[marchron]

[ QUOTE ]
My comment was directed at the use of the phrase "idiot end", which I perhaps define differently, and I should have phrased it less glibly. In micro-limit hold'em online, where even the tight players don't fold, you need to weigh your chances with any draw tempered with the ability to make a winning pair. With a J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] board I'm more likely to play with K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] in this spot because I've got a better chance of making the best hand with a pair. Both straights draw to the nut straight, but one is clearly better. The worse of these I'd call the "idiot-end". (Notice that splitting in either case doesn't really matter much.) It might not be the classic definition of the term, but in micros, I use it as such.

[/ QUOTE ]
Unlearn this, then. "Idiot end" and its synonyms apply only to the phenomenon of making your straight and still losing, whether it's because the same card makes your opponent a higher one, or he still has a draw/redraw to a higher one.

Since all straights here are to the nuts, it doesn't matter here. But obviously a draw with overcards is stronger than one without, so say that.