What is your UTG hand range?

[Restlys]

I just bought poker tracker and im loosing massive money on that position...My personal hand range is

Raise 3x bb with any suited connectors over 5 = 56, 67 etc
raise 3x bb with PP from 2 to 9
raise 4x bb with PP from 10 to A
Raise 4x BB with AK, AQ

this is in a perfect world, in my stats I have plenty of suited 2gapers but i intend to eliminate those from my HR

[wildzer0]

wow yeah drop those suited connectors. My UTG raising range is something like 22+, AJ+. I'll occasionally add KQs

[derosnec]

[ QUOTE ]
wow yeah drop those suited connectors. My UTG raising range is something like 22+, AJ+. I'll occasionally add KQs

[/ QUOTE ]

exactly that, except i open ATs/KQs most of the time (depending on table).

[wildzer0]

I go back and forth with ATs and KQs. Basically I raise them if I'm running good, fold if I'm running bad /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Poseidon65]

Ditto to what these guys said, though my range is slightly wider. I'll raise A9 and AT UTG, but only because I feel I have a skill advantage over my opponents at this limit (as borne out by my results).

At NL100 which is much tougher, I'd throw these hands away. I'll even throw away AJ at times, depending on the table.

[Restlys]

seems like a major shift, curious to see what it looks like 20k hands from now

so drop the low suited connectors, cool

[jonyy6788]

"raise 45s"

-ValueDonk

[derosnec]

i prefer KQs to ATs and it's a much bigger winner for me (looking at PT right now with 94k hands). i think because people pay off a queen more so than an ace. plus queen isn't as dominated as the ace, and a pair of queens is better than a pair of tens, and it makes straights using an ace so when opponent has an ace you can cooler him and blah blah blah blah. maybe that's all obvious.

[Poseidon65]

[ QUOTE ]
i prefer KQs to ATs and it's a much bigger winner for me (looking at PT right now with 94k hands). i think because people pay off a queen more so than an ace. plus queen isn't as dominated as the ace, and a pair of queens is better than a pair of tens, and it makes straights using an ace so when opponent has an ace you can cooler him and blah blah blah blah. maybe that's all obvious.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually I think that's pretty interesting.

[Vyse]

I used to have raising ranges with 22+, AJs+, KQs with UTG like everyone else here, but I got coached a month back or so and have widened it to:

22+ obv
ATo+
KQo+
T9s+

[Elrohir]

and AQo+, AJs+, 22+, TJs+KQo. 3.5BB everytime. But depending on the table, it's very adjustable : when I play tighter it's more like 55+, AQo+, KQs+ and that's all.

[Restlys]

how many hands have you played since, hows your UTG doing since then?

[Vyse]

I've played like ... 50k hands since then, and I was moderately more profitable from UTG, though not by a lot or anything, the last time I checked. (I've since deleted a large majority of those hands. Don't ask.)

I also run fairly looser than a lot of 2p2ers, about 21/18, and am trying to get looser (~25/21) like 2p2 sLAG Fiksdal.

My looseness comes from CO and MP though (obv everyone's loose on the button), not UTG. I'm not afraid of playing dominated hands, and off my head I can only remember once or twice actually losing a substantial pot because my kicker was dominated. The SCs are my biggest winners of the bunch I added, though.

[jessyj07]

4xbb with every single open raise I make and my range is:
Suited broadways/A9s/9Ts/22+/AJo+ and that's it.

[jessyj07]

[ QUOTE ]
KQo+


[/ QUOTE ]Vyse, I use to raise KQo UTG and after 150k hands at the $25 I dropped it because it was losing me money /images/graemlins/mad.gif. I'm sure you play it better than I tho, just sharing.

[derosnec]

i filtered KQs and KQo for utg. neither is a huge winner for me. .22 PTBB and .19 PTBB per hand respectively, compared with AA which is 4.37 PTBB per hand. ATs is a small loser for me.

also AKo is a loser for me, so is AJo and 44-22.

of course i might suck too.

Edit: ignore all of that. KK is a loser for me utg. so obviously sample size issues here (94k hands)

[jessyj07]

[ QUOTE ]
Edit: ignore all of that. KK is a loser for me utg. so obviously sample size issues here (94k hands)

[/ QUOTE ] /images/graemlins/confused.gif

edit: i'll post my stats as soon as my slow comp loads my 180k+ $25nl hands.

[skiller3]

Hands I play 6m UTG:

any PP;
AT-AK;
KJ-KQ

Note that I'm generally LAG.

[jessyj07]

AA - +8.09bb/hand
KK - +3.98bb/hand
KQs- +1.56bb/hand
KQo- +0.27bb/hand

Filtered out Party and I'm +.27bb/hand w/KQo but with party included I'm -something. Whatever. Guess I'll have to start raising it again.

[derosnec]

utg?

[jessyj07]

yeah, all UTG stats.

[whyherro]

I think the more interesting question is to what hands people open their range with on the button, since if you are going to be stealing 20-30% or so of the time you've got quite the selection.

[Spanky1974]

75K hands and pretty much only AA-22 AK-AJ and KQ. AJ and AJs show a small loss though. UTG BB Won/Hand is .13 at $10NL and $25NL.

Usualy ATs+, AJ, 22+, KQs for 6max. I do mix in medium and small suited connectors and 1 gappers. Over the last 100k hands I have mixed results. Everything depends a lot about the table dynamics IMO. On some tables you get away with raising SCs UTG and betting your draws etc on other tables you don`t.

[bluffbetter]

[ QUOTE ]
I've played like ... 50k hands since then, and I was moderately more profitable from UTG, though not by a lot or anything, the last time I checked. (I've since deleted a large majority of those hands. Don't ask.)

I also run fairly looser than a lot of 2p2ers, about 21/18, and am trying to get looser (~25/21) like 2p2 sLAG Fiksdal.

My looseness comes from CO and MP though (obv everyone's loose on the button), not UTG. I'm not afraid of playing dominated hands, and off my head I can only remember once or twice actually losing a substantial pot because my kicker was dominated. The SCs are my biggest winners of the bunch I added, though.

[/ QUOTE ]When you say you're not afraid of playing dominated hands, do you mean you call raises with AJ. So if UTG raises, there's 1 caller and you are button with AJ, you call or even reraise?

[bozzer]

ok I don't want to dilute the general adivce in this thread, which is to drop the suited connectors UTG.

some food for thought: I've run 26/20 for 30k hands at 25 and 50nl, raising suited connectors and one gappers (I treat them the same) 45s-QJs in the first two positions about 50% of the time according to PT, to give a total of 309 hands for -0.15 big blinds/hand.

Obviously sample size is an issue here, but I would imagine that your 'true' winrate with a single type of hands in a certain position will converge much more quickly than overall WR (e.g. you should be about work out that 93o UTG is not going to be profitable fairly quickly).

A couple of notes:

The most striking thing about my SC stats in EP is that my W$SF is very low - 36% - compared to an overall value of 50-55% in the first two positions. I don't know whether I'm not playing them hard enough, or whether there's some sort of bunching type effect going on (where if I open with a poor hand UTG it is more likely someone has a good hand).

Secondly, I do win with SCs in EP+blinds at about +0.15BB/hand. Sample size, well timed 3bets, cheap completions, who knows?

Thirdly, I think there was some thread where all the HSNL players discovered they were losing with their SCs in EP. A lot of them then argued this was fine because it got them action on their strong EP hands. The validity of this argument is very questionable in uNL. I do think the EP raise gets respect, but people are very unlikely to change their hand ranges in response to you unless it's very dramatic.


Anyway, FWIW, here's my graph:

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa43/slb62/SCsEP.jpg


I'd be very interested to see other people's results with SCs in EP, however often you play them.

[Shoe Lace]

I usually fold SCs from EP. If however I'm at a table where I'm completely running it over, I'll be more inclined to raise it up (if I'm confident someone won't 3bet me).

Only because when a weird flop comes out and I hit it fairly hard...like 56A with 56, I'm likely to get payed off big by someone with AT. Especially so if the flop is 55A instead.

If people are playing big pots with you fairly light because they think you have nothing, this is exactly the time you want to mangle them with trips or 2 pair on a semi-safe board.

I think if you constantly raise SCs from EP then you're going to be doing a lot of check/folding on the flop.

[C4LL4W4Y]

Grunch...4x bb, all the time, AJ+, 22+, KQs at a standard uNL table. If it's playing weak/tight, I'll open it up to QJs, JTs, 89s, KQ, KJs and a few others.

[Triggerle]

I used to experiment with opening with a lot of stuff in EP: any suited ace, sc, K9+ etc.

I mainly did this in order to force me to gain post-flop experience in sticky situations. This worked out great for me as I became much more confident in my post-flop play in all positions (if you know how it feels to have TPnK OOP then you know what your opponent could feel if he has a hand like this when you are in position).

A side effect of this strategy was that I got much more action on my good hands regardless of position. I would never have believed how much of a difference this can make even at NL25.

FWIW, I stopped this pretty much during a phase of getting coolered/sucked out on for 3 weeks straight. I now notice that they have stopped giving my big hands action. My current plan is to pick up my agressive pre-flop plan again after I get my confidence back up.

[C4LL4W4Y]

You don't need to get wild in EP to get action on your big hands at 25 or 50NL.

[whyherro]

[ QUOTE ]
ok I don't want to dilute the general adivce in this thread, which is to drop the suited connectors UTG.

some food for thought: I've run 26/20 for 30k hands at 25 and 50nl, raising suited connectors and one gappers (I treat them the same) 45s-QJs in the first two positions about 50% of the time according to PT, to give a total of 309 hands for -0.15 big blinds/hand.

Obviously sample size is an issue here, but I would imagine that your 'true' winrate with a single type of hands in a certain position will converge much more quickly than overall WR (e.g. you should be about work out that 93o UTG is not going to be profitable fairly quickly).

A couple of notes:

The most striking thing about my SC stats in EP is that my W$SF is very low - 36% - compared to an overall value of 50-55% in the first two positions. I don't know whether I'm not playing them hard enough, or whether there's some sort of bunching type effect going on (where if I open with a poor hand UTG it is more likely someone has a good hand).

Secondly, I do win with SCs in EP+blinds at about +0.15BB/hand. Sample size, well timed 3bets, cheap completions, who knows?

Thirdly, I think there was some thread where all the HSNL players discovered they were losing with their SCs in EP. A lot of them then argued this was fine because it got them action on their strong EP hands. The validity of this argument is very questionable in uNL. I do think the EP raise gets respect, but people are very unlikely to change their hand ranges in response to you unless it's very dramatic.


Anyway, FWIW, here's my graph:

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa43/slb62/SCsEP.jpg


I'd be very interested to see other people's results with SCs in EP, however often you play them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I tend to be in the camp that think suited connectors and suited gappers (most of them) have no inherent value - we play them simply to even out our range so that we are a lot less predictable. They serve this purpose well because postflop its generally easy to tell where we are in a hand and oftentimes our holding is well disguised.

I guess the conclusion is: at 25NL and 50NL, I think it's probably not the best idea to go crazy with suited connected and suited gappers from early position because people are so poor at estimating ranges anyway.

[Waingro]

My UTG range depends a lot on table conditions. If the table is full of loose-passive droolers (and what table isn´t?), I raise suited 2-gappers, suited kings, A8o+, KTo+, connectors 9To+. If table is more aggressive or tighter I tighten up a lot to converge with the consensus of this thread.

[C4LL4W4Y]

Uhh, playing pots UTG at a table of loose passives with 9To is not a good strategy. The tighter the table, the looser your opening range should be.

[Waingro]

[ QUOTE ]
Uhh, playing pots UTG at a table of loose passives with 9To is not a good strategy. The tighter the table, the looser your opening range should be.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why not, I can vb my top pairs and they are going to let me draw cheaply if I flop a draw. If I am at a more TAGy table I am not going to see many flops if they find out I open with 9To UTG. And I think you underestimate your opponents, they often only play one table and they definately pay attention, they just don´t adjust very well. They call pf with ATC, don´t rr and stack off with any piece of the flop once they have found out you are FOS.

[bozzer]

offsuit connectors are fairly rank IMO.

[Waingro]

[ QUOTE ]
offsuit connectors are fairly rank IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]
So there is no opponents and no table conditions that 9To can´t be played profitably UTG? That is a pretty big statement. My point wasn´t that you should play bad hands all the time, rather that my UTG raising range is heavily dependant on table conditions. How is that hard to understand?

[skiller3]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Uhh, playing pots UTG at a table of loose passives with 9To is not a good strategy. The tighter the table, the looser your opening range should be.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why not, I can vb my top pairs and they are going to let me draw cheaply if I flop a draw. If I am at a more TAGy table I am not going to see many flops if they find out I open with 9To UTG. And I think you underestimate your opponents, they often only play one table and they definately pay attention, they just don´t adjust very well. They call pf with ATC, don´t rr and stack off with any piece of the flop once they have found out you are FOS.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. While you aren't making money ON THE FLOP by raising weaker hands against such opponents, your implied odds against weak/easily value-towned opponents post-flop is better. In other words:

bad opponents=play more hands against them

[Fiksdal]

grunch..

at a tight table:
22+, AT+, A9s+, KQ+

at a loose table:
22+, AJ+, ATs+, KQs+

[Nogatsira]

[ QUOTE ]
grunch..

at a tight table:
22+, AT+, A9s+, KQ+

at a loose table:
22+, AJ+, ATs+, KQs+

[/ QUOTE ]

my range exactly

[C4LL4W4Y]

yup it's a good one

[bozzer]

[ QUOTE ]

bad opponents=play more hands against them in position

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP. It is sooooo hard to make money from even the worst players OOP. I'm talking 63/5 types - don't open up your OOP range vs them, it's just burning money.

[relativity_x]

AJ+,TT+

[bozzer]

[ QUOTE ]
AJ+,TT+

[/ QUOTE ]

he he. weren't you bigging up the SCs in EP in another thread? (for variation I know, but still)..

add 22-99 holla.

[poker_n00b]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i prefer KQs to ATs and it's a much bigger winner for me (looking at PT right now with 94k hands). i think because people pay off a queen more so than an ace. plus queen isn't as dominated as the ace, and a pair of queens is better than a pair of tens, and it makes straights using an ace so when opponent has an ace you can cooler him and blah blah blah blah. maybe that's all obvious.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually I think that's pretty interesting.

[/ QUOTE ]

[censored] yeah!

[poker_n00b]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Uhh, playing pots UTG at a table of loose passives with 9To is not a good strategy. The tighter the table, the looser your opening range should be.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why not, I can vb my top pairs and they are going to let me draw cheaply if I flop a draw. If I am at a more TAGy table I am not going to see many flops if they find out I open with 9To UTG. And I think you underestimate your opponents, they often only play one table and they definately pay attention, they just don´t adjust very well. They call pf with ATC, don´t rr and stack off with any piece of the flop once they have found out you are FOS.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. While you aren't making money ON THE FLOP by raising weaker hands against such opponents, your implied odds against weak/easily value-towned opponents post-flop is better. In other words:

bad opponents=play more hands against them

[/ QUOTE ]

Wouldn't your implied odds increase if you openlimped vs loose passives hands like JTo and 89s and 22-55?

I openlimp like 3% of my utg hands and after 2k openlimped hands I run at minus .15 ptbb. LOL. maybe not a good idea afer all.