preflop hand selection

[Sanzarc]

I only played online so far but I fold Q2-Q7s in every position. Q8s can be played from SB or from the button.
My style is an absolute rock (but it is very profitable) so that's why I say that.

[KitCloudkicker]

[ QUOTE ]
I only played online so far but I fold Q2-Q7s in every position. Q8s can be played from SB or from the button.
My style is an absolute rock (but it is very profitable) so that's why I say that.

[/ QUOTE ]

fine strategy for online, but a subpar strategy at most low limit live games.

[smarterthanyoda]

[ QUOTE ]
fine strategy for online, but a subpar strategy at most low limit live games.

[/ QUOTE ]
At what point do hands like this become profitable? The games I play in seem tighter than the games in LA. We usually see 4-5 players to the flop and only 1-2 go to the river. It's hard for me to imagine this has the implied odds needed to make Qxs or even Kxs profitable from EP. Am I wrong?

[Xhad]

I wouldn't play Q9s from EP even in retardedly loose-passive games, and I'm hardly a rock pf. The problem with these hands in these positions is that you're pretty much forced to make mistakes postflop because you're acting in the dark a lot of the time. i.e. when Q9s isn't flopping a flush draw it's flopping a bad pair in a big pot, or a gutshot in a pot that's right around correct odds but won't be if anyone decides to raise the flop. Similar problems apply to stuff like J6s otb.

[BigBadBabar]

yeah i disagree with kit here i don't think hands like q4s need to be played really ever, in a live game, and your winrate can still be solid and fine and you can still play plenty of hands and not appear nitty. there's a reason suited connectors (a la j9s) are marginally profitable and nonsuited ones (q3s) aren't as much. position as xhad mentioned is pretty key too. i don't mind limping a good suited king after limpers, but again it's very situational and depends on a lot of smaller factors. ep i don't normally play that stuff. lp after tons of limpers maybe good suited kings and q8s+ would be my default.

[KitCloudkicker]

[ QUOTE ]
yeah i disagree with kit here i don't think hands like q4s need to be played really ever, in a live game, and your winrate can still be solid and fine and you can still play plenty of hands and not appear nitty. there's a reason suited connectors (a la j9s) are marginally profitable and nonsuited ones (q3s) aren't as much. position as xhad mentioned is pretty key too. i don't mind limping a good suited king after limpers, but again it's very situational and depends on a lot of smaller factors. ep i don't normally play that stuff. lp after tons of limpers maybe good suited kings and q8s+ would be my default.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is probably fine. i think i've made a few bucks with these hands but i of course cant keep detailed stats while playing live, so it can be the result of small sample size.

BBB made a good point here tho... dont appear nitty. In my experience, even morons wont pay you off if you havent played a hand in an hour.

[TheCount212]

exactly... I have been working hard at loosening up my game for live 3/6, having started my poker playing in NL tournaments under the rocky tutelage of Harrington's books. Now I'm pretty much playing any pair, suited connectors down to 64s, Axs, Kxs, and even Qxs when the situation is right. After all, the only true way to hit more flops is... to see more flops. =]

[rubberloon]

[ QUOTE ]
These hands are so marginal they are hardly worth the time and effort to play them. To put things in perspective, I checked some 240k hands spread limit, and I compared my winnings per hand, with aces normalized at 1.0.

AA 1.0
KK 0.61
QQ 0.43
JJ 0.36
AKs 0.31
TT 0.23
AQs 0.21
AK 0.18
99 0.15
KQs 0.14
AQ 0.14
AJs 0.11
AJ 0.11
88 0.09
QTs 0.08
QJs 0.07
ATs 0.06
KJs 0.059
AT 0.054
77 0.052
66 0.043
JTs 0.041
x
J9s 0.0017
---
KT -0.0017
x
K9s -0.0067
Q9s -0.0075
Q8s -0.0092

This might be due to my poor play earlier in those 240k hands, and/or due to the fact I didn't know how to play Q9s; however, one thing is clear: they are very marginal. The only reason to play them would be because of meta-game issues, such as range balancing. And there's no way to know if by folding them all the numbers wouldn't be more negative.

There's more fun stuff to discover in this list -- besides the QTs/QJs discrepancy. For example, it is clear that 99 is a vastly better hand than 77; resulting in almost 3x the profit!

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for confirming my jaundiced view that for marginal +EV hands the game ain't worth the candle. Thanx a lot.

[TheCount212]

Thanks Babar... as usual, yours is the advice I will probably adopt.

[BigBadBabar]

count, <3