Off Beat Starting Hands

[chewybarber 0]

Ok, so I know the big starting hands. But, I think I win more with the off beat hole cards. For example, I might win a few bets holding QQ when the board hits duds, but I really seem to win when I’m holding something stupid like 92o and the board comes down 99K and the opponent has something like AK—or I have a hidden straight etc.Obviously the big starting hands win big too. But, what I want to ask if you guys play the odd starting hand just whenever, or if you have developed a strategy for playing these hands. Being a noob I usually play them on occasion (gamble) or if I have position.

[MasterLJ 0]

92os is a horrible hand that should never be used.Hands like 56 suited and low pp are hands that are "sneaky" that can be played profitably in position, in multi-way pots... even to raises.

[trystero 0]

92os is a horrible hand that should never be used.

yup, you think you'll win a lot with 92o when the flop comes 99K but many players are able to fold AK there. Many players OTOH aren't able to fold 92 when it's obvious that villain has trips with a better kicker.At lower limits the most profitable hands besides KK/AA, IMO, are sets because 1) donkeys love to overplay TP and 2) it's, somewhat paradoxically, correct to go the distance with overpairs (the range which most opponents are on is so wide that folding AA on a 2 5 J board is almost impossible). So you can stack both good and bad players rather easily.

[James D 0]

Never be calling raises pre-flop with hands like 92 off. It's just gonna get you into a world of hurt, long term.I mean, if you're playing an MTT or even SnG, and you're a big stack playing aggressive on the bubble, then you can maybe raise with any 2 cards.If you're playing cash games, you can see flops in position (even OOP can work actually, if you have good post-flop strategy) with suited connectors/2 gap connectors like maybe 57/86 and small pairs to a raise for set value, but only when you think it's a profitable play if you hit the flop hard, on your particular table.Never worry if you have folded a terrible hand like J3, and the flop comes JJ3. Theres tonnes of times when you'll fold a hand like AQ after a pre-flop bet/re-raise/all in call - They showdown AK v JJ and the flop comes QQ5. But it doesn't matter, because you have made the correct fold.Just don't be tempted to play useless hands generally, unless you have a tremendous read against someone, in position. Even then, I don't think it's ever adviseable, because even if you hit 2 pair with extreme junk hands it can get you into big trouble.

[simo_8ball 0]

If the 92 is sooooooooooooooooted though......

[chewybarber 0]

Isn’t extreme to say, “Never play ______, pre flop!”? If you only play top ten hands and connectors, then aren’t you limiting yourself? I see the reason for playing only top ten hands and connectors the majority of the time, but to say that is all you’ll ever play—ever—seems extreme. Oh, and 92o was just an example, I haven’t even played that hand, maybe in the BB—89o I have.Let’s say you sit down for a couple of hours, and the majority of the time you’re playing top ten hands and an occasional connector. You win a few bets here and there, some big some not so big—you loose a few too. Now during that time you play off beat hole cards once an hour. The first three times you miss the flop and fold, no big deal, you’re out the blinds or a small raise. But, on the fourth hour you’re off beat hand hits big—in my limited experience, nobody puts you on that hand, especially if you’ve been playing top hole cards, and the result is often having someone move in big and being caught by surprise—and of course the, “You idiot, 92o! You lucky moron!” Who is the moron? In my opinion, this type of play is tactical. It is an attempt to catch on opponent off guard in the short term for a big gain; and really, there isn’t much risk.I would be really surprised to find out that no big money winners try this from time to time.

[James D 0]

To answer this question, it would be possible to write a full dissertation. Hard to explain complete hand selection here because it involves so many various factors, such as-No. of players (6/9/10 handed)-Position -What types of players are at your table (who's on your right, left etc?)-Table Image-If it's a tourney, what is your M (Chip stack in relation to the blinds)-What stakes are you playing/What is the buy-in-What specific reads do you have-Are you getting great odds/great implied odds to call pre-flop with a marginal hand, after many players have entered the potetc etc...For example, you talk about the 'top 10' hands... but these really don't matter for much. You can't just play your cards obviously, without taking in the action around you. So, if you are dealt AQ (is that a top ten hand?). You can't just play it regardless, and it's an easy fold in certain situations pre-flop.However, if you are first to enter a pot, you could enter for a raise with say, 96 suited. Or, like I said, if you are in a tournament playing aggressive big stack poker, it sometimes doesn't matter what 2 cards you have if you have position and good reads.Essentially, the point is that whatever 2 cards you play, there must be a REASON for playing them, however bad they may be. You can't just decide to say, 'hey I'm gonna just call a raise with this 49 out of position because I've got a good feeling about it'.Mixing up your play is good, and especially if you have built up a solid table image it can definately be profitable to change up your play.

[Actuary 3]

no chewy, playing hands like 92 off is never a good strategy as you put it. There are plenty of playable, raisable hands that have much higher EV that will keep your opponents on thier toes.Hands like 92 are long term losers, regardless of what you think based on a few times they have hit big. One reason hands like 92 suck is there really aren't a lot of boards that both connect with your hand and any other hand that would be willing to give you much action.

[TheCinciKid 0]

I disagree. I won a huge pot with 83o in a live 6/12 game last night, cracking Aces in the process. These are great hands to play b/c nobody puts you on them and you can get away cheaply if you miss. I think you guys should be playing offbeat starting hands more often. Thanks.

[Zach6668 513]

I disagree. I won a huge pot with 83o in a live 6/12 game last night, cracking Aces in the process. These are great hands to play b/c nobody puts you on them and you can get away cheaply if you miss. I think you guys should be playing offbeat starting hands more often. Thanks.

QFT.

[James D 0]

I disagree. I won a huge pot with 83o in a live 6/12 game last night, cracking Aces in the process. These are great hands to play b/c nobody puts you on them and you can get away cheaply if you miss. I think you guys should be playing offbeat starting hands more often. Thanks.

So random though, to just say you should be playing more offbeat hands. It's all so dependent on the table/situation/other players.The biggest single pot I have ever won was with 52o. But I was in the BB, after early positon raise and many callers. So I was getting great odds/implied odds to complete. Flop came 552. If I had been second to act, I would never have played the hand to a raise and I it would have been fishy of me to do so.I assume the same for your 83... there would have been a reason for you playing it that particular hand.But yeah, if you're not playing huge pre-flop pots with junk, then you can crack big hands, of course.

[Zach6668 513]

So random though, to just say you should be playing more offbeat hands. It's all so dependent on the table/situation.The biggest single pot I have ever won was with 52o. But I was in the BB, after early positon raise and many callers. So I was getting great odds/implied odds to complete. Flop came 552. If I had been second to act, I would never have played the hand to a raise and I it would have been fishy of me to do so.I assume the same for your 83... there would have been a reason for you playing it that particular hand.But yeah, if you're not playing huge pre-flop pots with junk, then you can crack big hands, of course.

52o?You must have been playing in Thunder Bay.That hand is called "Big Thunder", or the "Thunder Bay Special". It never loses. Seriously.I folded it on the flop, from my BB once, face up... flop was like AK9 or something... dealer shakes his head. He goes, you are going runner runner straight, guaranteed. Turn 3, river 4. loooool.

[James D 0]

52o?You must have been playing in Thunder Bay.That hand is called "Big Thunder", or the "Thunder Bay Special". It never loses. Seriously.I folded it on the flop, from my BB once, face up... flop was like AK9 or something... dealer shakes his head. He goes, you are going runner runner straight, guaranteed. Turn 3, river 4. loooool.

Lool..My best friend has a 'signature hand' ala Bill Fillmaff, it's the 5 3 of diamonds specifically. He goes crazy and starts singing the Bond theme tune (Diamonds are Forever) if he wins with it - which he always seems to, seriously! - ,.. but it's in a certain way, on the 'forever' part where he goes up to a high pitched squeal and rolls the 'r'... I don't think I could pull it off, but it's mucho funny

[Zach6668 513]

Lool..My best friend has a 'signature hand' ala Bill Fillmaff, it's the 5 3 of diamonds specifically. He goes crazy and starts singing the Bond theme tune (Diamonds are Forever) if he wins with it - which he always seems to, seriously! - ,.. but it's in a certain way, on the 'forever' part where he goes up to a high pitched squeal and rolls the 'r'... I don't think I could pull it off, but it's mucho funny

lol, we all laugh now, but there are seriously regulars who play 52o religiously.. it's f'ing hilarious, and just adds to the softness of the game.

[TheCinciKid 0]

So random though, to just say you should be playing more offbeat hands. It's all so dependent on the table/situation/other players.The biggest single pot I have ever won was with 52o. But I was in the BB, after early positon raise and many callers. So I was getting great odds/implied odds to complete. Flop came 552. If I had been second to act, I would never have played the hand to a raise and I it would have been fishy of me to do so.I assume the same for your 83... there would have been a reason for you playing it that particular hand.But yeah, if you're not playing huge pre-flop pots with junk, then you can crack big hands, of course.

Yeah, I guess my post needed an SW for the sarcasm challenged. I guess I was also trying to be a little tongue-in-cheek or smash-esque as I of course want my opponents playing as many "offbeat" starting hands as possible. As far as my 83o hand from the other night, I was in the BB and called a raise blind in a huge pot. Flop had a 3 in it, so I was getting odds to continue for one bet, turn brought another 3 and I cracked Aces with 83o. I really don't reccomend playing that hand though, unless of course you're playing at my table.

[chewybarber 0]

no chewy, playing hands like 92 off is never a good strategy as you put it. There are plenty of playable, raisable hands that have much higher EV that will keep your opponents on thier toes.Hands like 92 are long term losers, regardless of what you think based on a few times they have hit big. One reason hands like 92 suck is there really aren't a lot of boards that both connect with your hand and any other hand that would be willing to give you much action.

I respect that you are the stronger player; however, I think your position on this is too static. I don’t agree that a person should never play off beat starting hands, and by off beat I just mean something other then those hands commonly accepted as being good e.g. AA KK AK QQ AQ JJ 1010 etc.I liken you’re position here to that of those who advise players to adhere to similar absolutes like raising 3x BB with a good hand, or using the button to exert pressure etc. All these things are good, but they aren’t always good, and rarely good at the limits I play. For example, I have found at my limits raising 3x BB the majority of the time you have a good starting hand is just a good way to give away money. (You’ll note how often some players cry that no one respects raises—well, change.) In my opinion the tendency of players at my limit to be calling stations negates the purpose of raising 3x BB pre-flop—rarely are people going to get out even with the raise, and therefore the point of my raise becomes moot. So, if I continue to do this despite what the table is telling me, I’m just being a poker robot, and complaining when my programming fails.By the same token, when the table tells me over and over that the majority of people there will see the flop with any ace, any two face cards, any single face, any pair and any suites, and everyone calls pre-flop up to me, it might be a good time to see that flop with the off beat hand, I’ve certainly got nice pot odds.

[Actuary 3]

Yeah, I guess my post needed an SW for the sarcasm challenged.

nope.and 83 >>>> 52.You make higher TP with 8. Your kicker is also better, 50% higher.83 is a 2nd tier hand, not exactly the junk hand category we're debating.

I respect that you are the stronger player; however, I think your position on this is too static.

that respect is useless if you don't try to learn,My post clearly states I would not stick to the top 10 hands,I play QT off all the time, for example. That hand actually connets quite often against other hands that connect, but not as well. you just have to play well post flop.And you should always raise strong hands, especially whe they will call with worse hands, You are raisng for value and the more you do it, the less likely your opponents will put you on specific hands.What you are doing is simply joining the herd by limping in with junk. You can still come out a winner by folding a lot post flop and taking your big hands against those that won't fold; but it's still less than you make playing better hands and making raises preflop and still playing well post flop.Don't mistake winnig money in bad games for playing well. You can suck and still win. You'll win more playing better, though.

[James D 0]

Yeah, I guess my post needed an SW for the sarcasm challenged.

nope.and 83 >>>> 52.You make higher TP with 8. Your kicker is also better, 50% higher.83 is a 2nd tier hand, not exactly the junk hand category we're debating.that respect is useless if you don't try to learn,

Yeah... ok boys and girls. Expected.Not just saying it, but I genuinely thought it was sarcastic. However, I chose to answer straight basically cos this isn't general.And, after all... this is the written word. I have no clue anything about you and it could be serious: fact.But don't worry, it's all been noted... and you will be the victim of my lack of writing 'sw' sometime in the future. I promise

[trystero 0]

For example, I have found at my limits raising 3x BB the majority of the time you have a good starting hand is just a good way to give away money. (You’ll note how often some players cry that no one respects raises—well, change.) In my opinion the tendency of players at my limit to be calling stations negates the purpose of raising 3x BB pre-flop—rarely are people going to get out even with the raise, and therefore the point of my raise becomes moot. So, if I continue to do this despite what the table is telling me, I’m just being a poker robot, and complaining when my programming fails.

This isn't true at all. The point of raising is to put money in the pot when you've got the best hand, not to drive people away. What good is AA if you just scoop the blinds? Yes, you want to isolate, but you primarily want to get a lot of money in the pot ASAP. I play at your limits - I just started grinding at $10 NL, and after 2000 hands guess which ones are my most profitable?AA 8 times 87.50% 11.91 BB/handQQ 7 times 85.71% 9.36 BB/handKK 5 times 100% 9.20 BB/handAnd this includes today's downswing when AA and QQ lost to flushes (both as flopped sets, sick).

[chewybarber 0]

What good is AA if you just scoop the blinds?

I don't know, I've never just scooped the blinds with a call.

Yes, you want to isolate

Ok, then there is some truth to what I said.

but you primarily want to get a lot of money in the pot ASAP.

The reason you raise is to represent strength, and the reason you represent strength is to drive out what might currently be weaker hands that could develop strength during play. Do I hope someone calls? Yes, but the brunt of my raise is to drive off weaker hands.Oh, and I did say (the majority of the time) in other words, in my opinion, at my levels, raising most big hands 3x BB isn't a great play. That being said, I do raise many hands pre-flop, just not as often as I might if I were either playing at a higher limit, or in a tourney. Anyway, the point of this thread was about when if ever some people might play the off beat starting hand, and it seems that the majority are just dead set against it.

[trystero 0]

The reason you raise is to represent strength, and the reason you represent strength is to drive out what might currently be weaker hands that could develop strength during play. Do I hope someone calls? Yes, but the brunt of my raise is to drive off weaker hands.

No offense but you some serious misconceptions about poker. I suggest that you study the game more so you'll understand that putting money into the pot when you have the best hand is mathematically sound. You do not raise primarily to 'represent strength.' (I say primarily because, yes, there are times when you're obviously not holding the best hand and want villain to lay his hand down; this is bluffing or stealing). You raise primarily for value.Suppose I'm holding the nuts on the flop and you bet. Let's say the flop is K72 rainbow so therefore I'm holding KK. Do I raise because I'm trying to represent strength and drive you out of the hand? No, I raise because I want to you to give me more money and I think you will. Let's say you're a novice who's holding KJ. Likely you'll have trouble folding your top pair. At this point I'm about a 95% favorite to win, so naturally I'll try to get as much money in as possible while the odds are on my side.The same reasoning holds for AA pf. You've got the best hand - now try to get your money in the middle. Suppose I'm holding KK. You raise to 3x the BB and I repop you to like 10x the BB. Well, at this point you can just move in and be a 4-1 favorite if I call (which I will). All accomplished by playing your hand fast and hard.You study and learn the game so that you know when folding AA postflop becomes correct. This is what separates decent players from donkeys. A case can be made for playing JJ softly pf at the lower limits, such as when there are a bunch of loose / calling station limpers in front and you're in the BB. Maybe even QQ (not from me, though). But not so for KK. Definitely not so for AA.

Oh, and I did say (the majority of the time) in other words, in my opinion, at my levels, raising most big hands 3x BB isn't a great play. That being said, I do raise many hands pre-flop, just not as often as I might if I were either playing at a higher limit, or in a tourney.

Again, we probably play the same limits. Right now I'm at $10 NL (blinds of .05/.10 cents). I open 3x BB with big pocket pairs all of the time and have no trouble thinning the field. If there are limpers I simply raise it up even more. At a loose table from early position I'll pop it to 5x the BB. And there's a ton of evidence to suggest that this is the most profitable way to play big pocket pairs. At all levels. If you're not getting enough folds from 3x the BB then obviously you need to raise more.

Anyway, the point of this thread was about when if ever some people might play the off beat starting hand, and it seems that the majority are just dead set against it.

The concept you're explaining is that of implied odds - and I'm sure everyone here values that greatly, as it's at the heart of NL's profitability. The majority's problem, as I understand it, was in using a total trash hand like 93o as an example. Just two hours ago I called a raise on the button with 87s from an UTG raise which came from an extremely tight player. The flop came down 887 and he moved in. Of course there was some other idiot in the hand who took forever to think of what to do so that my router disconnected and I didn't win any money whatsoever. But the point still holds.

[Zach6668 513]

Reason for raising:VALUE.Most players don't understand this. They don't want callers when they raise with AA. You do. You want to raise with AA and if you get called by 9 players, you are making a ton of money.I don't really have a ton of time to get into why what you said was wrong, but listen to trystero.EDIT - and he even posted while I was replying... read it, learn it, love it.EDIT 2 - my AA example refers to a limit game. getting 9 callers in NL sucks, only because it's very hard to play postflop, but you could still turn it into a profitable situation if you were amazing postflop.

[rog 0]

Hands like 93o should never be played because they dont bring enough value. Anything less than 2-pair is not really good enough to continue with post-flop with a hand like 93o. Unpaired cards flop 2-pair or better about 3% of the time. 97% of the time your preflop investment is wasted. There's no way to make those 33 limps you ended up folding, not to mention the times you get raised.AA should be raised for value preflop in almost all circumstances. AA loses equity as callers increase, but doesn't lose it as quickly as the pot grows, so your EV goes up as more callers join in. Thinning the field with big pairs is more of a tournament concept since your tournament life is at stake. In a tournament you dont mind limiting your upside to reduce your risk of busting by thinning the field and giving up a little EV. In a ring game you make whatever play has the highest EV.My advice to you, OP is to listen to the advice people here have to give. Your ideas are silly to an experienced poker player. If you go on to become a good poker player, these ideas will seem silly to you in retrospect. Do yourself a favor, and absorb the lessons being taught here.

[mtdesmoines 3]

Hands like 93o should never be played because they dont bring enough value. Anything less than 2-pair is not really good enough to continue with post-flop with a hand like 93o. Unpaired cards flop 2-pair or better about 3% of the time. 97% of the time your preflop investment is wasted. There's no way to make those 33 limps you ended up folding, not to mention the times you get raised.

This is gonna piss people off. My range of hands flexes with: • table texture • opponents • ratio of cost to call to total in pot • how I am "running" • recent "flop texture"Generally, I have to have connectors or a gap connector, to play under J 10. And I won't play anything worse than a one-gapper under 10 unless it comes to me for free (in the BB). And when that happens, I might consider a 4x BB raise to collect the small blind, because I'm beat at the flop 90% of the time. Depends on the strength of the SB.Lately, I've been seeing about 45% flops in short-handed games. But it's only because I've been on a little bit of a heater and my reads in the last six months have just been sick, sick, sick ... and when your reads are on, the value just goes up up up. I've very, very rarely stuck chips in a pot where I was behind. Anyway, I've been playing some higher stakes lately (over my roll ... and I'm gonna hear about that, too, I'm sure). When I do that, I play a lot fewer hands. Somewhere around 15 - 20%.But no matter what you're playing, hands like 9-3, J-4, 10-2, 8-3 are total crap .... you're going to lose with them over time. Those hands never reside within my range of hands.

[Zach6668 513]

• how I am "running" • recent "flop texture"

I'm not gonna comment on these