KQ - a tricky starting hand?

I know it's hard to define value of a pre-flop hand, but I'm struggling at the moment to know how to play KQ, KJ and QJ, especially the former (the latter two I will lay down out of position or facing a raise, unless they are suited and I have good reason for wanting to see a flop).

KQ is dominated by AK and AQ, so does this mean it's as strong as AJ? or is it weaker as it doesn't have the high card potential, or is it stronger because the straight potential is higher? In what circumstances would people fold KQ? What difference does it being suited make?

Contriubtions gratefully received!

I love KQ.

It never gives me any trouble. You just have to play it carefully. With KQo, I fold in EP (I open call with KQs, it's just me), and in any other position, I fold if there's a raise before me, and I raise if it's folded around to me. From there on I play it exactly as I would AK.

In poker tracker KQ is one of my most profitable hands, and I generally can sense when I am being dominated by AQ and AK, so I very rarely lose big pots with this hand (I rarely win big pots either. It's just not that kinda hand).

"KQ Rules in the land of the unraised pot" - some guy.

I play it exactly like renton and it doesnt seem to be causing too many problems.

KQ is a strong hand. At a minimum call in EP. As you move up in limits you should probably play it more aggressively. I raise it up in any position, same with AJ on most tables. Coherent opponents will be able to put you on a hand easier if you play it too passively pre and post flop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by r8ed

KQ is a strong hand. At a minimum call in EP. As you move up in limits you should probably play it more aggressively. I raise it up in any position, same with AJ on most tables. Coherent opponents will be able to put you on a hand easier if you play it too passively pre and post flop.

---

ya I probably shoulda mentioned that I play 25nl where its ok to play so few hands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renton

You just have to play it carefully. With KQo, I fold in EP (I open call with KQs, it's just me), and in any other position, I fold if there's a raise before me, and I raise if it's folded around to me. From there on I play it exactly as I would AK.

---

I play it the same way. I figure if I hit a K or Q high flop, I'm winning. If not, I'm not. Who doesn't love KQsuited? It's so beautiful. Like the so so girl at the bar that looks great through your beer goggles, just don't go too far with her (time).

raise it first up provided your position isnt awful
dump if its raised, unless raiser is horrible

Personally, I never raise w/ KQ suited. I would rather raise w/ 89 suited than KQ suited for obvious reasons. Then again, at 25 you might actually get some callers w/ Kj or K10, so its a bit more viable, but no better than just calling in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dpe8598

Personally, I never raise w/ KQ suited. I would rather raise w/ 89 suited than KQ suited for obvious reasons. Then again, at 25 you might actually get some callers w/ Kj or K10, so its a bit more viable, but no better than just calling in my opinion.

---

Raising with KQs commonly gets called by AJ+, KQ, any pair, and occasional suited connectors.

You are only dominated by four of these hands. You have the better end of a coinflip against pairs (remember suited/connecting overs are a favorite to pairs). On top of that, a strong c-bet usually knocks out most of the pairs.

If you aren't raising with KQs then you have a leak, IMO. Just don't expect to call any raises and you should be fine with it.

I disagree completely, of course it depends 100% on the tables you are playing. I play relatively tight tables and a raise and C-bet w/ a couple of big cards like KQ is extremely transparent and a -ev play. W/ KQ you are either taking down a small pot w/ top pair or w/ a c-bet. You are also losing big pots against 2 pair or better or AQ or AK.

But you might ask, what about when you hit a big hand like a flush or straight w/ this hand? Well, in this case why do you want to raise preflop and thin the field? I play KQ like it is, a drawing hand. Limp in and hope for a big hand. If you hit top pair, bet small and hope to take down a moderate pot, if someone comes at you hard get out. Personally, I think this is the best way to play KW. At lower limits you can play this like a big hand and get paid off against people that call freely preflop but fold easy post flop. But you could have pulled this move w/ any 2 cards!

There are always exceptions though, I personally like to raise w/ this hand when the entire table folds to me and I'm up against 1 or 2 players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dpe8598

I disagree completely, of course it depends 100% on the tables you are playing. I play relatively tight tables and a raise and C-bet w/ a couple of big cards like KQ is extremely transparent and a -ev play. W/ KQ you are either taking down a small pot w/ top pair or w/ a c-bet. You are also losing big pots against 2 pair or better or AQ or AK.

But you might ask, what about when you hit a big hand like a flush or straight w/ this hand? Well, in this case why do you want to raise preflop and thin the field? I play KQ like it is, a drawing hand. Limp in and hope for a big hand. If you hit top pair, bet small and hope to take down a moderate pot, if someone comes at you hard get out. Personally, I think this is the best way to play KW. At lower limits you can play this like a big hand and get paid off against people that call freely preflop but fold easy post flop. But you could have pulled this move w/ any 2 cards!

There are always exceptions though, I personally like to raise w/ this hand when the entire table folds to me and I'm up against 1 or 2 players.

---

I suppose it depends on what you mean by lower limits.

I play 25nl and 50nl, and over 20k hands KQ is just as profitable as AK for me. If you have the postflop sense to know when you are dominated, then you can do some real damage with this hand. You just have to understand that you are a 40/60 underdog to any Ace and you're dominated by AK/AQ/AA/KK. Once you get over that its smooth sailing.

You must only raise with QQ+ AQ+, I am attempting to deduce from what you have wrote. This is a safe strategy, but if you're playing against me, and PAHud tells me you're PFR% is 3.5, and you raise preflop, I am folding just about anything other than AK and KK+. Raising with hands like KQs allow you to smear that tight image a little bit, so you don't get all folds when you catch a great hand.

Those are precisely the blinds im talking about. There you can raise w/ KQ and it is profitable. At 50/1 to 2/4 it is an entirely diff story.

With respect to what I raise with, I will raise w/ anything. I raise w/ AQ pretty frequently, but not always. I will also occasionally limp w/ AK. On the other hand, I will raise w/ a variety of other hands like 66 - AA and a lot of suited connectors. You can build a loose image faster by raising w 24os and then buying a pot and showing than by raising w/ a variety of face cards, trust me.

Overall, I have found it tremendously more profitable to play aggressive post flop as compared to preflop. If you are thinking about moving up levels, take this advice! Usually, when you raise preflop and then c-bet, players are just thinking about ways that that hand DIDNT hit your hand and they are trying to put you on a c-bet. On the contrary, when you call a bet and then bluff, players are trying to see how the hand did hit you. This wasnt true about a year and a half ago and still isnt true at some of the lower levels, but is becoming more prevalent. Players are just wising up to the raise and c-bet (which actually helps when you do hit your hand and makes it more profitable to avoid slow playing and represent a buy).

I've actually found it to be more profitable to raise. Check and then raise huge on the turn representing a slow play. This is the "new" c-bet. Sure you are vulnerable to the extra card, but you are representing a tremendously stronger hand than the regular c-bet.

Quote:

---

I disagree completely, of course it depends 100% on the tables you are playing. I play relatively tight tables and a raise and C-bet w/ a couple of big cards like KQ is extremely transparent and a -ev play. W/ KQ you are either taking down a small pot w/ top pair or w/ a c-bet. You are also losing big pots against 2 pair or better or AQ or AK.

But you might ask, what about when you hit a big hand like a flush or straight w/ this hand? Well, in this case why do you want to raise preflop and thin the field? I play KQ like it is, a drawing hand. Limp in and hope for a big hand. If you hit top pair, bet small and hope to take down a moderate pot, if someone comes at you hard get out. Personally, I think this is the best way to play KW. At lower limits you can play this like a big hand and get paid off against people that call freely preflop but fold easy post flop. But you could have pulled this move w/ any 2 cards!

There are always exceptions though, I personally like to raise w/ this hand when the entire table folds to me and I'm up against 1 or 2 players.

---

1. KQ/KQs isnt a drawing hand. In position it is a strong hand. Out of position it is a dangerous hand if not played properly.
2. If you play tight tables then why arent you raising KQ? you should effectivly be raising both 89s and KQs and c-betting to take take down a number of small pots repetitivly. On a tight table your raisng rnge should be wider as opps will not call beyond the flop even preflop at times without a hand. Thus your fold quity with any two is so much higher. You arent trying to out camp a camping table. Your trying to pray on their weaknesses.
3. C-beting forces opps into a decision, no matter what they have. Checking does not force them into decisions or makes their decision far easier. Put pressure on opps to play poker.
4.Ifyou are scared of AQ/AK then you arent noticing the sign of being beat or arent controlling you pot very well. Top pair isnt a license to print money but if you are raising KQ in position then if a player behind you has a better hand thats tough luck! It happens. Utilise position more than thinking about 'what if'
5. If you arent getting paid with top pair by more moderate hands then you arent playing enough hands imo to encourage action
6. You need to understand the dynamics of a tight table and c-betting.
A tight table wont like someone who raises every third hand, they WILL get pissed eventually and you start getting policed. Also, c-betting when your range is wide forces opps to start playing their hands. Show them your hand range is wide and dont check when you OBVIOUSLY hit nothing BET! Then if you raised 89s and not KQs and hit trip nines on the flop but bet anyway opp has to decipher the strength of your hand. If you dont ever ask opponents to make decisions, they wont make BAD ones when you put pressure on them.

the only time I play KQs as a drawing hand is when a player who always habitually minbets preflop with AA does his thing. Then I will call his bet a hope to flop trips, twopair, straight or flush. But people at the limits you guys play probably aren't dumb enough to minbet AA preflop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renton

the only time I play KQs as a drawing hand is when a player who always habitually minbets preflop with AA does his thing. Then I will call his bet a hope to flop trips, twopair, straight or flush. But people at the limits you guys play probably aren't dumb enough to minbet AA preflop.

---

now there you would be very much mistaken :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miffed22001

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renton

the only time I play KQs as a drawing hand is when a player who always habitually minbets preflop with AA does his thing. Then I will call his bet a hope to flop trips, twopair, straight or flush. But people at the limits you guys play probably aren't dumb enough to minbet AA preflop.

---

now there you would be very much mistaken :)

---

mistaken for making this play against minbetters?

or mistaken that there aren't people that play that dumb @ 2/4? :D

the second option
the first isnt that bad...

Hi Miffen, very good post w/ 6 important points. These are good points for someone who is looking to play good solid poker. However, this style of play is not the MOST successful for me at the tables I play.

First, understand that when I say the tables I play are tight, I don't mean the players are pushovers. I mean they are playing near the exact brand of poker you are playing. Of course, there is a lot of variation, but they are trying to play solid poker. This is because these are players that have beat the 25 and 50 tables and are looking to keep this up.

Because of this, the typical preflop raise w/ big cards and c-bet, even in position, is a very transparent play. This is why for this particular hand I'm looking to take down moderate pots w/ top pair and draw to big pots, against more players, with straight or flush.

The trick with KQ is understanding that it's a 3-card hand.

It gets me in trouble in limit because there are times where I can check behind Ax and be good, but KQ forces me to fire the last barrel. Not so much of an issue in NLHE.

As far as pre-flop goes, my starting hands look something like this:

AA
KK
QQ
JJ-66
55-22
AK
Other stuff I'll play sometimes.

Fnord I thought you had a fairly loose game, a la 20-22 vpip. Not true?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renton

Fnord I thought you had a fairly loose game, a la 20-22 vpip. Not true?

---

That has less to do with my previous post than you probably think.

Fnord, my starting raising hands are pretty much just like yours. Of course throw in that I will also limp and limp raise with any of those hands. Finally, I will also raise w/ any other 2 cards on rare occasions, but I only do this to build image or against specific players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dpe8598

Finally, I will also raise w/ any other 2 cards on rare occasions.

---

I like to play hands that might flop something worth playing. Kinda hurts your chances when you start with air and are slim to none to get much better.

Agreed, which is why those are rare occasions eg., an unusual table with push overs post flop or I'm sure that a loose image will pay me off at that table.

Then again, you can always go to another table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fnord

The trick with KQ is understanding that it's a 3-card hand.

It gets me in trouble in limit because there are times where I can check behind Ax and be good, but KQ forces me to fire the last barrel. Not so much of an issue in NLHE.

As far as pre-flop goes, my starting hands look something like this:

AA
KK
QQ
JJ-66
55-22
AK
Other stuff I'll play often when in position and/or in isolation against a poor player

---

FYP

My thoughts on KQo:

easily dominated
worse then AJo
often unplayable
automuck to a preflop raise

but

often good enough to play, particularly opening from MP on. My tight image helps tremendously. I don't like getting action with this hand.

vpip over last 30k+ hands with KQo is under 50%

KQs:

severely overrated by many, but definately more playable then KQo under many situations. Suitedness doesn't help as much as the AJs/AQs type hands. I certainly think Fnord overvalues this hand.

I dunno, but saying KQ plays like AK is just absurd. It doesn't.

KJo and QJo are generally just useless trash. What are you looking to hit with these hands? Can they withstand any pressure postflop, even when they hit??

Fnord,

you're right. I most certainly am a nit.

For the record, all written above is assuming full ring games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lukie

For the record, all written above is assuming full ring games.


[/quote='lukie']

good job u stated this.

Quote:

---

KJo and QJo are generally just useless trash. What are you looking to hit with these hands? Can they withstand any pressure postflop, even when they hit??

---

Isnt this why we raise in poition when the texture of the specific hand suggests so?

Quote:

---

I certainly think Fnord overvalues this hand.

---

Im not going to agree to this either....
i think thats multitabling fever though...

---

I didn't say it plays exactly like AK

I said it plays exactly like AK postflop. Obviously KQ can't stand any pressure preflop. Obviously you can't call a shorty's all-in with KQ. Obviously you shouldn't raise with KQ UTG. But once you get past preflop, it generally plays similarly.

I really disagree.

The primary problem w/ raising w/ KQ is that you are narrowing the field to a few choice hands that either have you beaten or dominated. Even the other newby donk hand to over play (AJ) has KQ beaten preflop. That doesnt mean you can't play it or throw in a raise w/ top pair, but you most certainly have to play this top pair differently post flop than top pair w/ AK. AK cannot be outkicked, period. Big difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miffed22001

1. KQ/KQs isnt a drawing hand. In position it is a strong hand. Out of position it is a dangerous hand if not played properly.
2. If you play tight tables then why arent you raising KQ? you should effectivly be raising both 89s and KQs and c-betting to take take down a number of small pots repetitivly. On a tight table your raisng rnge should be wider as opps will not call beyond the flop even preflop at times without a hand. Thus your fold quity with any two is so much higher. You arent trying to out camp a camping table. Your trying to pray on their weaknesses.
3. C-beting forces opps into a decision, no matter what they have. Checking does not force them into decisions or makes their decision far easier. Put pressure on opps to play poker.
4.Ifyou are scared of AQ/AK then you arent noticing the sign of being beat or arent controlling you pot very well. Top pair isnt a license to print money but if you are raising KQ in position then if a player behind you has a better hand thats tough luck! It happens. Utilise position more than thinking about 'what if'
5. If you arent getting paid with top pair by more moderate hands then you arent playing enough hands imo to encourage action
6. You need to understand the dynamics of a tight table and c-betting.
A tight table wont like someone who raises every third hand, they WILL get pissed eventually and you start getting policed. Also, c-betting when your range is wide forces opps to start playing their hands. Show them your hand range is wide and dont check when you OBVIOUSLY hit nothing BET! Then if you raised 89s and not KQs and hit trip nines on the flop but bet anyway opp has to decipher the strength of your hand. If you dont ever ask opponents to make decisions, they wont make BAD ones when you put pressure on them.

---

Thanks man, this is a very helpful post for me.

I'm still in the process of trying to figure out how to wait for my good hands, but at the same time not appear too tight, because then when they come everyone will fold.

Just one question, if I may: calling with something like 89s.. most of the time you will get nothing, so is it profitable in the long run to autobet this one postflop? What I mean is.. are you going to lose money on this hand to appear 'loose' to get money off of good hands.. or can you actually make money off of this hand alone, because opps will drop out if they have nothing (pot steal)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackvance

I'm still in the process of trying to figure out how to wait for my good hands, but at the same time not appear too tight, because then when they come everyone will fold.

---

What stakes are you playing? If you are a t reasonably low stakes then dont worry about it. Sure the good players will notice you are tight, but you arent generally going to be taking alot of money from them anyway. Poor players dont seem to notice anyway. If you find yourself playing on tables where everyone folds then change tables (or just start stealing every other hand until they are forced to l0osen up).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelion

What stakes are you playing? If you are a t reasonably low stakes then dont worry about it. Sure the good players will notice you are tight, but you arent generally going to be taking alot of money from them anyway. Poor players dont seem to notice anyway. If you find yourself playing on tables where everyone folds then change tables (or just start stealing every other hand until they are forced to l0osen up).

---

I played at lowest stakes ($0.05/0.10). Tripled my money up to $30 pretty quickly. Then I really should have left, cashed in my money and started again at $10 another table. But I got this thing over me like "what a bunch of idiots".. so I stuck around and somehow this "overconfidence" stooped me down to their level and I started playing the crappiest hands possible "because maybe I get lucky". Then I proceeded to lose all my winnings in betting against a reraise of a passive player.. yeah, really stupid.

So I collected my wits, and slowly crept up again, stealing pots etc, up to $18. Then the same thing happened again and I started to play like a complete idiot again. Kept playing and ended the night with like a $4 net loss.

Damn I have some major leak in my game, in the psychology department.. so now I made a checklist of common "thoughts" (like "I got gotta get THIS GUY's money") and play-styles (calling a lot) that signify I'm losing it and should refocus. Hope this'll help me in the future.

Jack, you are also much too concerned about specific sessions, like "I went up so I must have been playing well" and then, I lose money so "I must have been playing badly". At your level, just play good solid poker with ZERO exceptions. Then, don't worry about the wins and losses for particular sessions. Keep telling yourself, "I am playing solid poker, I WILL win money in the long run".

Well, you are right ofcourse, but I'm too new to be able to convincingly tell myself I have to play "my game".. 8 days ago I played my first NLHE game ever, so I don't have much to go on yet. Yesterday played my first session for real money, $5 loss. Today again, $5 loss. But the previous MTT where I landed just outside ITM had really worn me out.. probably shoulda rested before going at it again, but it's so much fun you know :)

I put $60 (now $50 left) in my account and am totally willing to let this all go in the sense to learn the game.

In MTT I have already a slight bit of an idea of what my game is.. in ring games not yet. Takes time I guess..

Playing massive amounts of full ring hands will fine tune your ABC poker ability, that is, how to play under optimal conditions:

1. Fairly equal and deep effective stacks (100bb)
2. Full tables (9-10 players)
3. Predictable play.
4. Tight play reigns.

It will also boost your bankroll in a much less swingy way as opposed to MTT's. Once you master the low level ring games, you should have no problem excelling in the first levels of tourney play. After that, however, is when loosening up and being aggressive needs to happen.

I've been playing ring games at the 6-tables max now. (there a lot more of them where I play, as opposed to only a handful of 10-seaters if I recall correctly)

Problem with this tight play is.. however bad these players might be, they do know the basics of keeping track.. if I play very little hands, they seem to fold whenever I do make a stand. Even a small raise. So yeah, then I can steal a pot with a bit of aggression, but then I'm not playing tight anymore you know.

But I really shouldn't jump to conclusion, I was too out of it, couldn't focus anymore after the MTT. I think I'm gonna do something else now and call it a day.

do NOT play 6-max, until you get better.

Play full ring. You can't play tight in 6-max. Its much more difficult for a tight player to excel in 6-max IMO.

heres a KQ played oop, that i treated like AK once i saw the pf action. thots?

i wanted him to bluff at the end, i was certain i was holding the best hand.

#Game No : 3757530990
***** Hand History for Game 3757530990 *****
$100 NL Texas Hold'em - Thursday, March 16, 19:15:55 ET 2006
Table Carpe Diem (No DP) (Real Money)
Seat 3 is the button
Total number of players : 9
Seat 1: roybo680 ( $122.65 )
Seat 3: Marmitekite ( $125 )
Seat 4: cityfox ( $121.44 )
Seat 5: bmb013 ( $94.25 )
Seat 7: torpeda ( $97.55 )
Seat 8: TonsKGB ( $79.75 )
Seat 6: siknd ( $135.13 )
Seat 10: takechan ( $79 )
Seat 9: luckychuck21 ( $34.06 )
cityfox posts small blind [$0.50].
bmb013 posts big blind [$1].
TonsKGB posts big blind + dead [$1.50].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to siknd [ Ks Qd ]
siknd calls [$1].
torpeda folds.
TonsKGB folds.
luckychuck21 calls [$1].
takechan folds.
Marmitekite folds.
cityfox calls [$0.50].
bmb013 checks.
** Dealing Flop ** [ 6s, 7c, Kc ]
cityfox checks.
bmb013 checks.
>You have options at Table 96972 Table!.
siknd bets [$5].
>You have options at Table 97503 (No DP) Table!.
luckychuck21 calls [$5].
cityfox folds.
bmb013 folds.
** Dealing Turn ** [ 7h ]
siknd bets [$7].
luckychuck21 calls [$7].
** Dealing River ** [ 5h ]
siknd checks.
luckychuck21 bets [$17].
joeleves has joined the table.
siknd calls [$17].
luckychuck21 shows [ Kh, Jd ] two pairs, kings and sevens.
siknd shows [ Ks, Qd ] two pairs, kings and sevens.
siknd wins $60.50 from the main pot with two pairs, kings and sevens with queen kicker.

For what it's worth,

I fold pf, sometimes check the flop but often pot it, $10 on the turn, river plays the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renton

do NOT play 6-max, until you get better.

Play full ring. You can't play tight in 6-max. Its much more difficult for a tight player to excel in 6-max IMO.

---

I tend to think that new players should play both full and short-handed games to

a) get better at both, what happens when a few people leave your full-ring table? It effectively becomes a 6-max game...
b) figure out what you like most

I am also of the opinion that tight play can be extremely effective at 6-max. I think lagg/maniac play is severely overrated by many (most?) players in shorthanded games. I understand that you can't play as tight as full ring and still be profitable in short-handed games.

Miffed,

KQ isn't a drawing hand? If it isn't a drawing hand, isn't it a made hand? Does king-high win a lot of pots at showdown?

but then, heres another where i couldnt take advantage of a small edge. i was pretty certain that there was a good chance opp only held the ace of clubs, but it wasnt worth it to me to find out. considering small pot, i wanted a bigger edge.

#Game No : 3757548558
***** Hand History for Game 3757548558 *****
$100 NL Texas Hold'em - Thursday, March 16, 19:18:09 ET 2006
Table Table 97503 (No DP) (Real Money)
Seat 9 is the button
Total number of players : 10
Seat 1: siknd ( $99.60 )
Seat 5: naylor09 ( $45.58 )
Seat 3: racecarralf ( $82.79 )
Seat 6: nitro17 ( $31.82 )
Seat 7: SP_73 ( $43.20 )
Seat 10: ptcruze ( $100.95 )
Seat 9: Eagle7_9 ( $97 )
Seat 2: bubba0077 ( $96.30 )
Seat 4: ButlersPimp ( $42.30 )
Seat 8: GAMBLEON13 ( $22.20 )
ptcruze posts small blind [$0.50].
siknd posts big blind [$1].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to siknd [ Qd Ks ]
bubba0077 folds.
racecarralf folds.
ButlersPimp raises [$4].
nitro17 folds.
SP_73 calls [$4].
GAMBLEON13 folds.
Eagle7_9 folds.
ptcruze folds.
siknd calls [$3].
** Dealing Flop ** [ 3c, 5c, Kc ]
siknd checks.
ButlersPimp is all-In [$38.30]
SP_73 folds.
siknd folds.
ButlersPimp shows [ Qc, Ad ] high card ace.
ButlersPimp wins $50.20 from the main pot with high card ace.
>You have options at Carpe Diem (No DP) Table!.
Game #3757557390 starts.

anyhow, ill stop cluttering up this thread

Given the effective stack size, I don't like the fold.

ok
Kq doesnt play like AK preflop. AK has a lot of fold equity preflop, or at least against reasonable players if we decide to reraise it.
Post flop KQ plays similar to AK, it makes tpgk.
Lets be honest, you shouldnt be going bust on tpgk (KQ) so why the heck are we bothered about being dominated by AK or AQ? If KQ gets raised when we have a good hand then its pretty much as useless as AK/AQ is on tpgk. We dont want pot escalation with tp at any point, so why is KQ different from AK or AQ post flop?
I dont see the arguement that OMG we might be dominated.
If you are raising in position *repeat* in position then if someone behind holds AK/AQ then were going to lose money. Its that simple. We wont be playing huge pots with tp/gk anyway, so why are we bothered about about being outkicked when in position? Thats almost the same as saying why are we raising with AQ and then betting top pair when someone might catch two pair on us?
Allowing a lot of limpers onto a tpgk type hand isnt great imo. We want to play short small pots where we raise preflop and rep the flop, no matter what cards flop.
AK also normally reraises preflop giving us a clear indication KQ is useless preflop (again, there is temptation to call a reraise perhaps with KQs, but im not convinced as im not in the same circumstance with AQs etc)
In 6 max if someone limps utg or utg+1 are they really limping AQ/AK? For a limp reraise perhaps? thats play that will get you burnt when late position players raise pps and start attacking you post flop when they dont buy it.

so, if were playing KQ its for a raise. We arent getting involved in someone elses raised pot. THEN we would face domination problems and the arguement about KQ as trash is acceptable. Instead, We want KQ up against a small field post flop after a preflop raise to thin the field. We also look to c-bet where applicable. ok checking at times is fine too but not every time. Afterall were looking for confusion on opps part. Are we checking AA or missed overs? At 200nl the same aplies as at 100nl and 50nl. C-betting is effective when used as a tactic, not as an automatic reaction.
So why are we making an exception of KQ? if we do then I'll make the same arguement for AQ. I dont reraise AK always preflop bcoz i dont like too. therefore AQ is in the smae boat as KQ isnt it?
This arguement makes little sense to me because we arent considering the position aspect of this hand. We dont raise utg with KQ, its debateable if we even call. Thus only in position do we raise and then we should be quite clear that were acting on everybody else information, they dont want to raise their hand preflop.
we just seem to be forgetting that in position we can raise a wide range of hands because our hand is much stronger thus. If people are limping AQ/AK in 6max or full ring then wtf. I want to play against such players coz my sooted trash and pps are getting such cheap outdraw odds its dumb.

Hehe I love how biondino started this thread and hasn't posted anything on here since. He probably didn't expect it to be the State v. KQ trial.

lol Renton (State vs. KQ).

IMO a great, great thread. I'm still pretty new to the forum but I think that players who are new to the game and easily frustrated by the answer "it depends" should check out this thread.

I keep hearing this talk about being dominated by AQ+.

Nobody seems to mention QQ+...

Miffed, its not so much about being worried about being dominated, its just that even after a perfect flop, you are very likely dominated by the kinds of hands that will call your preflop raise. Using your above logic, we could raise w/ any 2 cards, then throw in a c-bet and fold if the guy fights back. Against some tables that is not a bad option. However, thats not what we are talking about, we are talking about if KQ is a GOOD raising hand.

Its not

Again the problem w/ KQ is that even after an optimal flop, you may be dominated, that is not a good raising hand. You might ask, well what if I flop 2 pair or better. Well you can flop 2 pair or better with 23 suited, so that scenario doesnt even matter.

AK is SO much better than KQ, because if you flop a pair, it is the best pair out there. It can only be beat by 2 pair or better.

Now if you have a read on your particular game that a lot of people are calling raises w/ Kx trash or Qx trash, then good for you. Raise it up and take down those pots at that particular game. But, for the purposes of giving people good advice on this board, I stand by my opinion that KQ is not a good raising hand. Can you raise w/ it? Depending on the circumstances hell ya! Should it be an automatic or regular raising hand. NO.

Quote:

---

Miffed, its not so much about being worried about being dominated, its just that even after a perfect flop, you are very likely dominated by the kinds of hands that will call your preflop raise.

---

ok. No offence meant here. But do you understand position? Because if you do why on earth are you not considering it in the context of what im saying?
If dominating hands are out there
1. They raise preflop before us, so we fold (even in full ring)
2. They have AQ/AK on the button when we raise from the CO when its folded to us. That happens, are we gona make all these excuses because the button/sb/bb MIGHT have AQ/AK/QQ+? We might as well not play if we're thinking like that!
If we arent raising KQ from the CO after a bunch of limpers or when folded to us
1. We lose a lot of fold quity preflop for blind steals
2. We arent effectivly thinning the field enough to take a number of small pots. We also arent making pps pay to draw out on our hand that will most likely be the best if it hits post-flop.
3. With lots of people in the pot KQo is trash, as perhaps is AQo if we do not thin the field appropriatly (if we think about lhe strategy here and apply it some) KQs is less trash as now it has flush capabilities, but you have to be kidding me were playing KQs on the CO for a FLUSH/STRAIGHT draw in an unraised pot!
perhaps in ep we might be playing it thus, and we wouldnt be raising it there anyway, hence consideration of position.
Are you arguing then that everytime we raise KQo/s in later position that someone behind us will have a dominating hand bcoz thats just ridiculous in my eyes!? I'll get a math wiz to work that ou for us if needs be.

Quote:

---

Should it be an automatic or regular raising hand. NO.

---

at which point have i said such?
My emphasis all along has been on the idea that KQo/s varies in strength in relation to our position in the hand preflop and the action that has already occured previous to us. This is a basic arguement of poker in all its forms. Position offers a huge advantage to a player who has it, therefore we adapt our starting hands and the way in which we play them to recognise the power of position.
I havent said raise KQ always or out of position, ive stated clearly that KQ is strong in position where players in earlier positions have offered us information on their hands. :shock: :?

Quote:

---

a) get better at both, what happens when a few people leave your full-ring table? It effectively becomes a 6-max game...

---

Yeah, kinda my reasoning too. People come and go. I want to be able to assess the situation when some people leave and know how to adjust my game.. and similarly when more people join again.

Another thing is, I wanna take back the $30 my friends took from me last week.. and our house games are usually 4-6 people. Now, 4 people already plays differently than 6 people, so understanding how more players change the dynamics of the game is crucial to get a well-rounded game imho.

Quote:

---

If dominating hands are out there
1. They raise preflop before us, so we fold (even in full ring)
2. They have AQ/AK on the button when we raise from the CO when its folded to us. That happens, are we gona make all these excuses because the button/sb/bb MIGHT have AQ/AK/QQ+? We might as well not play if we're thinking like that!
If we arent raising KQ from the CO after a bunch of limpers or when folded to us
1. We lose a lot of fold quity preflop for blind steals
2. We arent effectivly thinning the field enough to take a number of small pots. We also arent making pps pay to draw out on our hand that will most likely be the best if it hits post-flop.
3. With lots of people in the pot KQo is trash, as perhaps is AQo if we do not thin the field appropriatly (if we think about lhe strategy here and apply it some) KQs is less trash as now it has flush capabilities, but you have to be kidding me were playing KQs on the CO for a FLUSH/STRAIGHT draw in an unraised pot!
perhaps in ep we might be playing it thus, and we wouldnt be raising it there anyway, hence consideration of position.
Are you arguing then that everytime we raise KQo/s in later position that someone behind us will have a dominating hand bcoz thats just ridiculous in my eyes!? I'll get a math wiz to work that ou for us if needs be.

---

Damn, I actually understand this now, while I didn't yesterday :). I think atleast.
- if there are many people with you postflop, chances are high that someone has 'hit something', ie something not so easily detectable that potentially beats your top pair. So KQo is risky to play even if it hits with many people in
- if many people are in, you're probably gonna need something better than one pair. So if you're going for a straight/flush (draw), hit 2 pairs or a set, you want as many people in as possible for two reasons:
1. more people means more likely someone hit top pair so you can take a big chunk of his money when you 'hit'.
2. more people means a bigger pot and a smaller relative input from you, which is crucial since you are playing the 'odds in the long run' here.

And the odds that someone behind you (assuming 1-2 people) will hold a dominating pair is just one of those low-odds situations that you have to live with.. in the long run (which is what mattters) it will be more than offset by the amount of times you make money off of playing these types of hands in position. The math could make this case solid but I think it's pretty obvious..

Another thing about (aggressive) raises instead of calling, which is probably obvious to all, but just to reiterate:
- It might be intuitively awkward to c-bet or raise when you don't really have something, and you might feel you are just throwing money away. But in the long run this *does* pay off. The reasons are:
1. Most of your profits will be made from the opp's mistakes anyway. So unless you raise and allow him to fold, you won't force him to make a mistake. (unless you are slowplaying etc ofcourse, but that is a strategy that should only be employed after you have a read imho, not standard)
2. The less players there are, the less likely someone will have something. So aggressive raises become profitable 'because you weed out all the suckers' (as a friend of mine put it once).
3. Added benefit is that this play-style makes your play very hard to read. You retain control because you can still fold out at any time when you sense something is up. But for your opponents, all they see is you raising all the time you decide to play a hand. You're like a stone wall, they got no real clue what you have. This might sucker someone in to chase you from frustration, taking a huge bite out of his stack when you have something. The times he outclasses you, you'll lose money, but if played properly, this will be offset by pot steals, opp mistakes (like them throwing away a winning hand), weading out the 'got lucky on the runners' hands and the times you sucker him along with him holding a second best hand.
4. If you only raise when you have something, call when you are unsure etc, even the biggest idiots WILL get a read on you. Even a dope will try a bluff and be proud of it even they sense you will fold.
5. Not advised in 10 people games because the chances are too high someone actually has something.. will only be viable when in position with a bunch of folders/limpers and weak raisers before you, and the appropriate stack sizes to be able to take a hit from the inherent fluctuations of aggressive raises. (ie, it pays off in the long run, but if a 'temporary dip' puts you out of bussiness, like in MTT, this isn't worth it)
6. Ofcourse don't go overboard with this.. ALWAYS raising, whatever happens will make your game too predictable. Then even idiots will start to slow-play you. Either you check, fold or raise/reraise. Only consider calling if there's atleast one limper before you.
7. Do not underestimate the positive effect this has on throwing off weaker opponents. Only 1/20 people on this planet are rational thinkers. Probably more in poker, but still a lot of them play on emotion, what they 'feel' is right. A playstyle like this will throw people out of their game and as their emotions start to waver they'll make more mistakes.

Btw any comments welcome.. I'm pretty new and just organizing my thoughts, so take all this with a grain of salt.

sklanskys point in lhe (correct me anyone if im wrong) is that many lhe pots go to the river. Therefore, being on the button or CO with AQo or KQo facing a lot of limpers is a debateable raise (even call) (really depends on how bad your opps are) because AQo or KQo making one pair in a multiway pot isnt very strong.
In no limit, this is adapted because we create the pot odds with AQo/KQo on the CO/button preflop. Therefore opps need odds or at least some other-pie-in-the-sky reason to call preflop when we pump it up more than 1bb. :)
Effectivly we ask them to draw to worse odds on their hands. Eg 22 limping utg in full ring facing a 6bbs raise on the CO from AK. 22 is paying the privilidge to hold up/improve against AK post flop.
Most of the rest of your post is dedicated to the DEF of poker (the bit beyond ABC :P ) so yes there are other reasons to not always raise KQo in position or bet flops etc. We could make a million more posts on such discussions.
My point was that in relation to the question, as i think you have agreed with generally, is that KQ's power or rating preflop is linked to its position preflop, perhaps more so than any other hand in poker. We can just about play it in ep for a call, we can possibly raise it in mp in an unraised pot and we should look to raise it in lp for value and protection. (positions assume full ring, where position is more clearly illustrated)

Just some good 'old smash-mouth Fnord poker...

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $1.00 BB (8 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

SB ($90.90)
BB ($34)
UTG ($100)
UTG+1 ($155.95)
Fnord ($169.35)
MP2 ($89.35)
CO ($63.95)
Button ($82.85)

Preflop: Fnord is MP1 with K:diamond:, Q:spade:.
2 folds, Fnord raises to $3, 2 folds, Button calls $3, 2 folds.

Flop: ($7.50) Q:club:, 6:club:, Q:diamond: (2 players)
Fnord bets $5, Button calls $5.

Turn: ($17.50) J:spade: (2 players)
Fnord bets $12, Button raises to $24, Fnord raises to $50, Button raises to $74.85, Fnord calls $24.85.

River: ($167.20) T:heart: (2 players)

Final Pot: $167.20

Results in white below:
Fnord has Kd Qs (three of a kind, queens).
Button has Jh Tc (two pair, queens and jacks).
Outcome: Fnord wins $167.20.

i have been seeing a lot of people these days calling on the flop with nothing... Do they just feel commited cause they called a little raise pre flop?

KQs = my second most profitable hand with 17k sample size

I don't know if this is a good thing or not...