..These are hands I call a standard open raise with from the blinds. We're assuming 2-3 players come along, stacks are relatively even, and we're moderately deep stacked(200 big blinds).

I'd like your feedback as well as your hand range/why you do/don't play these hands.

Small pocket pairs
Hands; 22-66

We're really only looking to hit a set here. That's the only true value in pairs 22, 33, 44 and 55. Though, we can approach a flop like an open ended straight draw cautiously. Any straights we make with these pocket pairs are easily counterfeited. The positive side is that if we do hit a set our hand is fairly disguised and we're able to slow play if we wish.

Mid pocket pairs
Hands; 77-JJ

As with any pocket pair, we can be fairly confident that if we hit our set we've got the best hand and can play accordingly. I don't like re-raising 99, TT or JJ out of the blinds as I'd prefer not to play a big pot out of position.

We can though, begin to play these hands more aggressively post flop when the flop leaves our hand as an overpair. We're able to trap, to an extent, especially if the original raiser is a habitual continuation bettor.

Small suited connectors
Hands; 34s, 45s through to 89s.

With suited connectors we have to be very careful. I've seen a ton of guys call with suited connectors, hit top pair or bottom two, and throw up on themselves when the board pairs on the river and gives KK a better two pair.

Very specifically, we're looking for big draws, trips and flopping a nut straight or the flush. We need to be cautious with two pair, and play them fast and hard. We're not looking to play big pots out of position with a mediocre holding. At the very least we're hoping to hit an OESD, if not an OESFD.

Higher suited connectors
Hands; T9s, JTs, QJs and KQs

Things can become a bit more interesting with these types of hands. In a raised pot, if we hit two pair with KQs we're likely to get action it--but we can be counterfeited easily.

Again though, we're looking to flop a big draw, trips or at the very least an OESD. We can feel a little better though about top two for the simple fact there's going to be less over pairs and less opportunity for our two pair to get counterfeited.

One and two gapped suited connectors
Hands; J9s, J8s, 46s, etc.

Almost virtually identical mindset as the suited connectors, though I tend to lay them down more often unless I think I can outplay the villain(s). I like to keep them lower though, if I do choose to call. I don't want to necessarily be making this call with KJs or KTs.

Suited Kings and Suited Aces
Hands; KXs, ARs.

I'm really only really hoping to hit a flush/flush draw with these hands. Either that or trip up my kicker. In certain cases I don't mind drawing my ace to two pair if I think I can stack one of the villains, but, it does become a bit of a risky proposition as people tend to overplay Ax sooooooted.

Again, I'm looking mainly at flush possibilities with these hands.



Hands I will not call a raise with from the blinds in a 2-3 way pot; AT, KJ, AQ, AJ, QT, KTo, 22 (depending on villains), Q9, Q8, QJo and most any 3 gapped cards.

remind me on AIM later to respond to this.

Word.

OK, that was such a huge, well thought-out post, that i feel guilty that im only gonna respond in a waffling, drunken manner, but youll have to forgive me - im from England...

I agree with most of your criteria and reasoning.

small pps, obvioulsy, no set, no play. As you tell us to assume 2 or 3 callers in front of us, i call as standard with any pair, get odds for the set. i find it interesting that u say the only value in pairs 22-55 is a set - personally i would extend that up to 77 or even 88, as there are few flops that we can consider ourselves ahead with 66 etc in a 4-way raised pot.

i agree that the medium ps (for me 88-jj) are not genrrally to be reraised - it would achieve very little, other than to isolate us in a situation in which we are probably behind. there is an argument for reraising with JJ, dependent on your read of your opponents. It is one of those hands I hate, as it can lose u so much money, but a reraise , and then aggression on the flop if we have an overpair (but being prepared to lay it down if we are raised significantly) can be ok in certain situations...

When it comes to suited connectors, i will generally only play 67s and above. You briefly outlined the dangers of getting too attached to shit like 34s - easil;y counterfeitable even if u hit your dream flop, and the odds of flopping a OESFD, 2 pair, or a straight, dont really make it worth it, IMO.
67s-9Ts play like small pps for me - if I dont hit em big, im out - 2 pair is the minimum, but a 9Tx flop, will almost certaily make a straight draw for at least one of your opponents, so proceed with caution.

Not a big fan of suited 2-gappers, as gutshots can look dangerously pretty in a 4-way pot...Ill usually lay them down PF, as again we need to be hitting at least 2 pair to proceed. They do however have the advantage of being better disguised if we do make our str8 - who's gonna give us credit for exactly 68s?

Would you play Axs and Kxs the same? Maybe its because I play predominantly Omaha, but I hate hate hate Kxs. I know most of the time in HE a king-high flush is good enough, but I still seem to lose an inordinate amount of cash with it. I find that people are too willing to call with A x with 3 s on board. also it raises the same problem as Axs, that if we hit our pair, or even 2 pair, many other hands we could be up against have a decent chance of making a better one.
I just think that with Kxs, our good hands aren't good enough often enough to make a call of a PF raise justified. Im more than happy being the agresor with it in decent position, tho.

I think our position is horrible to be calling with Kxs. say we hit a K-high flop, or one with 2 of our suit - how do we proceed as first to act? If we bet, we will almost certainly be raised by the original aggressor, and maybe a reraise to come after, so we then have to fold. If we check, we will have the same bets/raises, but with no idea where we are in the hand.

Well, that's how I play anyway - excellent post, made me think about my own play, instead of just slagging off other peoples, so thanks a lot!

I'm only going to highlight the pieces where i have something different/more to add. A lot of the hands you posted were common.




I we stratify these even further to be jj-88, I think we have extra value on flops with rags and a low face card due to the propensity for people to raise with any PP due to televised tournaments. (Although I raise them all the time, but htat's for a different reason). The key in playing these is that we're looking to take down pots on the flop and we need to pick the right players. We need to pick passive players who will fold if we apply pressure and will raise if they've got the goods. Pointless to try to play these hands out of position against a very aggressive player that will reraise any attempt on our part to take the pot down.



i need atleast 3 other people in the pot for me to really want to play this hand. calling with these OOP seem to just bleed me more than anything.




I'm not looking to play flush draws OOP. By being OOP, we are unable to control the pot and ensure that we are able to achieve the payout we require in order to make our implied odds acceptable for this hand. I am reraise A suited hands some times in SH games, but very opponent depedent there.



I may play AQ, AJ and qjo from LP raisers and we're atking the flop heads up. Obviously not calling form the rock, but I think enough people try to steal blinds that calling here is fine.

Good post. I agree with most of your selection process. I put a lot of importance on how many players we expect to see the flop with.

I am not going to see a flop heads up or 3-way with 22-66 or any suited gappers. The likelihood of hitting a straight with 810 is surprisingly less than 89. Surprising to me atleast.

On the flip side, I will get a bit liberal in let's say a 4-6 way pot. Not with what I call trap hands (K9, Q10, J8, etc.), but I will likely then see the flop with any suited ace, and most suited one or two gappers. Never a three gapper. I will also see with AQo, AJo. I am looking to hit my Q or J as top pair more than my ace, or obviously a straight or top two.

I definately agree with this, especially the bolded sections. In a loose game with a lot of preflop action, and several players to the flop I definately will play most suited gappers/connectors, as these hands play better as more people heads see the flop.

On occasion, I will take a heads up/ 3 way flop with a small pair, but usually only when it's facing a LAG or late position raise, and a call also from late position.
(i.e. CO seat and button) I generally don't like doing it when there are early position limpers ahead of the raise, as the possibility of the limpers re-raising and shutting me out of the pot is greater.

I'm always fairly tempted to defend my blind with cards that I deem to be live (small connectors, gap-suiters) but less willing to call a raise when I could be dominated (higher connectors/gappers such as K-J or Q-J)

Usually my only exception to this will be J-T, as it holds greater possibility of making the nuts than say K-J.

This is clearly solid advice. (I'm going to stay away from 34s in this situation, but that's a very minor point, and I may be just wrong.)

What's interesting to me is how closely this follows my strategy for any time I'm against a raiser and 2-3 callers. Am I not giving enough consideration to position? Does the discount compensate?

I don't think that's it. Consider these two very different situations:
[list]
[*]Raise. Call. Call. Hero calls from big blind.
We're "out of position", but we have a couple of very good things going for us positionally.

First, we're closing the action preflop. We're not going to call the first raise and then get blasted out by a big re-raise.

Second, (as I learned from Ciafone's book), we have good position relative to the raiser. That is, we get to see how the field reacts to a continuation bet before we act again. If we can count on the raiser to bet or raise, then we can let the draws and such call his bets and then re-raise with our set, for instance.

[*]Limp. Limp. Raise. Hero calls from button. Call. Call.
We're "in position", but not so much really.

First off, we have to anticipate the calls from the other players. We might even face a limp-raise.

Second, we have to act first after the raiser, whose action and holding is the most predictable of all the players. We really don't much information to work with if it's checked to the raiser who then bets.
[list]
Blind play is the most unique when it's a single raiser vs. a blind. Then there's no field to act in between, and our positional disadvantage is complete. As Scott pointed out, the position of the raiser (whose standards presumably go down closer to the button) becomes a big factor here.