SSHE: Even 72s can be playable - really?

DeepCroak · #1 11-15-2004, 03:25 PM

Was re-reading SSHE pre-flop recommendations and saw something that I missed first time.

In Eds recommendations for SB play in an unraised pot, he recommends playing any two suited cards. Wow, really? Even 72s?

I really am having a hard time with the proposition that ANY two SOOTED cards can be played profitably, even in the small blind, an unraised pot, lots of loose limpers, and assuming I play the hand well. That just seems like spewing chips to me, but I'm obviously not a Noted Poker Authority.

Is this one of those situations where enough of the suited hands are profitable in enough circumstances that a simplification was made to say "play them all, in aggregate they are profitable", when in fact not all of them are profitable in all circumstances? Or am I misreading it? Or what?

Kellon · #2 11-15-2004, 03:44 PM

Better yet, take a look at this discussion of the Best Damn Hand in Poker--the 72 offsuit. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

http://72off.cjb.net/

Svenungson · #3 11-15-2004, 03:49 PM

Well, he also sais that those pre-flop-recommendations are not carved in stone and written in blood. You need to adapt to the other players, your table image, people already in the pot etc. etc.
So with alot of callers (loose table is defined as 6-8 seeing the pot if i remember correctly, so lets say 8 limpers) it might be very profitable to call half of a bet with 72s if you are able to play well postflop.
However, i do not think it is a good idea if you are not very sure of your abilities. Might i add that i would not call in the situation i described above [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Lost Wages · #4 11-15-2004, 04:04 PM

Any two suited will flop a made hand 2 pair or better or a flush draw about 15% of the time (5.6:1 against).

Lost Wages

AngryCola · #5 11-15-2004, 04:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Might i add that i would not call in the situation i described above

[/ QUOTE ]

I would call in that situation every time! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

These small stakes players play badly. Punish them for it. If you hit your flush draw, it most often will be good and easy to play, because flush draws are one of the easiest hands to play in hold'em, IMO.

DeepCroak · #6 11-15-2004, 05:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Any two suited will flop a made hand 2 pair or better or a flush draw about 15% of the time (5.6:1 against).

Lost Wages

[/ QUOTE ]

Which just means that 85% of the time your flop play is probably easy. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

As we all know, flush draws only come in about once in 3 times - any idea how much of that 15% is flush draws (versus two pair or better)?

We all know there are lots of ways to lose with what you initially thought was a very good flop - even if you make your draw. And we've all experienced them [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]. 72s is obviously more vulnerable to them than any other suited hand.

So my surprise is that when all of these are considered (including nature of opponents, table image, nothing is set in stone, and all the rest), Ed implicitly seems to assert that 72s can still present a profitable opportunity to voluntarily put chips in the pot. [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

AngryCola · #7 11-15-2004, 05:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So my surprise is that when all of these are considered (including nature of opponents, table image, nothing is set in stone, and all the rest), Ed implicitly seems to assert that 72s can still present a profitable opportunity to voluntarily put chips in the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's because it's true. [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

DeepCroak · #8 11-15-2004, 05:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So my surprise is that when all of these are considered (including nature of opponents, table image, nothing is set in stone, and all the rest), Ed implicitly seems to assert that 72s can still present a profitable opportunity to voluntarily put chips in the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's because it's true. [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I've gained new respect for the power of SOOTEDness. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

bernie · #9 11-15-2004, 06:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So with alot of callers (loose table is defined as 6-8 seeing the pot if i remember correctly, so lets say 8 limpers) it might be very profitable to call half of a bet with 72s if you are able to play well postflop.
However, i do not think it is a good idea if you are not very sure of your abilities. Might i add that i would not call in the situation i described above

[/ QUOTE ]

For 1/2 a bet, you wouldn't complete with 6-8 limpers? Loosen up. Your missing alot of profit here. I'd call it with 2-3 limpers.

b

bernie · #10 11-15-2004, 06:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I've gained new respect for the power of SOOTEDness

[/ QUOTE ]

For fun you can go to pokerroom.com and look at the EV stats. Compare some offsuit hands with their suited counterparts. I did this the other day with KJo and KJs. KJs was, if i remember right, about 4 times more profitable overall. That's quite a bit.

b