startin hands from this site.

[projectb36]

Hey guys, i've been wondering why you would play KJ differently than KJs. on this site of starting hands , it shows to play KJ in late with a small raise and call a small raise, while the KJs shows to play in any position but fold to any amount of raise, how can this be when the KJs is clearly a better hand.

[ttanaka]

Both are pretty weak, both you could limp in, both I would fold to a raise, both you could raise in late position to attack the blinds.

[Humphrind]

I agree with ttanaka. It's been a while since I have read the starting hands essay on the main page. But I can comment on what I think about KJ.

I have called half my stack with KJs before. So keep in mind that when playing in tournaments (as I usually do) it's all conditional. But as a general rule, for a beginner wondering how good KJ is. Here is my rules.

KJ suited and off from early position on a full table is a fold.
KJ suited is a raise from late position in an unraised pot.
KJ off is a limping hand from late position in an unraised pot.

And as I said before, but I want to re-stress. It is conditional. If you ask any poker question, the answer will most often be, "It depends." The same is true for how to play KJ. The rules I gave are very general.

{This post has been removed}

[Hotel_Detect]

For some reason I feel like I rake in a ton of pots with KJ.. like more so than with KQ ... maybe i know how to get away from it easier?.. I havent been using pokertracker so i am not even sure if this is reality, but I have started limping with KJ at all times, and raising in position.. even calling raises sometimes..

[Fnord]

I see similar results. I think it's because you tend to bring in the weaker hands from better position and are less inclined to chase overs or stand down lots of aggression.

Per KJ vs KJs. It pays to be suited. If I'm going to be a dominated bitch, I may as well have a flush draw to take off some of the sting.

[Toasty]

I think the main problem with KJ is most of the time you get action you are dominated and hence win a small pot or lose a big one.

[Fnord]

I think the main problem with KJ is most of the time you get action you are dominated and hence win a small pot or lose a big one.

In NL it's almost a hand hand. Big unsuited unwired cards want a raised pot to cut off implied odds against your likely pair. However the dominated offsuited cards are even less likely to be good when they hit that pair and will tend to only get called by better hands.

[Krapp]

One other note:

Its ok to limp in with KJs in early position. You would fold KJo in early position. I guess they extra 2% and the high-flush draw makes it worthwhiled....

[kidpoker22]

I think it's ridiculous to say that you should always limp w/ KJ, or that you should always fold with KJ. Different situations merit different plays. In the big weekly NL tourney of PS, I would ALMOST never play KJ except maybe on the button or B v. B. In a tight game, KJ won't play well unless you flop huge to it. In a poor/loose game, KJ plays better because your odds are exponentially higher. In a good/solid game, the reverse implied odds with a hand like KJ are brutal.

[Humphrind]

I think it's ridiculous to say that you should always limp w/ KJ, or that you should always fold with KJ. Different situations merit different plays.

And as I said before, but I want to re-stress. It is conditional. If you ask any poker question, the answer will most often be, "It depends." The same is true for how to play KJ. The rules I gave are very general.

I agree with you.

[Toasty]

Good point, I try not to make 100% all the time PF decisions and it depends on the type of the game I'm in what I'm willing to raise/call in what position.