinking about this very same question earlier today, and here were my thoughts:

If you play 56s and call a PFR to see a flop, you need to flop 2 pair, a set, or a straight to be quite certain that you are in the lead. If you flop a flush, you could lose to a higher (probably AK or AQ) flush or your opponent could be drawing to a higher flush with the A or K of your suit. If you flop an OESD or a 4-flush, you might win the hand with a bet or raise - but many opponents will call you all-in or try to bet you off of any draws that come up if they have hands with an overpair or TPTK.

Now, even if you do flop a flush or a straight, or even a full house - what are the chances that you can get all of your opponent's chips?

My conclusion was that too many things need to happen just right for you to justify the implied odds that you think you are getting by calling a tight PF raiser with 56s (unless of course your post-flop play is vastly superior to his and you can read whether your opponent has AK or KK).

[Richie Rich]

You make a good point if everyone at the table is playing with short stacks relative to the blinds. But if you and your opponents are playing with large stacks (100xBB+), then calling with suited connectors ain't such a bad idea...

[Boopotts]

"Especially if you are sure you can outplay him on later streets?"

Lately I've been amused to discover that the 21st century definition of 'outplay', at least insofar as it pertains to poker, means to bet and/or raise with a hand that you probably shouldn't have even entered the pot with.

[Michael Davis]

Also, consider that if you really can't get all of your opponents chips that often, you are going to be able to put the heat on him on other types of flops when you have very little.

-Michael

[shadow29]

?

If you can restrict your opponents hole cards, you can also figure bluff outs as well as legitimate outs in your considerations. Moreover, preflop has nothing to do with outplaying him on later streets. I don't know how to explain it to you, sorry.

Also- 'hand that you shouldn't have been in there, etc'---that's at the very heart of the discussion. Should you play those cards specifically because you know what range of hands they have and the medium suited connectors go best against those hands than any others.

Michael Davis makes a very astute point as well.