[Buzz]

Hi Tex - First of all, when you write A-3, an inference is the hand has no deuce (else you would have written A-2-3). Similarly, when you write A-4, an inference is the hand has neither a deuce nor trey.

Second, I prefer to think (and write) A-3-X-Y and A-4-X-Y in order to emphasize that there are four cards to consider.

Given the above, I think of both A-3 and A-4 alone as primarily low two-card combinations. In a game where the object is always to scoop, either of these gives you a chance at low (which is good). But then you usually need something else for high. The ace may also fit with another card in either case, but A-3 or A-4 for high, although not impossible (as in a wheel or full house, for example), is not very likely.

How well either combo does for low depends very much on the particular flop. With no deuce on the flop, and nothing else going for the hand, A-3-4-Y or A-3-5-Y are not very good, and without a four or five for back-up, the bare A-3 after a flop with two low cards, but no deuce, is probably not worthwhile playing. It depends on your opponents, of course.

Drawing for second nut low alone is generally poor strategy after the flop. But if there are three low cards but no deuce on the flop, the situation is different. In other words, playing the second nut low, though fraught with peril, is quite a bit better than drawing for it. The main problem with playing the second nut low is approximately half the time in a full game, you're up against the nut low.

A-4 is even tougher to play as a low combination. Not only do you have to contend with A-2, but also with A-3 and 2-3. To play A-4 for low at all after the flop, you almost have to have either a deuce or trey on the flop. And in either case, A-4 assumes the role of A-3 without a deuce on the flop.

There's a lot to playing A-3-X-Y and A-4-X-Y hands, depending on the flop, the turn and river, your table image, and how your opponents play - too much to generalize in one post.

Buzz