www.flopturnriver.com

Poker Forum

Over 1,246,000 Posts!

Already Registered? Username: Password: Remember Forgot Password
Tweet

Q4s versus Q3s etc. - limping in on the button

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display Modes

RiverMonkey

12-22-2004, 09:58 PM Post subject: Q4s versus Q3s etc. - limping in on the button

#1 (permalink)

Flush

Join Date: Nov 2004

Posts: 446

I was just reading Adbul's starting hand requirements chart

http://posev.com/poker/holdem/strate...lop-abdul.html)

Firstly, what does he mean specifically with "Opening Hand Rankings and Minimum Openers "? Does he use 'Open' in the generic sense to pertain to anything from limping in for one-SB all the way to raising, re-raising, and capping pre-flop? (Of course knowing your opponents would certainly dictate where in this 'open' spectrum you should be for any given starting hand)

I also have a few questions related to the justifications behind some of the recommendations. (Perhaps I am simply mis-interpreting the chart).

[1] Why is Q4s considered ok for 'opening' on the button, but not Q3s, or Q2s? Other than Q2s/Q3s being dominated by Q4s, I can't see why he recommends Q4s but not Q3s/Q2s.

[2] Why is K2s ok to 'open' on the button, but not K3s, K4s, or K5s?
On second thought, maybe that's not what the chart is saying at all .... maybe its saying you can play any suited king-X down to X=2 on the button?? Question[1] still stands though .... I don't see how Q4s is any better than Q3s.

Thanks all!!

Play for FREE and practice your game at...

Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!

thenonsequitur

12-22-2004, 10:52 PM Post subject: Re: Q4s versus Q3s etc. - limping in on the button

#2 (permalink)

Full House

Join Date: Nov 2004

Location: Location: Location

Posts: 637

Quote:

Originally Posted by RiverMonkey

On second thought, maybe that's not what the chart is saying at all .... maybe its saying you can play any suited king-X down to X=2 on the button??

Yes, that is the correct interpretation...any suited K-X down to X=2. Below the chart he says:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adbul

when a hand is "missing", it belongs to the lower position

And he also says:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adbul

if you can open with hands on one line in the table you can open with all the hands above as well

I don't have a definite answer for your question [1] though. Maybe it's just that 2 and 3 are so weak that almost any card will dominate them. I seem to recall Slansky and Malmuth saying somewhere in one of their books to be especially wary of hands with 2 and 3 in them, for this very reason. If more than one top theorist has thought about this, there's got to be something to it.

|~|ypermegachi

12-22-2004, 11:18 PM

#3 (permalink)

4-of-a-Kind

Join Date: Aug 2004

Location: emo-kid

Posts: 3,580

open means to raise first in.

RiverMonkey

12-23-2004, 06:59 PM Post subject: Thanks for the feedback ... I think EV must be the answer.

#4 (permalink)

Flush

Join Date: Nov 2004

Posts: 446

Thinking from an EV perspective, how Q4s is any more valuable than than Q2/3s? If the lower suited card provides any extra relative value in the long, what kind of poker hands/events would contribute +'vely to your EV?

It seems to me that flops like QQ4, or 44Q are just as likely as QQ3 or 33Q. But, if the board completed and resulted in Qs-full-of-3s *and* Qs-full-of-4s you have an EV+ event.

3 or 4 seems to me to be equally as likely to give the low straight potential given the right boards. However, 76543 versus 87654 is certainly a positive EV event.

Similar thinking on the flush front. If both players hit a flush you again have another EV+event for Q4s over Q3s. Likewise with the pairing of both 3s and 2s by the board in the same game. Trip & Set situations; 333 over 222 etc ..... I think you get my point.

The cumulative affect of all these possible domination situations ..... must be the reason why you should value hands like Q4s over Q3s.

On the surface, I was amazed that all those events are frequent enough, and therefore would be significant enough, to enter into a position-based starting hand strategy. Obviously, the experts think they do ..... Running all the possible domination situations through your favourite sim program will give you the frequency statistics.

Maybe its more of an **implied** odds based argument. Any dominating hand has implied odds over a dominated hand, and likewise, any dominated hand has reverse implied odds against a dominating hand. Hence extra $$-suckage potential which also will contribute +'vely to your EV.

whileone

12-23-2004, 07:18 PM

#5 (permalink)

Flush

Join Date: Nov 2004

Posts: 306

I think part of it is the possiblility of a board pair. if the Flop is 55Q, your second pair is no good. the smaller that kicker is, the more likely you are to be dominated.

RiverMonkey

12-23-2004, 11:24 PM Post subject: Good point! I didn't mention that scenario

#6 (permalink)

Flush

Join Date: Nov 2004

Posts: 446

Evaluating the relative probabilities of all possible domination scenarios you think you might be up against is important for determining your proper p-f,f,t & r play. (This is really a pretty elegant application of the Fundamental Theorem of Poker. (As Sklansky explains in TOP, multi-way pots make things a little more complicated.))

As an aside: I think information leakage & collection, bluff and bluff success rates etc, could also be thought of as affecting your (reverse) implied odds.

If you could, loosely or otherwise, quantify implied odds as a function of:
(e.g. in terms of an effective number of outs for or against you)

- your knowledge about your opponent(s)
- how tight/loose, aggressive/passive, likelihood to fold they are
- hand reading
- how dominant or dominated you think your hand is

that would really give you a nice systematic way to think about how to play any given hand.

Latest Poker News
KoRnholio	05-26-2012, 03:08 PM Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
According to an email sent out by Mark Bryan, a gaming analyst at Merrill Lynch, the Australian government plans to legalize online poker sometime in the next six to 12 months. This move will coincide ... more at Poker Blogs »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off Trackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:43 PM.

Play Texas Holdem Online, Online Texas Holdem Strategy, & Poker Forum

This is not a gambling website.

Poker Forum

Over 1,246,000 Posts!

Poker Forum

All Other (Limit) Poker

Q4s versus Q3s etc. - limping in on the button

Play for FREE and practice your game at...