Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

Hand 1, I am in the BB and pick up 9/2 suited. UTG (tight, predictable) raises, 4 callers, I call? What about 3 callers?

Hand 2, I am on the button with 6/4 diamonds, UTG raises, UTG + 2 repops, 2 cold callers (I see the SB and BB both reaching for chips) I call 3 cold?

Thanks.

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

hand 1 is ok, hand 2 isn't

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

Hand 1 is standard.
Hand 2 is an instafold. I'm folding for 2 bets too. 97s or 86s would probably be my cut off for 2 bets for sutied 1 gappers and I'm folding all suited 1 gappers except for AQs for 3 bets. KJs-T8s all face varying degrees of domination that negate their high card/high flush strength while the lower ones just aren't strong enough. This is especially true because the raises/reraises are from 1st and 2nd in.

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

hand 1 = fine either way
Hand 2 = if i knew 100% that sb and bb were calling and utg was repopping it, I might call w/97s or maybe 86s but in this case your not getting the odds. I know it seems great that your getting 6:1 on your call but your implied odds aren't there. Since your putting in 3bets pf the final pot has to be 3x bigger than if it was 1 bet pf. You just wont make enough back after you flop a big hand to justify the call.

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

Thanks for everyones responses. I thought the same on hand 2, but I ran the odds through cardplayer.com's hold'em tool, assuming that hero has 6/4 of diamonds, and the field holds the following: JJ, A/Q off, 99 and A/T off, hero's hand rates to be second with 22% chance of winning. What gives?

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for everyones responses. I thought the same on hand 2, but I ran the odds through cardplayer.com's hold'em tool, assuming that hero has 6/4 of diamonds, and the field holds the following: JJ, A/Q off, 99 and A/T off, hero's hand rates to be second with 22% chance of winning. What gives?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your range is a little bit narrow. You've gotta include hands like most Axs, KTs+, JTs, QTs+, and other suited connectors.

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

The issue isn't percentage, or at least not here. The issue is that you're paying 3 bets to get into the pot, which means your investment be paid off 3 times what it would normally be compared to a pot in which you limped in.
(ie. The return on a $1 investment that has a 10% chance of success needs to be at least $10 to be break even but the return on a $3 with a 10% chance of success needs to be $30. )
Given the way poker works, your initial investment is only thinly correlated with how much you can expect to make postflop. If your hand was hit 20% the time, (rounded for simplicity) you would need to make 5 SB if you limped, a reasonable proposition. However, you would need to make 15SB if you coldcalled 3 bets, something that is much harder to do. This example eliminates paying bets postflop when you chase your draws for simplicity, but the point stands.

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hand 1, I am in the BB and pick up 9/2 suited. UTG (tight, predictable) raises, 4 callers, I call? What about 3 callers?

Hand 2, I am on the button with 6/4 diamonds, UTG raises, UTG + 2 repops, 2 cold callers (I see the SB and BB both reaching for chips) I call 3 cold?

Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think people would be quite surprised if they did any simulation work on the second scenario. When there are that many people calling several bets the remaining deck will be rich in small cards. Hands like 65s and 64s are likely to have an equity edge against this big field. Put some likely ranges for these players in Poker Stove and see. 64s is stronger in this scenario than QJs or JTs, as other players are probably holding all the cards needed to make the hands of the higher value hands. If every one of your opponents had a range of the best 7% only, you'd be the favorite.

In six and seven player pots where lots of players seem to like their hands, small suited connectors and one gaps (that don't contain a duece or trey) are the best hands. In fact, even if the player who 3 bet has AA you still have 19% equity. That's pretty good for putting 3 bets into a 21 bet pot.

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

When running the PS simulations please factor in the times you and an opponent both make a flush.

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

omg fold hand 2 wtf????

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

[ QUOTE ]
When running the PS simulations please factor in the times you and an opponent both make a flush.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since we are talking about Monte Carlo simluations with over 30 million trials, it is safe to say they are accounted for. Yes, you will sometimes lose to a bigger flush. With this deck rich in small cards you will also make lots of small straights and flop two pair and trips.


Especially valuable are hands that contain a six, in terms of implied odds. When wheel cards come in you often make a six high straight and get paid off by more than one opponent who holds an ace.

The very worst hands in these types of pots are any that contain a 9. K9s, Q9s, J9s, T9s, 98s are all bad. Play any two suited T or higher, and any two suited connectors or one gaps smaller than 9 and greater than 3.

I don't even remember on what web site I first read about this. It was a while back and I thought it was insane myself. But I have confirmed all of this stuff myself.

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hand 1, I am in the BB and pick up 9/2 suited. UTG (tight, predictable) raises, 4 callers, I call? What about 3 callers?

Hand 2, I am on the button with 6/4 diamonds, UTG raises, UTG + 2 repops, 2 cold callers (I see the SB and BB both reaching for chips) I call 3 cold?

Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think people would be quite surprised if they did any simulation work on the second scenario. When there are that many people calling several bets the remaining deck will be rich in small cards. Hands like 65s and 64s are likely to have an equity edge against this big field. Put some likely ranges for these players in Poker Stove and see. 64s is stronger in this scenario than QJs or JTs, as other players are probably holding all the cards needed to make the hands of the higher value hands. If every one of your opponents had a range of the best 7% only, you'd be the favorite.

In six and seven player pots where lots of players seem to like their hands, small suited connectors and one gaps (that don't contain a duece or trey) are the best hands. In fact, even if the player who 3 bet has AA you still have 19% equity. That's pretty good for putting 3 bets into a 21 bet pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

A fair amount of your equity comes from like when the flop is AK6 and you would have spiked a 6 on the turn to give you the best hand but it's two bets to you on the flop, or likewise with weaker draws like gutshots or backdoor flushes. In other words, a hand like 64s benefits from seeing all five board cards, but it's often prohibitively expensive to see the turn and river.

Another problem is that it that it's hard to make a nut-type hand with 64s. If you turn or river a flush and face any sort of a re-raise, you have to be worried. Similarly, a hand like two pair can be beat in a lot of different ways. Trips are not very well concealed and you occasionally run into kicker problems. Only making a straight with both cards is really gin for you, and even there you have to be worried about not having the best hand on a lot of boards.

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

[ QUOTE ]
A fair amount of your equity comes from like when the flop is AK6 and you would have spiked a 6 on the turn to give you the best hand but it's two bets to you on the flop, or likewise with weaker draws like gutshots or backdoor flushes. In other words, a hand like 64s benefits from seeing all five board cards, but it's often prohibitively expensive to see the turn and river.


[/ QUOTE ]

You've got tons of equity to spare here. You are about a 2:1 favorite against most of the other hands. If the flop is AK6, call if you have one of your suit on board for a backdoor flush. You will be getting at least 12:1 to call two bets on the flop. Also, there is a good chance there are no aces or kings left in the deck. Most of the high cards are gone.

Poker Academy can deal repeated scenarios of this where you can be the hero. You can set up your opponents for a range of hands. I will test some more that way. But I am inclined to think that in late position, holding 76s,75s,65s,64s, and 54s you should play in any six or seven handed pot no matter how many bets you have to call.

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for everyones responses. I thought the same on hand 2, but I ran the odds through cardplayer.com's hold'em tool, assuming that hero has 6/4 of diamonds, and the field holds the following: JJ, A/Q off, 99 and A/T off, hero's hand rates to be second with 22% chance of winning. What gives?

[/ QUOTE ]

There was no error. What it told you is correct. It is just anti-intuitive and everyone here is responding with their poker intuition. Hands with big cards are hoping to flop big cards but the deck is rich with small cards. Its as simple as that.

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for everyones responses. I thought the same on hand 2, but I ran the odds through cardplayer.com's hold'em tool, assuming that hero has 6/4 of diamonds, and the field holds the following: JJ, A/Q off, 99 and A/T off, hero's hand rates to be second with 22% chance of winning. What gives?

[/ QUOTE ]

There was no error. What it told you is correct. It is just anti-intuitive and everyone here is responding with their poker intuition. Hands with big cards are hoping to flop big cards but the deck is rich with small cards. Its as simple as that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually should not have said simple as that. Look at the hands you put up there. The AT has no chance. The JJ dominates the T and the AQ dominates the A. The 99 is a super underdog to the higher pocket pair.

Besides the deck being rich in small cards, in cases where you have so many hands going in for 2 or three bets, one or two of them are going to dominate the rest of the field. If you had AK and QQ out there, every other hand other than yours is probably screwed big time. Every ace or king is badly dominated by AK and every smaller pocket pair is a big dog to the higher pocket.

You are drawing to hands that are not going to be dominated by these. You are looking to make two pair, trips, a flush, or a straight. Your biggest worry is someone with a bigger flush draw of your suit. That will sometimes happen, but not often.

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for everyones responses. I thought the same on hand 2, but I ran the odds through cardplayer.com's hold'em tool, assuming that hero has 6/4 of diamonds, and the field holds the following: JJ, A/Q off, 99 and A/T off, hero's hand rates to be second with 22% chance of winning. What gives?

[/ QUOTE ]

I stoved vs more resonable(imo) ranges and only got 16.9% eq with 64s

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 19.843% 18.83% 01.01% 4667699 250795.22 { 88+, ATs+, KJs+, QJs, AJo+ }
Hand 1: 26.604% 25.63% 00.97% 6353566 240989.55 { TT+, AQs+, AKo }
Hand 2: 18.401% 17.91% 00.49% 4440107 121123.22 { 22+, AQs-ATs, KJs+, QTs+, J9s+, T9s, 98s }
Hand 3: 18.278% 17.81% 00.47% 4414404 116281.72 { 22+, AQs-ATs, KJs+, QTs+, J9s+, T8s+, 98s, 87s }
Hand 4: 16.874% 16.74% 00.14% 4148498 34025.30 { 6s4s }

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

One of the general lessons that I learned from Stox's book is that with an issue like this there are often balancing forces. One of the biggest mistakes we make as "thinking, advanced players" is to only offer 1 point when defending a play, when that point automatically has a balancing effect. I consider this a major leak.

True, players will tend to play paint cards in these games, but this is mitigaed for the last few players that enter a multi-way pot. Also, when low cards come out, simple overcards, which constitute a larger range as compared to overpairs will not be paying off multiple bets on big streets, especially if coordinated boards come. And 1 more: players that are more likely to tighten their ranges to premium hands are also much more likely to play better postflop.

All of these points mitigate the point of having more "low cards in the deck" and mean that you shouldn't spew preflop with mediocre/weak drawing hands, unless you have specific reads on the situation.

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for everyones responses. I thought the same on hand 2, but I ran the odds through cardplayer.com's hold'em tool, assuming that hero has 6/4 of diamonds, and the field holds the following: JJ, A/Q off, 99 and A/T off, hero's hand rates to be second with 22% chance of winning. What gives?

[/ QUOTE ]

I stoved vs more resonable(imo) ranges and only got 16.9% eq with 64s

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 19.843% 18.83% 01.01% 4667699 250795.22 { 88+, ATs+, KJs+, QJs, AJo+ }
Hand 1: 26.604% 25.63% 00.97% 6353566 240989.55 { TT+, AQs+, AKo }
Hand 2: 18.401% 17.91% 00.49% 4440107 121123.22 { 22+, AQs-ATs, KJs+, QTs+, J9s+, T9s, 98s }
Hand 3: 18.278% 17.81% 00.47% 4414404 116281.72 { 22+, AQs-ATs, KJs+, QTs+, J9s+, T8s+, 98s, 87s }
Hand 4: 16.874% 16.74% 00.14% 4148498 34025.30 { 6s4s }

[/ QUOTE ]

Given that our investment in this pot, even after taking .3 bets out for rake and tip, is about 14.5%, 16.9% is still quite good. Cloutier is the only author I've seen even lightly touch on this.

The ranges you used were better. The tighter the ranges, the more dominated the lesser broadway hands become and the more valuable the mid and small suited connectors and one gaps become. AK and AQ are the only offsuit non-pairs people should think about playing in these pots. But most continue to play hands like AJ, KQ, KJ, etc, all losers. These are the hands that create the dead money which makes the lesser suited hands profitable.

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

I'm somewhat surprised that there's little or no discussion of playing the 9-2. Hard to turn a profit here. I think the more players the worse this hand plays.

Re: Suited stuff, enough odds? 40 at the Borg
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm somewhat surprised that there's little or no discussion of playing the 9-2. Hard to turn a profit here. I think the more players the worse this hand plays.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought I covered that one [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] All hands with a 9, other than 99 and A9s, are losers.