Small connectors - always suited?

[Guitierez]

I recieved contradictory inputs on the play of small connectors, and the discussion might be of interest for too tight players also.

First of all, I'm very much into SSHE, many of the aspects improved my play considerably. So I know of the importance of beeing suited and the conditions to play eg. 76s (multiway pot, seeing the flop cheaply, low aggression postflop). Also statistics reveal that you have ~25% (18% vs. 14.2% against 5 opponents) better chances to win the pot with 76s over 76o....

And then I read Doyle Brunson's S/S2 where they recommend to play small offsuit connectors from late position also. This confused me completely as I always considered 76o to be a junk hand. But when I mulled over this situation i concluded maybe Brunson is not that wrong.

Can you really profit from the fact being suited? It's a psychological problem. Imagine you hit the three missing cards of your suit, do you think your flush will hold up? In a multiway pot there will likely be higher suited holdings out. Even worse, given you make your hand on the flop, start betting out to protect and then the 4th card of your suit pops up, it's a clear fold. IMHO these scenarios reduce the importance of beeing suited with small connectors, and maybe I should loosen up my LP starting requirements. To chase the straight both hands are of the same value obviously.

What are your thoughts about that, do you ever play small offsuit connectors, or muck them ruthlessly?

[martybonus]

i usually muck, even from LP. 76o? fahgeddabahdit.


there's a bit in SSHE in the flop play section about weak flushes which flop their necessary 3 cards. can't remember exactly where. but they seem to suggest that even a weak completed flush is going to win more than its share of the time. yeah, you'll lose to a higher flush, but not *that* frequently. not nearly as frequently as yo'll win a decent-sized pot.

true, multiway increases liklihood of better flushes, but it also increases the liklihood of hands like 2pair, TP, or sets. A complete flush is a pretty rare thing compared to these weaker hands. If you have a weak-ish complete flush, play aggressively until someone shows you fairly clearly that they have a stronger flush.

hope this helps. good q. and welcome to the forums.

[fretelöo]

[ QUOTE ]
Can you really profit from the fact being suited? It's a psychological problem. Imagine you hit the three missing cards of your suit, do you think your flush will hold up?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yessss. Very much so. You'd hate to see a fourth of your suit so there's the point to bet hard to get them to pay the max to keep drawing.

[ QUOTE ]
In a multiway pot there will likely be higher suited holdings out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, higher suited in other suits and offsuit holdings holding one of your suit. Flush over flush is quite rare.

[ QUOTE ]
Even worse, given you make your hand on the flop, start betting out to protect and then the 4th card of your suit pops up, it's a clear fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. But how often does this scenario occur? Or in other words: How often do you make the nut flush holding AJo?

[ QUOTE ]
IMHO these scenarios reduce the importance of beeing suited with small connectors, and maybe I should loosen up my LP starting requirements. To chase the straight both hands are of the same value obviously.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you shouldn't! The problem is, that 67o is probably a net loser over the long run. being able to make the odd str8 and some 2pr/trips hands (remember, everytime you hit 2pr with 67o, it's very likely, that someone else has a very live str8 draw) is simply not enough. That's why suitedness is important. It adds those 4% equity to make limping them profitable.

[fretelöo]

[ QUOTE ]
but they seem to suggest that even a weak completed flush is going to win more than its share of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol o rly? Any flush you hit that's not a 4flush on the board is likely a monster.

[martybonus]

heh. spose i could have been a bit more emphatic there. just trying to duly apply the correct 'conditions' so as to not make too forceful statements.

[Zeldark]

Drawing just to the flush is unprofitable.
Drawing just to the straight is unprofitable.
Combine the connectedness and the suitedness and you have something.

[fretelöo]

[ QUOTE ]
heh. spose i could have been a bit more emphatic there. just trying to duly apply the correct 'conditions' so as to not make too forceful statements.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's certainly a virtue. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] If I have 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] and the board comes K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], I'm capping with 4 opponents. Simple as that. If the turn brings T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], I'm capping again, even if HU. Heck, especially HU. I'd also and a lot more happily do it 9ways. Ah, screw the conditions, I'm capping either way. I hold the nuts so often, it's not even funny.

[winkydinky85]

Fold the unsuited connectors preflop. You have no high card value so you have to improve drastically to have anything worthwhile. Suited connectors also have to improve greatly but there are more ways for you to improve.

[martybonus]

you might want to bet if you have a royal flush.

it depends on reads, the table, and the action, but it's often a good idea.

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[fabadam]

[ QUOTE ]

And then I read Doyle Brunson's S/S2 where they recommend to play small offsuit connectors from late position also. This confused me completely as I always considered 76o to be a junk hand. But when I mulled over this situation i concluded maybe Brunson is not that wrong.


[/ QUOTE ]

Brunson's advice is meant mostly for mo-limit, where the implied odds are huge in comparison with limit. In limit I never play 76o.