Suited Connectors, Implied Odds, and You (Theory/Math)

[Osprey]

This thread is a great find. In my latest adjustment to my game, I just cut out suited connectors because I suck hard with them. But I find the point below to be a good one: what is your goal with the suited connector when you flop your biggish draw against a raiser? I think that's what most of this thread is about, against a raiser. Are you purely playing for the metagame? IE if you're willing to push that hard with your draw, people will pay off your sets and made hands when you push them hard

Let's assume 100% continuation bets and $100 stacks.
Raiser pops it to $4, you call in position with your suited connector.
You flop a 12 outer. Pot is rounded to $10
Preflop raiser leads out for $6, You raise to $20
Just to be arbitrary lets say it's 50/50 that the raiser has a hand worth pursuing and will eventually get it in with you on the flop or turn (argue with me if I'm horribly wrong here in my assumption)

Assumption 1: he folds, you win 12 dollars 50% of the time.

Assumption 2- he wants to get it in with you- let's say you have 45% equity with your 12+ out draw in these cases (sometimes these will be sets and two pairs and you could make your draw and lose as well, I am not sure if 45% is a super accurate estimate)
So you lose $100 55% of the time= $55
You win $102 45% of the time= $45.9
So 50% of the time you're -$9.10.
so you win $2.90 on average with my assumptions when you flop a big draw that you'd be willing to felt.

According to the original calculations, you flop your big draw about 7% of the times, which is 13:1. So, if you're calling a raise with these hands 13x-$4, -42 + 1 hand when you flop your draw and make $2.90 on average, but could also be stacked .

What happens when you play your simple 9 out flush or 8 out straight draw fast to get it in?
LEt's keep this assumption the same:
Raiser pops it to $4, you call in position with your suited connector.
You flop your flush or OESD. Pot is rounded to $10
Preflop raiser leads out for $6, You raise to $20
Just to be arbitrary lets say it's 50/50 that the raiser has a hand worth pursuing and will eventually get it in with you on the flop or turn (argue with me if I'm horribly wrong here in my assumption)

Assumption 1: he folds, you win 12 dollars 50% of the time.

Assumption 2: He gets it in with you somehow on the flop
Let's give you an equity of say 33%
So 67% of the time you lose $100 here
33% of the time you you win $102 here
so 33-67 is about -$34
So you lose -23 with the play here.

So seems pretty obvious I guess- you don't want to get it all in with a draw- so it seems pretty important to play these hard in games where people can fold TPTK or an overpair, because if you can't get them to fold, you're going to be a loser. I guess these hands allow you to apply big pressure to people to get them to make bad folds, like folding Queens with a King on the board when you push it hard, and they maybe also to pay you off if you do hit (how could that 9 have possibly helped him?) but you really don't want to make it look like a draw- ie shoving the flop with a 4 flush/combo draw on a raggy board might not be so great if the guy with aces puts you on the draw and calls- you don't really want to be called even if you have a gutshot to go with your flush draw, except to set the guy up for when you flop your set....

[ QUOTE ]
I think the conclusions are all wrong. You need to calculate how much you actually win when you flop a pushable hand. That's the key variable. That means calculating an EV for the pushable draws estimating your fold equity. If you assume 100% fold equity the EV of a combo draw is small. If you assume 0% fold equity, the EV of a combo draw is small.

I don't see how SC can be as profitable as pps.

Krishan

Krishan

[/ QUOTE ]

[ImsaKidd]

Osprey:

The rounding and incorrect equity #'s make your post incorrect IMO. Equity with combos is >50% a lot of the time.

And preflop raisers usually arent leading 6 into a 12 pot. It would more like 9-10.

[Osprey]

I don't think it makes a huge difference.
Let's take a best case scenario

Let's assume 100% continuation bets and $100 stacks.
Raiser pops it to $4, you call in position with your suited connector.
You flop a 12 outer. Pot is $10 to the flop heads up
Preflop raiser leads out for $10, You raise to $40
Just to be arbitrary lets say it's 40% that the raiser has a hand worth pursuing and will eventually get it in with you on the flop or turn (argue with me if I'm horribly wrong here in my assumption)

Assumption 1: he folds, you win 16 dollars 60% of the time.

Assumption 2- he wants to get it in with you- let's say you have 55% equity with your 12+ out draw in these cases
So you win $102 55% of the time= $56.1
You lose $100 45% of the time= $45
So 40% of the time you're +$11.10
so you win $14.04 on average with my assumptions when you flop a big draw that you'd be willing to felt with these better assumptions.

According to the original calculations, you flop your big draw about 7% of the times, which is 13:1. So, if you're calling a raise with these hands 13x-$4, -42 + 1 hand when you flop your draw and make $14.4 on average, so even with better assumptions, you're still losing quite a bit of money. It seems to be a lose lose situation if you call with these cards and your opponent folds immediately or gets you all in as the only 2 options- it really seems to me like they need to make big, incorrect folds. Or there needs to be multiway padding in the pot.

[Osprey]

No one has any thoughts about how getting it all in with a monster draw is not a great thing?

[blackize]

There is another thread that goes over it buried in one of the stickies somewhere. It basically said that getting it in with your monster draw is less +EV than if your opponent folds to your push. We push all in with our draws because we usually have a good deal of FE.

[Osprey]

So then, really, what's the point of playing these suited connectors? To flop a made hand? Or to force bad folds on semi-bluffs in games where people can fold? It seems to me you don't make near the money back calling raises with these than you would if you just let them go in raised pots.

[blackize]

[ QUOTE ]
It seems to me you don't make near the money back calling raises with these than you would if you just let them go in raised pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

Accurately gauging your implied odds is a huge part of NLHE.

Typically we will be better than our opponents.

We can

1) Make them fold the best hand some of the time
2) Pick up the hand when they miss some of the time
3) Manage the pot size to either win a small pot or a huge one when we hit.
4) Often our unskilled opponents won't bet enough to give us improper odds to draw.

Position is key in this which is why almost all your play with suited connectors should be done in position.

[iSTRONG]

i don't like calling raises with SC even in position with 100BB stacks. SCs are great to steal and re-steal with.

[blackize]

[ QUOTE ]

i don't like calling raises with SC even in position with 100BB stacks. SCs are great to steal and re-steal with.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point.

Against poor players who offer high implied odds, I don't mind calling in position with 100BBs. Against players who are much less likely to pay you off they are good for restealing.

[Osprey]

Yeah, I've noticed in general that stealing in limped or sometimes even raised pots seems to be easy money at .5/1 NL