What are the top 10 starting hands in holdem?

[RustyBrooks]

When I did simulations a while back I saw some slight differences in rankings when you started reducing the number of players. I'd have to go back and look again to remember what they are and possibly they did not affect the highest 10.

[jay_shark]

I double checked and noticed that kqs ranks above a-q0 and below pocket 10's .

[heyyo2]

what would be the top 10 starting hands in cash game?

[RustyBrooks]

Why would you expect the top 10 hands to be different in a cash game?

[heyyo2]

WEll because hands like AJs and KQs are considered trouble hands. Someone said that in a cash game it isn't that much of a trouble hand because you can let it go if you dont hit and if u do hit, you have a very good kicker.

In a tournament, you will go all the way and lose with it because your opponent will have a bigger kicker. NOt sure if i am phrasing it right.

[RustyBrooks]

People overemphasize the difference between cash and tournaments. In my experience the difference exists mostly at the times when your stack gets low enough that standard opening or completion bets represent a significant portion of your stack. (Or, if your opponent meets this criteria) This can happen in NL too if you let it, or want it to, but when you bust out, probably you can rebuy.

Anyway, in general these hands are just as much trouble in cash games as they are in tournaments, and if you can release it in a cash game, you can release it in a tournament.

[heyyo2]

Would you all prefer AQs over AKo?

[RustyBrooks]

Now we get into the real nitty gritty, which a table of top 10 hands is no good for.

What's the situation? What's my position? Who's already acted? How many people can I expect to be in the pot? Any short stacks still to act?

Heads up, I'll take AK over AQs. Multiway I like AQs because it's only a little weaker in pair value but I'll have better drawing odds, or a better hand, multiway.

It's nice to speculate about good hands but there are situations where AQs or AK goes in the muck and there are situations where I'll glady raise QTo. There's good hands and then there's good (and bad) situations.

[formula72]

AQs beating AKo. Not according to me PokerOffice.

[GeeBeeQED]

Rusty, I think there might be an argument for a difference at some M in a cash game. I think the kinds of opponents have a bearing on this also. At an M of 30 or so and below, I'm certain I agree with you fully. Above that it gets a little debatable for me.

I realize the OP is more general and your answer is for the purposes of this forum. However, I like the question about the differences in a cash game. I do like your answer but I think I lean more towards the people you describe than where you are on this subject.

I would support the idea that as the stacks get deeper and deeper and/or as the opponents get tighter and better the traditional high hands lose ev. Is it enough to change the rankings? I'm not sure I could argue that. However those conditions bring the more speculative hands way up for me.

I'm thninking in terms of ending stack values after a night of hard work and good play. Most of these nights are many hours against maybe only 15 to 20 opponents. That is much more time facing individual players and many fewer players than one is exposed to in a tourny. The style reads and knowledge of each opponent about the others grows much deeper here than in a tourny.

Sure I want aces, every hand if I can get them. However 1 pair hands that don't improve (most of the time) can be tricky to play, expecially with a thoughtful and strong opponent is calling or playing back. It seems I make most of my monster pots live against players that just can't let go of the AA or KK (or worse, other top pairs) post flop. I like the hands but I have some level of contempt for them also.

One of my thoughts is in tourny's you rarely have an M greater than 40 or so. However in live it's very common. A table with 5 to 8 players with an M around 100 or over isn't uncommon.

Really, I'm not arguing with your persepctive here. I guess I'd juse enjoy reading your theoretic musing a little in support or not.

Dave