Stoxtrader open raising range?

[yourface]

nice post, holla. very shania-esque

[maniacut]

danza, really nice post.

[TheWunderkind]

btw its a pretty funny video(-:

@danza sure you should adjust hands that youre playing from all positions slightly by the table makeup youre image and maybe how youre running lately,
however it seems that stox is using defaults as i dont think he does table or seat select in his videos or having stats on his opponents on AP wich is where he played.

However it seems odd that raising T9s UTG and 67s in CO is is standard while mucking JT0 in CO is his standard too especially if the CO is UTG i think mucking JTo is -EV.

Maybe JTo i often dominated by other broadwyays wich noone seems to fold vs a CO open while 67s isnt and 76s makes a nice little flush now and then too makes up winning or loosing,
youre also get called by A high more often on 7 high Boards then on broadway heavy boards or if u make a str9 or 2 pair with 67s it also gets called down lighter if you make the same with JTo i guess.

I dunno it just seemed very odd to me that folding JT in the CO 1. in is a standard for him wich is why i made this thread.

I think stox open TJs UTG though. But maybe ppl fold QJ or KT more often vs an UTG raise (wich seems to never happen in my games) or does only the suitedness makes up for winning and loosing?

I think JTo is a default open and a winner from the CO for most ppl, just curious why not for him or JTo is really a looser for a lot of ppl or the games i he plays in.

[danzasmack]

I see what you mean. That post was originally just "i open it and I don't care if it's a slight loser". But then I realized that's a bad post.

How does he say to play flushdraws?

Is there a way to estimate the value of a suited hand?

Also people react to UTG raise differently.

And i'll check my DB when i get home.

[sethypooh21]

Without getting into the empirical aspect of it at all, from a theoretical standpoint, T9s is going to play significantly better post flop than will JTo. First, I think you're slightly less likely to be dominated with T9s (even moreso with 67s). Second, the sooootedness let's you play significantly more flops aggressively in a +EV manner on many boards. This is something we need to constantly think of preflop: how a hand will play postflop - even if we hit our hand somewhat with JTo we're going to tend to win small pots and lose big ones.

[Heisenb3rg]

great post by danza, similar to my opinion. I am not a fan of the "it's +EV in my DB therefore I raise" approach either. For reasons I have touchd upon in many of my posts.

I think one of the biggest reasons T9s and 67s is > JTo is it's semi-bluffing properties. A lot of the straight draws with JTo hit a 3-bettors range hard , so you will often get played back at and pay for your bluff.
This isn't close to as true with the added flush draws and the lower straight draws.

Also, i really believe the flush draws play a huge role in short handed hold em not for hitting the flush themselves, but for bluffing purposes
a) folding out air in decent sized pots
b) allowing you to profitably get to the river and catching a pair, backdoor straight etc. to win the pot.

Also, if you hit a pair of J's against AK , they often have gutshot straight and the like.. Your gutshot draws, are subejct to card removal..

Also the lower the card, the more profitable drawing to the "middle gutshots" are.

IE board is Q84 vs 248. Both cards have gutshots, but your pair draw is a fair bit stronger/more deceptive on the 248 board even though it's a lower board.
If you hit your straight on the high board, you wont get action from less than 2 pair (because they have to fear two pair). On the low board, you'll likely get plenty of action from overpairs, and possibly ace high call downs.


All of these factors make up for the strength of hitting a pair of jacks or tens , instead of sixes or sevens. (which is still very important)

[ILOVEPOKER929]

[ QUOTE ]
great post by danza, similar to my opinion. I am not a fan of the "it's +EV in my DB therefore I raise" approach either.




[/ QUOTE ]

If you have a large enough database, I see nothing wrong with constructing a default opening stategy using this approach.

[Heisenb3rg]

yeah too bad large enough is greater than 3 million hands probabily..

(just pulled a number out of my ass [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] )

edit: Im only talking about the marginal hands.. The noticeable winners/losers should stand out fairly quickly and the DB method is fine.
Also I agree there is nothing wrong with using that approach to get a feel for which hands are close to 0 EV... Then for those hands raise/fold depending on table conditions. Erring on the side of tightness for the -EV hands and looseness for the +EV hands.. That's ok.
But using it to say "this hand is -EV, in my DB, therefore I fold" I dont like.

[sethypooh21]

Heis does a very nice job fleshing out what I meant by "postflop playability" of T9s/76s vs. JTo.

[Flintoff]

I based my entire opening strategy for all positions on Stox's large DB. It's done ok for me so far. I did drop just one or 2 from the very bottom of the range though hands like KJo UTG are up for constant review.

I,m not sure it's even possible to determine the most borderline hands and whether they are profitable or not. The ever changing games will tip some one way - some the other.

I certainly don't worry too much about them.