adpro

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

zunni74

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 monkey looks to make sure we are not playing limit at Brantford." - Redington

Kristy_Sea

It sounds like you are falling into the same trap the author is helping you to avoid...

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"
************************************************** ***************



************************************************** **********************

Kristy_Sea

Work in the expression 'putting the cart in front of the horse' If that helps you to see my point.

adpro

EDIT:

You posted more than one!!!

I'll come back and read more later and comment. I'm at crappy work right now.

AcidJoe

The biggest problem with suited connectors is the board is usually a very draw heavy board. If your in there with 9 10 diamonds and actually flop the flush, the A of diamonds if he's around will probably not going away unless you make it very expensive. If you hit 2 pair there is probably a straight draw against you. If you hit top pair and a flush draw there could be a bigger draw against you.

With that being said I don't mind playing them.

__________________
Kristy, why can't we all just get along?

ReefAquarium

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. ...

__________________
Not smarter than a grade 5 or Kristy Sea

BBC Z

I think the thing you have to remember with your smaller suited connectors (say 9Ts and lower) is that they're going to be easier to play postflop. You either make a pretty strong two pair, flop a big draw.. or you fold..

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..

__________________
13Cards is the worst thing to happen to Canadian Poker ever.

Milo

Okay, this is great, because this comes up ALL the time around my school of fish. Please confirm or correct this line of thought, disregarding the #'s used (they are for simplicities sake), and focussing on the premise. Thanks

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?

__________________
I don't gamble . . . but I will bet.

Vandal

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.

Kristy_Sea

What a great score for us...Welcome to the forum Blair!!

Milo

Got it. Thanks. More to think about, I guess . . .

__________________
I don't gamble . . . but I will bet.

BBC Z

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.

__________________
13Cards is the worst thing to happen to Canadian Poker ever.

GTA Poker

Focusing on hand selection in NL cash games with deep stacks isn't very important at all IMO, tournies with low Ms sure...didn't read the article, but I have to assume it is referring to typical MTT play

__________________
That level 5 trap really paid off...ship him the cookies.

Kristy_Sea

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?)