Do you agree with this article?
Here is the article...
ESPN - But they were suited! - Poker
Baiscally the article talks about suited connectors and how they give you basically no value for playing. They say in the article that if you wouldn't play the hand unsuited, you shouldn't play it suited, because the chances of you hitting a flush by the river are too slim.
Here is a quote directly from the article
"T.J. Cloutier says that if you wouldn't play them unsuited, why are you playing them suited? Suited cards add very little additional value, only about 3 percent."
Now, I agree with this way of thinking for lower suited connectors, because you run the risk of someone else having a higher flush. The only for sure win for types of flushes for low suited connectors is the straight flush.
Anyway, I disagree with this article. I think higher suited connectors (like 9Ts and above) are great hands. I probably won't play 9Tos, but, depending on position, I'll play 9Ts.
I know that the math says that you are not much better off with the possible flush (only raises the hand 3%), but that 3% can pay off big time if you hit. I feel it's worth it to play a lot of connectors (depending on the game and situation of course), and more worth it to play them if they are suited.
What do you all think? Do you think the same way as this article, or do you like your suited connectors?
Also, lets say you have 9Qs. How much more value do you give that than 9Qos?
I would like to hear what the pro's on here have to say about this article.
Thanks for the input.
Adpro
ESPN - But they were suited! - Poker
Baiscally the article talks about suited connectors and how they give you basically no value for playing. They say in the article that if you wouldn't play the hand unsuited, you shouldn't play it suited, because the chances of you hitting a flush by the river are too slim.
Here is a quote directly from the article
"T.J. Cloutier says that if you wouldn't play them unsuited, why are you playing them suited? Suited cards add very little additional value, only about 3 percent."
Now, I agree with this way of thinking for lower suited connectors, because you run the risk of someone else having a higher flush. The only for sure win for types of flushes for low suited connectors is the straight flush.
Anyway, I disagree with this article. I think higher suited connectors (like 9Ts and above) are great hands. I probably won't play 9Tos, but, depending on position, I'll play 9Ts.
I know that the math says that you are not much better off with the possible flush (only raises the hand 3%), but that 3% can pay off big time if you hit. I feel it's worth it to play a lot of connectors (depending on the game and situation of course), and more worth it to play them if they are suited.
What do you all think? Do you think the same way as this article, or do you like your suited connectors?
Also, lets say you have 9Qs. How much more value do you give that than 9Qos?
I would like to hear what the pro's on here have to say about this article.
Thanks for the input.
Adpro
Comments
Actually, the article is broken down into 2 areas...
1) Suited cards: That's where the quote you mention from the article comes from. So hands like K3s not being worth much more than K3o etc which is 1000% true.
2) Suited connectors: They do discuss the addition of possible straights and how it adds to the overall value of the hand.
Where I disagree with the article is their MUB fear regarding higher flush draws. The chances of someone having a higher flush is something like 12:1 (if my memory/math is right) where both players have 2 suited cards in their hands and no 4 flush is on board.
I find suited connectors more dangerous when you flop top pair on a low board. I lose more money by over-valuing that pair than probably anything else in my game.
the article is over-simplified without stack sizes, relation of those to the blinds and basic understanding of implied odds, the punchline is just 'chasing is usually bad' it is directed at beginning players and serves a purpose in a full page of wandering thought that could be summed up by simply saying..
"your preflop hand selection is flawed..memorize these and then expand as you grow as a player"
*****************************************************************
************************************************************************
You posted more than one!!!
I'll come back and read more later and comment. I'm at crappy work right now.
With that being said I don't mind playing them.
Joe didn't mention this because he assumed you all knew but just in case... The above is gold... and also why they benefit so much from having position... being able to act last is huge huge huge... Position is so important here it's stupid to say, "position is important here" It's like saying, "Water is important for swimming." Understand.... Water isn't important for swimming... Important isn't strong enough word here. ...
COmpare that the KJs when you flop 2nd pair jack and have all these little pieces of hands and you need to figure out more about whats going on..
If J/10 off-suit is 20% to win preflop, J/10 suited is 25%. This would mean that the suited connector is 5% better overall (25 - 20 = 5, right?)
But isn't it also true that the suited connector is actually 25% more likely to win? The thinking being that the 5% increase is 25% of the original win%. Is there a flaw in this reasoning?
If this premise is correct, then isn't the suited connector is actually 25% more likely to win than the identical non-suited connector?
Your premise is correct, but your conclusion is... Tenuous... It's accurate (not mathematically) in this case, but it doesn't apply evenly to all suited cards. But yes, your way of calculating is accurate.
"Suited" becomes exponentially more important, the worse your starting hand is.
Observe:
Let's say you know your opponent has 9/9.
You have AK, unsuited. You have a 44% chance to win the hand. 1.27:1 pot odds. You need to be getting 1.27 dollars for every dollar you put in for this to be the correct call.
Now you have AK suited. You have a 47% chance to win the hand. You have 1.13:1 pot odds. An increase of roughly 7%.
You can see that Suited vs. Unsuited has an effect, but not a drastic one, on your decision.
Now Consider:
You have 72, unsuited. You have an 11.7% chance of winning the hand. 7.5:1 pot odds to make the call.
You have 72 suited. You have a 16% chance of winning the hand. 5.25:1 pot odds to make the call. An increase of 45%.
Clearly, suit matters. In fact, it matters dramatically more for poorer starting hands.
So, in summary:
Suit should have virtually no effect on your decision process with Strong hands. But it should have a dramatic one with poor hands.
You are just shifting between comparing these two hands in the context of the universe of every starting hand (5% difference) and the relative difference between the two hands (25%). They both mean the same thing.
LOL!
Do tell...where exactly is it that you imagine a lovely deep stack game that a beginner who doesn't understand hand selection and implied odds SHOULD play?
(besides any game at which we are present?)
I don't know how much I like this way of thinking.
What you're saying is if I were to have two hands (A and
I don't see how 11.7% is all that much worse than 17%.
Also, a dramatic one with poor hands? What happens if someone else has a higher flush? Also, you have to look at how many other people are in the hand.
Lets say you get dealt 2s 3s and the flop comes out Qs Kh Ts. Are you going to call with 8 other people in the flop because you have 9 outs to the flush? Lets say you hit the flush on the turn and someone bets like mad. Are you going to call and go all-in? What are the chances that one of those other 8 players have two spades?
Now, lets say you have AK of spades and the same thing happens. You're hoping someone has two spades.
Lets say you have AKos in the same situation. You're likely going to fold to any decent raise with only top pair and the nut kicker.
Lets say you have 23os. I would hope you would fold. But if having lower suited connectors makes them that much more valuable, shouldn't you then be playing 23 suited?
I can only see a straight with no flush possibilities returning a lot of money with 23 suited, or the straight flush, which is highly unlikely.
So, the fact that you get 23 and it is suited shouldn't really make your pre-flop action any different than if they weren't suited.
Does this make sense, or am I completely off the map here?
Can you maybe explain further?
I was thinking about this a lot lately and here is what I have come up with.
The fact that a card is suited raises the value of a hand more than with smaller suited cards. I agree with this. The numbers show that your chances of winning increase more with lower suited cards.
I was watching the WSOP last night (I record it) and I saw Daniel Negrano (not sure of the spelling) get 3d 5d, or 4d 5d. Can't really remember. I also can't remember the full hand and what the other guy had, but his hand was fairly strong.
Either way, Daniel ended up winning with a flush, but a low flush.
So, against one other player, I can see how lower suited cards can have more value put on them and win when they do hit that flush. They can also have hidden straights.
My problem is looking at how much the hand value increases by using the increase percentage only, not the percent that it increases. I feel this gives the hands false values. An increase of 25% sounds huge.
I feel you should only look at the increase on its own. So, given AK, you have +3% chance of winning if it's suited. For 72, you have +4.3% chance of winning if it's suited.
Understand that the values do go up if they are suited as the cards get lower, but it really isn't that much of an increase. We're only talking about a 1.3% difference in increase between the best non-paired suited hand and the worst non-pair suited hand.
Please, if I am totally off the mark here, please explain!! I want to understand this if I am wrong.
Wat.
I think you're taking Vandals calculations far too literally. At no point did he mention actual increased hand values, merely pointing out the difference in soootedness depending on hand ranking. A simple method in math (wp Vandal).
Also - referencing hands you see on TV is tilt inducing. In this particular case, I am at a loss as to why it was included and felt like jumping off my balcony. nh.
I understand the method in math, but I just think it's a poor way of showing that lower cards that are suited increase in value at a rater higher than higher suited cards and their counterparts. And yes, he mentioned the fact that an unsuited 72 is so much less valuable than a suited 72.
I just feel like the raw percent increases are better to look at, rather than looking at the amount it increases and representing them as the percent increase. I don't know how to word it, but I just feel that it's a poor and misleading way to show that lower cards that are suited gain more value due to the suited factor than higher cards.
Hopefully you are on at least floor 14!!!!!
The hand reference was because I was saying that when there are only two people in the hand, you run less chance that someone else has the flush and beats you. If you have 9 people in the hand, there is a largely increased number of players that could have a flush. That has to change the low suited connector hand ranking for sure. The amount of people in the hand must change it drastically. So, what are his numbers for? Heads up? against 2, 3, ... 10 players?
Anyway, lets take the above example and instead of two people in the pot, we have 6 people. Lets say someone else fires. What would Daniel do? He's probably putting them on a higher flush than him, since he has crap for a flush and pretty much any other flush will beat him, and it's very possible. I see it all the time when playing with donks that can't fold. That's why I value a higher suited cards much more than lower.
So, as I stated, that's why I brought up that hand. I'll continue folding my 45 most of the time. Don't worry about me going on tilt from mentioning a hand I saw on TV. Does everyone go on tilt from watching a player play cards on tv?
Again, if I am totally off the mark, can you please explain instead of jumping off your balcony?
Floor 21, FTW.
Here's why that line of thinking is incorrect, and I'll even let you answer it for me:
If I have 9/9, and I'm all in. What pot odds do you need with KQo to call me, and what pot odds with KQs.
Now ask the same questions with 54o and 54s.
See how different it is?
[EDIT] Too lazy...
Adpro, I just wanted to say that I think you're an amazing addition to the forum..a learning player who thinks!
In this specific instance you've missed Vandal's point a little bit...he's not advocating playing suited crap...he's just showing how MUCH better it is than unsuited crap.
Have you read about pot odds yet? If you understand it, try going back and think about the difference between 7/2o and 7/2s...and what situations you'd be correct to play each of them...or better yet NOT correct to play 7/2o
Hope that helps!
double goddammit...while I was un-jacking your account you beat me to the punch!
To summarize in a very simple form:
KQo is a decent hand in this scenario - being suited increases its value marginally
54o is a shitty hand in this scenario - being suited increases its value significantly.
This does not mean 54s > KQs.
I'm in no way saying that KQs is worse than 54s.
I do understand pot odds post flop for sure, and I use them all the time. Maybe I just need to go over my pre-flop game, which I honestly haven't gone back to re-check in a while, so I guess I should go back for a refresh. Thanks for your post Kristy.
The only thing I have a problem with at all is the fact that the increase in what you are going to call doesn't increase all that much, and when you represent the increase by percent the percent it increases compared to its non-suited counterpart makes it seem like a way larger increase. I fully understand that it is a large increase.
I understand that if it's 1% chance of winning unsuited and 2% suited, you are gonig to be able to call twice as much, based on pot odds. I just don't like the idea of saying it's an increase of 100%, because some people might take that the wrong way, especially pre-flop when it's not as easy to figure out your odds of winning a hand without some software telling you.
Either way, I do understand and I guess this is just a bit of a personal preference or issue, or whatever. No offence was meant by it at all.
Let's talk about this quote:
"Overall, players love to play suited cards. Picture this scenario: You are sitting in the big blind. As each player folds his or her hand, a player in late position raises four times your big blind bet. After everyone else folds, you look down to see Qh-9h. Wow, suited cards!
What do you do? Let's assume that you decide to call.
Your world just got a lot more complicated after the flop brings Ac-10h-3h -- a flush draw! Now what do you do? You have about a 1 in 3 chance of hitting the flush. Consequently, you end up calling bet after bet, down to the river. If you don't catch the flush, you have to fold, losing valuable tournament chips. Or even worse, you do catch the flush and your opponent has a higher flush. All the while you keep saying to yourself, "But they were suited!"
Calling out of position with anything less than a very strong hand is a big mistake imo unless stacks are very deep. If you did flop a flush draw in this spot you should almost certainly be check raising because playing your draws weakly both gives away the value of your hand to some degree and allows your opponent to control the pace of the hand. So his scenario should read more like.....
What do you do? Let's assume that you decide to call.
Your world just got a lot more complicated after the flop brings Ac-10h-3h -- a flush draw! Now what do you do? You have about a 1 in 3 chance of hitting the flush. Consequently, you realize that calling on every street has major drawbacks so you decide to turn your hand into a semi-bluff and disguise your hand giving you multiple ways to win the pot and increasing the value of your hand tremendously. If you check raise wrks you pick up a decent number of chips and if it doesnt then you have the option to fire again on the turn or check and fold if you opponent makes a large bet.
As far as the value of cards being suited I think in a multiway pot with position a hand that would be bordline for you to play becomes much more valuable(89s or 67s for example). However trash hands are still trash hands. 92o and 92s are both still 92.