Posted Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:30 pm GMT by mk97
when i watch the pros on tv, i notice they fold hands K8, A w/ low kicker, J9, etc. when i play with my friends at home, i(and they) usually always play hands like those, to see the flop. we also play 3-5$ buyin and winner takes all..so its not all that much lol. just wondering if this is a bad idea, to play hands like those.
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:47 pm GMT by supafrey
Yes. Read a few hundred of the thousands of posts here and you'll begin to figure out why =)
or just skip that, and go to the book section of the posts. Then buy a book or two and check it out ^_^
Posted Tue Aug 23, 2005 1:14 am GMT by starfishblue
After reading a few books, suited hands are worth much more than unsuited hands and position is vital in making many decisions.
The number of players still in the game and how many raise etc... this game is one big tapestry of stuff to remember. 
The more you read... the more u understand why you might consider folding AJo UTG or whateva.
Posted Tue Aug 23, 2005 3:06 am GMT by Muck
Indeed position and action have a bearing on margin hands like JTs or ATo. But I think this is a question about junk hands.
K8o looks okay, you’ve got a face card and an 8 is an above average kicker right? But the only flop that can give you confidence to play strong is K 8 x.
Suppose the flop is K Q 7, what do you do? The chances are you’ll either pick up a small pot because no-one has anything or you’ll lose a lot to AK, KQ, KJ. If you don’t bet it and just try to see the showdown for cheap you’re risking someone with AJ or JT outdrawing you to a straight.
Dan Harrington put it simply “We choose good cards pre-flop to make the decisions we face on the flop easier”.
Posted Thu Aug 25, 2005 8:49 am GMT by BncStylee
I had to learn this the 'expensive' way when I started playing... to read some books helps a lot though and improved my game to the point where I started making a profit.. personally, I think position is most important... you can play a junk hand like K8o from late position since you'll see the action before it comes to you... if there is a raise pre-flop there's no point playing K8o (of course it depends who the raiser is since there are a few maniacs that raise even with 23s)
Furthermore, if there's a raise pre-flop even a medium hand such as k10 is pretty much a loser hand if you don't hit a straight. (just think what the raiser most likely is holding)
Posted Thu Aug 25, 2005 10:05 am GMT by Skribbles
| starfishblue wrote: | After reading a few books, suited hands are worth much more than unsuited hands and position is vital in making many decisions.
|
I may be a little off... but wouldn't a suited hand (KQs) only win about 3% more than unsuited (KQ).
It "Looks" like it is much more but in reality the difference is very little.
Posted Thu Aug 25, 2005 10:17 am GMT by Loonbat
| mk97 wrote: | | when i watch the pros on tv ... |
This is the beginning of the end.
Realize that the only footage you see on television are the action hands (no one really wants to see the 70%+ of hands which never go past the flop or make it to the turn). 5 hours of final table action may be distilled down into 42 minutes (plus 18 minutes for commercials), and the hand selections you may see on a final table with all-in pushes on small PPs and lesser holdings is not the way these players (generally speaking) made it to this final level.
At the final table point in a tourney, it is quite advantageous to steal blinds and antes.
Moral of the story: what you see the pros play (or not play) should not gear your standard game, unless, of course you're always playing at the FT of a MTT.
Posted Thu Aug 25, 2005 11:56 pm GMT by Cyberhwk
| Skribbles wrote: |
I may be a little off... but wouldn't a suited hand (KQs) only win about 3% more than unsuited (KQ).
It "Looks" like it is much more but in reality the difference is very little. |
One would think so, but the WizardOfOdds has an interesting chart on Holdem and I believe his numbers are pretty respected. (http://wizardofodds.com/holdem)
In a 10 handed game, 72o has a 5.86% chance of being the best hand. 72 suited has a 9.53% chance. A 66% improvement.
AK suited is 21.73% vs AKo at 18.29%. Only a slight improvement.
Interesting...
Posted Fri Aug 26, 2005 3:13 am GMT by Muck
Maybe that’s because the figures take into account the odds of your hand holding up if you make a pair for example.
With AK if you hit A or K on the board you’ve probably won.
With 72 you can hit one of the cards but still lose to an overpair or better kicker.
With 72s your only real chance to beat 9 people is to make a flush. I think that's why it adds so much value.
Posted Fri Aug 26, 2005 3:48 pm GMT by supafrey
| BncStylee wrote: | personally, I think position is most important... you can play a junk hand like K8o from late position since you'll see the action before it comes to you... if there is a raise pre-flop there's no point playing K8o (of course it depends who the raiser is since there are a few maniacs that raise even with 23s)
|
Hrms.. I don't know if I agree with this. In my opinion, you can easily be a winning poker player and NEVER (and I literally mean never) play K8o in a ring game with more than 3 people seated at the table.
Raising with 23s has some value, and I'd rather have that in my hand than K8o a million times over.
Posted Tue Aug 30, 2005 9:49 pm GMT by TheSalche
| Cyberhwk wrote: | | Skribbles wrote: |
I may be a little off... but wouldn't a suited hand (KQs) only win about 3% more than unsuited (KQ).
It "Looks" like it is much more but in reality the difference is very little. |
One would think so, but the WizardOfOdds has an interesting chart on Holdem and I believe his numbers are pretty respected. (http://wizardofodds.com/holdem)
In a 10 handed game, 72o has a 5.86% chance of being the best hand. 72 suited has a 9.53% chance. A 66% improvement.
AK suited is 21.73% vs AKo at 18.29%. Only a slight improvement.
Interesting... |
ummm ... if you look at both its really only about 3% improvement for either hand
66% improvement from one hand to another sounds fancy ... but its still less than 10% chance of winning
no offense ... really dumb point
Posted Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:47 pm GMT by mikenike
lol 500-5000 buy in and a 3-5 buy in...
catch the the diff?
Posted Thu Sep 01, 2005 3:10 am GMT by Muck
| mikenike wrote: | lol 500-5000 buy in and a 3-5 buy in...
catch the the diff? |
Are you saying professionals fold poor cards because the game is so expensive?
I think they’d play the same openers even if they were playing a £1-£0.20 MMT.
Posted Thu Sep 01, 2005 5:10 am GMT by starfishblue
The real difference between playing suited cards and non-suited cards is not just the probability that one hand will make the flush and the other does not (after all the cards are out). But with suited cards, if you like the flop, you can win much much more that with non-suited cards.
I believe suited cards give more implied odds, and gives you more opportunities than offsuit cards after the flop.
|
|
