Suited Connectors

I generally play suited connectors all the way down to 54 in any position and will play gapped (J9) from late position. In SS2 Doyle says that he would even play with 2 and 3 gapped connectors from any position (T7,96), while Harrington wouldn't even touch them unless the pot was playing multiway. Anyone have any thoughts on how they play these hands pre-flop? Calling raises? Would you raise once in a while for deception?

Thanks!

Originally Posted by Lodogg

I generally play suited connectors all the way down to 54 in any position and will play gapped (J9) from late position. In SS2 Doyle says that he would even play with 2 and 3 gapped connectors from any position (T7,96), while Harrington wouldn't even touch them unless the pot was playing multiway. Anyone have any thoughts on how they play these hands pre-flop? Calling raises? Would you raise once in a while for deception?

Thanks!

I think you are using SC too much. I can’t see how they could be profitable from any position. You need position to play these.
IMO the criteria for playing them are:
Passive game such that you can draw cheaply… then fishy enough to pay you off when you hit.
3 or more people in the pot. If you play SC from EP then how do you know how many will see the flop?
To call a raise you need position on the raiser.

I will raise them in LP so I can buy the button…then throw a C-Bet on the flop.

So you are playing 54s in first position?

I agree with Eric that I am maybe using SC too much. The more I read Brunson's book, the less I like it. He has great points on being aggressive post flop, but his pre-flop strategy seems a little odd. Would you play suited gapped cards from multiway late position?

Brunson's book is for NL cash games where everyone has a deep stack (100BB) and you're getting the implied odds to hit your hand with a suited connector (if you hit vs a big pair, you're going to get paid off).

Harrington's book is for tournaments where the stacks are a lot shorter compared to the blinds and you're not getting the implied odds with suited connectors.

I'll easily play Sgappers from LP with enough people in the hand and for the right price. The beauty of gappers is that the implied odds are higher since the straight is more hidden. 58,79 and similar hands in LP are just a joy to get.

Best suited connectors imo
T9 98 78 76 56
all in lp possibly the first two in late mp. Also add J8/J9
I generally dont see a flop with these unless there is a reasnable amount of dead money in the pot. I want to win big pots with these not itty bitty little ones, especially if i forced to chase with marginal odds. Again in a multi way pot its more likely I'll get odds being in lp

Thanks for the advice everyone... It has been really insightful. Would you play Axs the same way? Only from late position and with the right amount of pot odds?

{This post has been removed}

Originally Posted by Ripptyde

Doyle is a fish

:P

I'll abstain on that one.

Originally Posted by Lodogg

Thanks for the advice everyone... It has been really insightful. Would you play Axs the same way? Only from late position and with the right amount of pot odds?

You have a roughly 6.5% chance of catching your flush by the river. If the odds are right then yes.

If there are lots of players in the pot and you play 56s and people hang around with a flush on the board - do you really want to be in a big pot? I'm hoping to hit the straight on these unless I can peg somebody isn't on the same flush draw.

I play SC when I can limp from LP, or I may raise from any position when I have the stacks.

Axs is the same.
Imo too many people go round calling raises with Axs and then chasin away at the flush. Two problems. One opp often has an ace in a raised pot, so your ace is basically a rag you can do little with. 2nd, almost zero drawing opertunities with Axs and many of those a raising of has too, eg wheel draw. So, suited connectors have much more to offer in that sense. Indeed, if you peg opp on missed overs and ou hit a pair you can bully too. So id call raises with suited connectors with enough dead money in the pot but calling raises with Axs is not such a good option imo unless you have a seriously large amount of dead money in the pot.

Originally Posted by Ripptyde

Doyle is a fish

Originally Posted by WildBobAA

Brunson's book is for NL cash games where everyone has a deep stack (100BB)

I remember reading a part of SS2 where he said he would move in preflop with nothing after a preflop raise and a couple of callers. Seems weird he would do that with 100BB plus.

Originally Posted by rebuyman

Originally Posted by WildBobAA

Brunson's book is for NL cash games where everyone has a deep stack (100BB)

I remember reading a part of SS2 where he said he would move in preflop with nothing after a preflop raise and a couple of callers. Seems weird he would do that with 100BB plus.

Why? I do this all the time. He's representing aces or kings here. If he puts the original preflop raiser on something less than that, how the heck can they call him? Umm, they can't. He scoops 12-16 BB.

Would it then be better to limp in with suited connectors from LP when you have 2 callers in front of you and see if anyone raises after that (raise 4x bb or a little more). If there are at least 3 callers after the 4x bb then would it be correct to call to call that bet with SC from CO or Button??

Originally Posted by EricE

I think you are using SC too much. I can’t see how they could be profitable from any position. You need position to play these.
IMO the criteria for playing them are:
Passive game such that you can draw cheaply… then fishy enough to pay you off when you hit.

How about HU vs tight player (range of raising hands AA--->AQ) who has a full stack and so do you? With position?

If the table is extremely Loose Passive I'll play them in any position. You probably won't get raised preflop and you'll probably have lots of people tagging along.

Sometimes, when there is a Tight Aggressive player I have a good read on, I'll limp-reraise with suited connectors in early position when there aren't any other players left in the hand. No way they put you on those cards.

Originally Posted by m3laNcholy

How about HU vs tight player (range of raising hands AA--->AQ) who has a full stack and so do you? With position?

I have certainly done it. The trick is knowing when to get away from it and cut your loses. Against a tight player his most likely holdings are unpaired broadways. So you start out with that expectation. At times I have continued to push it with him check/calling only to find out he had AA, KK or other PP to beat me. It’s a tricky place to be that I don’t often do anymore. But I am no authority. Worth a try though.

Originally Posted by AHiltz

You have a roughly 6.5% chance of catching your flush by the river. If the odds are right then yes.

What a flawed (yet common) way to look at the value of being s00ted.

Originally Posted by Fnord

Originally Posted by AHiltz

You have a roughly 6.5% chance of catching your flush by the river. If the odds are right then yes.

What a flawed (yet common) way to look at the value of being s00ted.

What an unhelpful post

Originally Posted by biondino

What an unhelpful post

NH sir.

For what it's worth there is a search function that usually can bring up a wealth of prior debate when I make a post like that. I just don't care to go 200+ words deep on the subject right now or spawn off this debate yet again.

However, I won't let bad advice from regular posters stand without comment...

Originally Posted by Fnord

Originally Posted by biondino

What an unhelpful post

NH sir.

For what it's worth there is a search function that usually can bring up a wealth of prior debate when I make a post like that. I just don't care to go 200+ words deep on the subject right now or spawn off this debate yet again.

However, I won't let bad advice from regular posters stand without comment...

I am going to throw a yellow flag here, too, Fnord.
If you don't want to write 200 words about it, you have to at least point people to search words/key posts/FAQ whereupon they can learn the truth.

Otherwise you might as well just post "ur wrong. do u see why?"

I'll let others elaberate.

Originally Posted by AHiltz

Originally Posted by Lodogg

Thanks for the advice everyone... It has been really insightful. Would you play Axs the same way? Only from late position and with the right amount of pot odds?

You have a roughly 6.5% chance of catching your flush by the river. If the odds are right then yes.

Well, for one thing you can’t get 6.5% pot odds. There are only 9 other people in the ring so you can only hold a 10% share of the pot, at most. So playing Axs can’t be about pot odds. Playing Axs must be wholly about implied odds. Action often dries up when a flush hits so the implied odds aren’t that good. The best you can hope for is to be up against another flush that is willing to push it all the way. Your tables have to be pretty fishy to make Axs worth it and you have to remember what you saw a flop for. A split pair of As with this hand is not worth anything…You will lose more with it than you will win. So its two pair or better just to play past the flop.

I feel a 200 word post comming up. Where is the teqila?

There you go.