"Most of your profit will come from AA & KK"

[Renton]

useless thread

[Osprey]

I find playing suited connectors to be a leak- I mostly play suited (and unsuited connectors) as blind stealing hands in 0.5-1$, and 1-2$ NL. The amount people fold to blind steals or fold to the flop cbet is unreal. Certainly would never happen at those levels live.

[futuredoc85]

[ QUOTE ]
I find playing suited connectors to be a leak-

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
I mostly play suited (and unsuited connectors) as blind stealing hands in 0.5-1$, and 1-2$ NL. The amount people fold to blind steals or fold to the flop cbet is unreal.

[/ QUOTE ]

One of these things is not like the other

[Osprey]

But you can make twice the flushes!!!

More and more, I'm not sure that your cards really matter all that much in blind steals, I think you can just choose hands based on the frequency you want to steal (ie, if you want to steal 40% of the time, use any ace, any king, any kind of connector- wheras I'll fold Kings and such). I don't think I'm leaking now with the suited connectors, I was before when I tried to open limp with them, or call raises in position and stuff like that.

PS: Are you in medical school?

[diebitter]

saying stuff like sc's are inherently -ev just isn't right. It's knwoing when to hold em and when to fold em.


Just play every hand so each decision is +EV (or least -EV) (if you know what you're doing you can accept the odd decision as -ev as long as you think it's +ev for the session/long game).

For example when you limp or call a raise with a pp, be reasonably sure you can extract at least about 8 times your bet on average when you hit.

Just think 'if i were in this spot a million times what's the best way to make the most money/lose the least money'.

Edit: and Osprey is on the right path, your cards don't matter with steals in the right table/spot. What is important though is recognising a changed table dynamic when the others finally get tired of your stealing and start playing back. Buying thw pot can get dangerously addictive on a passive table.

[Osprey]

Explain to me, in a non high level thinking, A-B-C low level relatively shortstacked game that we're playing, how suited connectors are + EV. You're about 29:1, I believe, to flop 2 pair, which is beating overpairs and such- even less to flop trips. There was a discussion about this in one of the other forums before Full Ring came about, and I worked out, based on probabilities someone supplied, the math for the times you flop a massive draw- I thiink it was 11:1 or 12:1 to flop a big draw, 12 outs and up, and to make calling a preflop raise profitable it still came out to be that you needed your opponent to call 1 bet, and THEN fold to your all in. If you pushed in with your massive draw, and your opponent folds, you don't make enough to cover the times you don't hit your hand and have to fold, and if he calls, you're essentially coin flipping for your stack and you're still not going to cover the times you miss your hand. Unless you think you can fold someone with any 2 cards, I'm not sure that playing suited connectors aggressively and for raises makes great sense. Note, I am not talking about limping into a 5 handed pot to try to flop the mortal nuts- that seems reasonable- but calling raises in position, to play heads up against a pre-flop raiser? I don't think it's a long term winner.

[diebitter]

err, i mostly don't play SC into raises preflop (unless it's a good family pot). cos that would be -ev. I'd certainly never call.

If it were HU, I sometimes reraise a good lag tho. If it were raised by a good lag and called by a tightish passive, I'd be even more likely to reraise (a little squeeze play is a wonderful thing). Mostly I'd fold.

It depends. None of this makes SC inherently -ev.

[phydaux]

[ QUOTE ]
Explain to me, in a non high level thinking, A-B-C low level relatively shortstacked game that we're playing, how suited connectors are + EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've answered your own question. Playing SCs is highly stack-dependant.

First, you have to have a stack. I like at least 75 bb if I'm going to be playing speculative hands.

Then, if it's folded around to you in LP you can raise with them provided the blinds have some stack for you to win if you get called and you make a hand. Again, I like at least 75 BB.

If it's raised in EP then you can call in LP with them provided the initial raiser has a decent stack.

I will limp with them from MP if the table is both nicely stacked and fairly passive. I'd seriously consider folding to a raise from LP.

And you don't play them from EP. Playing draws from OOP is pure spew.

[Noo Yawk]

[ QUOTE ]
my set mining skillz must be terrible, I'm actually pretty concerned about my small-mid pair performance, suited connectors seem to break even at best also.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think if you broke your SC's and small PP's down by position, you'd see a major difference in win/lost $$$

[Osprey]

Yeah, it is much easier to extract from position than OOP.