Very Simple Straightforward 2/4 Question

[Gauge]

[ QUOTE ]

Yea, it looks pretty, but it's hard to play OOP. QJo is weaker that 33, it is weaker than Q6s - would you ever think of playing Q6s in EP? Hell, I don't even play Q6s on the button.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fantastic information.. really put it in perspective

Also I didnt mean to seem like I was hurt, I can take a good jab.. I knew it was such a blatantly obvious question to most of you and I just wanted to explain why I was asking it. Thanks for the help guys. Youve yet to let me down

[Yossarian147]

SSHE also says to always call one bet back to you if you've limped in. 2 bets back is a different story, you need to tighten up almost as much as if you were cold calling in the first place.

[jeffnc]

It doesn't matter what your cards are here, always call.

There are some situations where you might fold, but limping and then calling a single raise is never one of them.

If you limp, and there is a raise and then a reraise behind you, you will fold some hands.

A more subtle example is when you complete the SB (especially when the SB is large, e.g. a $10 blind in a $15/30 game). Let's say a late player limps, you limp for $5 more getting 8:1 on your money, the BB raises. Now you're out of position and getting worse odds, there are hands here you could fold.

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
It sucks because now you're going to play a potentially dominated hand in bad position against the whole world, but you simply can't fold a suited ace getting 10:1 or so.

[/ QUOTE ]

It kinda sucks in the same sense that it would suck to draw to a gutshot getting 11:1. But at least here the hand is easier to play if you hit.

If you find that playing a hand like Axs is tough once you've limped in and then are facing a raise, then you shouldn't limp with that hand to begin with. Once you're in you have to play, but theoretically if you give up tons and tons of cash when you hit middle pair or top pair and lose to a better kicker, then you can fold Axs to the raise. Everyone who is telling you to call assumes you know now to play poker without losing your shirt. Pretty much every early decision in poker assumes you know what to do later in the hand. There are lots of books telling you when it's OK to play 65s preflop, but there are lots of players losing money with that hand too. So you can't follow preflop advice if you're a complete klutz postflop.

So, if you can't play after the flop, then fold Axs to begin with. If you think Axs is a decent hand to play, then never fold it to a single raise once you've limped.

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
A9s is a substantially stronger hand than QJo - and I mean substantially by a mile. A9s is a +EV hand, and QJo is a -EV hand, over the long term with average players.


In fact A9s is slightly stronger than KQo, 77, and KJo

However, A9s is slightly weaker than QJs, KTs and JTs.


QJo is a different situation - it's a unsuited connector, and not substantially different than JTo or T9o.

Yea, it looks pretty, but it's hard to play OOP. QJo is weaker that 33

[/ QUOTE ]

You are making these all sound like absolutes, and they absolutely are not. For one thing it's all situational, for another it depends on your postflop skill, and for another there is "playability" of a hand to take into account, not just raw strength.

QJo has pluses and minuses relative to JTo, and vice versa.

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Yea, it looks pretty, but it's hard to play OOP. QJo is weaker that 33, it is weaker than Q6s - would you ever think of playing Q6s in EP? Hell, I don't even play Q6s on the button.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fantastic information.. really put it in perspective

[/ QUOTE ]

How about if I said his statement is extremely debatable at best, downright wrong at wrong? Would that put it in perspective?

[AlienBoy]

[ QUOTE ]

You are making these all sound like absolutes, and they absolutely are not. For one thing it's all situational, for another it depends on your postflop skill, and for another there is "playability" of a hand to take into account, not just raw strength.

QJo has pluses and minuses relative to JTo, and vice versa.

[/ QUOTE ]


Is AA a stronger hand than AK? Yes it is, this is an absolute OVER THE LONG TERM. And QJ is stronger than JT, as an absolute over the long term. This should be self evident to anyone with the most basic grasp of math. Look at this chart:

http://www.tightpoker.com/hands/ev_position.html


My post is based on EV over all positions combined, based on stats of 115 million actual hands with average players.

It was used to demonstrate relative PF hand strengths. I was speaking in terms of EV, as a generality. I never said anything was "absolute" - though long term, in play with average players, that's based on h EV of these hands PF.

in hands of a SKILLED player, of course things are a bit different - clearly, the OP is in need of some fundamental advice, and advanced plays are not appropriate to discuss until the fundamentals are mastered.

QJo is a -EV hand if you ignore position - in EP is is a major loser, and in late position only a very minor winner (about +.03 EV on the CO or button). A9s is +EV in all positions, but playing it in EP depends on the texture of the table, and your relative position to certain types of other players.


AB

[elindauer]

Hi AB,

Are you aware that the chart you are referencing does not support the claims you are making? You say

[ QUOTE ]
QJo is weaker that 33, it is weaker than Q6s

[/ QUOTE ]

But then you give a link to a chart that shows Q6s as a bigger loser in every position than QJo! What? Are you even reading this stuff before you post it?

I get that you're trying to offer simplified advice to a player who is perhaps just starting out. I don't think that strategy really serves them well though... thinking about starting hands in absolute terms isn't really the way to go preflop. If you are going to talk in absolute terms... at least get it right! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]


-eric

[AlienBoy]

hmmm... A year ago I had taken that chart, loaded it I to excel, and ranked all hands by average ev for allnpositions... Im out playig at the moment, but when i get home I'll look at my exce sheet and see whats up.

Interestinly, in utg/utg+1 Q6o is stronger than Q6s... I misread thisnearlier...

Thenpoint still remains than QJo is a horrid hand in ep.


AB

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
And QJ is stronger than JT, as an absolute over the long term. This should be self evident to anyone with the most basic grasp of math.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's not. For example, JT is less likely to be dominated by a raiser than QJ is. As I said, very situational.

[ QUOTE ]
Look at this chart:

http://www.tightpoker.com/hands/ev_position.html


My post is based on EV over all positions combined, based on stats of 115 million actual hands with average players.

[/ QUOTE ]

That chart is kind of interesting but near meaningless for our purposes. All it shows is what poker players, including plenty of crappy players, have done with those hands.

[ QUOTE ]
It was used to demonstrate relative PF hand strengths.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately, that chart doesn't do that.

According to that chart, 44 and 22 lose money from the dealer button, but make money in earlier positions.


[ QUOTE ]
I was speaking in terms of EV, as a generality. I never said anything was "absolute"

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, you used that word twice in your post already.

[ QUOTE ]
though long term, in play with average players, that's based on h EV of these hands PF.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't really have a grasp of the math and statistics involved here. That chart doesn't show EV of those hands for average players. It shows the average profit of all players.

[ QUOTE ]
in hands of a SKILLED player, of course things are a bit different - clearly, the OP is in need of some fundamental advice, and advanced plays are not appropriate to discuss until the fundamentals are mastered.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, ahem.