KQs is MUCH better than KQ?

So we keep being told that having two hole cards that are suited only makes them slightly more likely to win. However I believe that KQs is in Sklansky Group 2, whereas KQ only manages a lowly group 4 position. I realise that KQs is a very easy hand to play (or to fold ), but why the enormous difference in usefulness?

I quite often see people calling a shove with KQs in tournaments, which to me seems quite courageous. Should I be calling shoves with KQs? I would probably be more likely to call a shove with a middle PP than KQs.

If I'm not mistaken, the Sklanski Grouping is based on Fixed Limit Hold 'em. You can just toss the whole ranking system goes out the window in No Limit, doubly so when you're talking tournament play. IMO, KQ is a great short stack shoving hand and a reasonable calling hand when facing a short stack all-in, especially after the anti's kick in. Other than than that, I don't even like calling a raise with KQ, suited or not. It's the most dominated hand there is. AIPF, KQs is only a couple of points better than KQo and doesn't even enter into my decision making when considering a preflop shove or call. Barring some opponent specific situations, the only suited hand I'll call a single preflop raiser with is with a suited Ace as when you do have a draw it's to the nuts, and you're very likely to stack the guy who fell in love with KQs.

It adds 3% equity having the flush draw.

Four Dogs, just a reminder, we dont need to nut peddle ever hand, second nut flush is a pretty solid hand to have.

It is, but the reverse implied odds for high suited hands like KQ, QJ etc can be pretty frightening. Even experienced players have a hard time getting away from non nut high flush hands and draws. People just tend to overplay suited hands in general. I'm no exception. In every case from KQ down to TJ, my unsuited hands have out performed their suited equivalents.

Only fish fold KQs preflop to a single raise.

Anyone who says this doesn't know what they are talking about. It's a great thing about poker, when people spout off stuff like this or say AK is a "drawing hand" or "a coinflip at best" you know instantly they are a moron.

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 48.602% 46.15% 02.45% 726995188 38646676.00 { 66+, A4s+, K8s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T9s, A9o+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo }
Hand 1: 51.398% 48.94% 02.45% 771031140 38646676.00 { KQs }

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 48.810% 48.40% 00.41% 1297725036 11107188.00 { 66+, A4s+, K8s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T9s, A9o+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo }
Hand 1: 51.190% 50.78% 00.41% 1361528652 11107188.00 { 88 }

Of course this and the "3%" is just hot-cold/all-in pre equity. There's no guarantee you will get to see all 5 cards; obviously if you fold on the flop, you are folding some non-negligible amount of equity. Being suited enables you to win more pots because:

A. you continue on more boards, making a better hand
or
B. enables you to take down more pots without a hand

i.e. you call raise on button with KQ spades. Board is Ts 7h 2s. You call on your flush draw and can hit a spade or K/Q for top pair or running cards J/9 or A/J for a straight. With KQo on that board, your equity is much lower and whatever equity you have, you get shut out of when facing a big bet.

Then you are playing some bad poker?

yeah, you are doing something really wrong.

Well, maybe. I'm a winning player. Are you?

LOL, that's solid.

Your sample size must be very small because you are making fundamental mistakes.

over a 100 hands. Good enough?

You realize, that this is the worst arguement you can make when someone critizes your play. I'm sure Baudib is a winning player and I believe I have won as well. So what is your point?

This kinda post will be what stops you from beating mid stakes incomparison to micro and low stakes. So continue.

haha, yeah, totally.

Look, poker isn't like painting or poetry. It's not a subjective, personal pursuit where goals and aims and tastes are different for everyone. Actions are either +EV or -EV or 0EV.

If we had enough information and could accurately account for every element including game flow, history, image, tilt factor, etc., then we could know precisely what we should do in every hand. The only things really to argue about are whether the incomplete information we have can be accurately assessed and how to then apply that informatio.

Anyway, there are areas where there is no debate possible. This is one of them. Suited cards are more profitable than unsuited cards of the same rank.

It is a bad argument and has nothing to do with leaks. Everyone has them. Keep in mind that I've been playing for many years and I've gone through many many playing styles, some better than others. My remark to baudib was based more on his smug insulting tone than anything else. I mean, you better have some decent street creds if you're gonna call someone you know nothing about a fish, right? I did follow up with a quick OPR and PTR check. It was kinda about what I figured it would be, maybe a little worse. He should keep his advice to himself.

you are, in fact, a fish. RIO for KQs and QJs, really? Unsuited hands are better? KQs/QJs are top 8% hands, if you aren't playing them, what are you playing? Furthermore they each play better postflop than stuff like 99 that's "ahead."

FWIW I'm up $10,700 on OPR between Tilt/Stars (incomplete results; it breaks down to $8,400 w/23% ROI on Tilt and $2,300/39% on Stars, the Stars account is missing probably 3 years worth of data for some reason), don't know about PTR (I can't log in).

Well Dude, I don't care what your OPR and PTR is because at the end of the day if you are making statements like the one above regarding a hand, someone is going to point it out. Regardless of if they say, oh poor baby or ****ing fish guy, it doesnt matter cause it is a valid point.

I dont care what baudib's PTR is, he made a legit comment and your reponse is childish at best.

I do no care how long you post here, or what cred you think you.

I dont care about any of that, no one does. All we care about is pointing out a flaw in your logic.

So with this, I concluded and will point out, you are coming off as a mighty doucher.

If someone you "respected" on this forum, makes that same post, do you respond differently?

I'm down $550 on PTR over 62K hands!

What flaw. Baudib is saying that calling with KQs vs a single raiser is better, IE more profitable, than folding. I strongly disagree. Rather than just say, "Your a fish!", why not support your statement with facts, or results, or anything that even sounds well thought out. So why don't you and your sidekick explain to us fish how it is that you show a profit in this situation. I'd be very interested.
Go ahead.

Look at his post, make a rebudle. If you disagree say why, he provided equity calculations etc. in a post up there.

Ill give you a hint, it is post number 5

Hey, I'm game. I'm not going to spell it all out for you because, well, there's not much to say except that KQs is a kickass hand that flops incredibly well.

but to steer you in the right direction

Vs. a standard TAG who opens from MP or later

overall we're flipping (hot-cold equity-wise) with a range of, say, any pair AT+/A5s+/KT+/QT+/K9s+/Q9s+/J9s+ (that comes out to 19.5% of hands)

BEFORE THE FLOP we're actually behind 70% of the time but once the flop comes out we've moved ahead to 43.6% of the time, we'll improve on 4.2% of all turn cards to take the lead there, as well.

-- If we flop:

Top pair, we have about 78% equity vs. his range

Any pair (i.e. AKx or AQx boards), we have 70%

A pair with a flush draw, we have 84%

A flush draw with overs, we have ~56% equity vs. his range

An open-ender (JTx), we have 45.4% equity

A gutshot over with overs (T9x), we have 38%

Not to mention the times when you flop better than 1 pair.

I'm sure you can figure out on your own how being in situations like this would be profitable.

Your logic is bad and your advice is dangerous. I said I don't like calling a single preflop raise with KQ suited or otherwise and you replied that "Only fish fold KQs preflop to a single raise". That's what you said. Then you spout of some poker stove equity calcs that show how KQ does in an all-in situations as if that has anything to do with calling a preflop raise. Further more you used a range that gives the same weight to 66 and A4s as is does to the hands that are most likely to be raising such as AJ-AK and QQ-AA. Try plugging those hands in and see how you you do.

I stand by my statement that barring some specific situations, calling with KQ suited or not to a single raise is bad poker. You say that's fishy but then go on to give a very specific situation yourself. That's hardly negating my statement. The fact is that as pretty as KQs is, in a majority of the cases your going to be entering the the hand with an inferior hand. You may be ahead in those time you flop TP in which case you're not likely to get much action. When you're facing AK, AQ, AA, KK you're going to lose alot more than you win.

The fact that you don't like it doesn't make it unprofitable. To not play KQs means that you must play about 7/3 and that's pretty damn fishy.

I also mentioned that KQs plays far better postflop than hands midpairs that are "head."

I also showed how dominating KQ is against a pretty standard generic range on numerous flop textures.

Hands like AJ+/QQ+ don't come around very often. That's 5% of hands. Standard raising ranges comprise 15%-30% of hands. It sounds like you are a standard nit who has trouble reading hands and suffers from MUBS.

It is simply not a fact that KQs is an inferior hand. It is a top 5% hand, and I'll ask again, if you're not playing KQs, what are you playing?

I gave a pretty standard/normal range, some people raise 2% some 45%. 20% is pretty normal.

All hands fare poorly vs. the top of someone's range. But when you're facing KJ, KT, K9, QJ, QT, JT, not to mention the fact that you have tons of equity vs. stuff you're "behind" like AJ/AT/A9/JJ/TT/99, you are going to win a lot more than you win.

As for talking about specific situations, you're the guy who talked about RIO with KQ when you make a flush! FFS! If you can't profit off making the second nuts and ANY flush in general you need to rethink what you're doing.

Like I said, there is 0 room for debate on this issue, so it's not a matter of differing opinions or theories. KQs is a super profitable hand that should be played from all positions vs. almost all players. You are simply mistaken.

If you want to talk about 3-bet pots, then you would be correct in a lot of cases.

According to a study of 120 million hands on Pokerroom, of the 169 "unique" (AcAd is the same as AsAh) starting hands, 40 of them are profitable:

Pocket pairs 55-AA

A3s+

ATo+

KTo+, QJo

K8s+

T9s, JTs, Q9s+


Here are the groupings by profitability:

Top 5 hands (50% of profits): AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AKs

Top 6-14 hands (earns 30% of profits): TT, 99, AQs, AJs, ATs, AK, AQ, KQs, KJs

Top 15-26 hands (15% of profits): 88, 77, A9s, A8s, AJ, AT, KT, K9s, KQ, QJs, QTs, JTs

Top 27-40 hands (earns 5% of profits): 66, 55, A7S-A3s, K8S, KJ, KT, Q9s, QJ, J9s, T9s

Four Dogs, I don't know what stakes you play, but in micros and low mid-stakes playing hands like QJs and KQs are super profitable. Easy to get away from with too much heat (the passive players will let you know if you're beat) and good enough to rake nice pots when the fish play Kx and Qx.
Also they have the possibility of flopping big draws + power hands etc etc

You do realize, that comments like the ones below are what very likely put people off making some strategy/in-depth poker posts, right? Now, I know FD is a big boy and can handle his own, but why would you want to belittle instead of make valid counterpoints?

etc., etc.

Tone of this thread needs to change now.

In my db when calling a preflop raise I am up 80BB/100 with KQs and DOWN 125BB/100 with KQo. Pretty clear cut to me.

Overall both are winners but KQs is a much bigger winner (50BB/100 vs 8BB/100).

My 500K hand sample gives the clear edge to KQs.

So KQ loses when calling a pre-flop raise, but is marginally profitable for you overall.

Poker Stars - $0.01/$0.02 No Limit Hold'em (7 players)
Poker Stars Hand Converter Tool from CardsChat.com

SB Hero: $3.80
BB: $3.31
UTG: $2.30
MP: $1.95
MP+1: $6.09
CO: $2.74
BTN: $5.20
delwing - Sitting Out

Pre-flop: ($0.03) Hero is SB and dealt
2 folds, MP+1 raises to $0.08, 2 folds, Hero calls $0.07, BB folds

Flop: ($0.18) (2 players)
Hero checks, MP+1 checks

Turn: ($0.18) (2 players)
Hero checks, MP+1 checks

River: ($0.18) (2 players)
Hero checks, MP+1 checks

Final Pot: $0.18

Showdown:
Hero shows (two pair, fours and threes)
MP+1 shows (two pair, fours and threes)
Outcome: MP+1 wins $0.18

Times have changed A LOT since Doyle wrote Super System. It's now a historical document and can teach you VERY little about how to play poker today.

KQo yes. KQs is profitable in both situations and KQ is profitable overall.

I agree completely, definitely the least useful poker book that I have encountered so far, but I still think that Baudib is being a little harsh when calling somebody a moron or a fish for stating things that are widely held beliefs. Misguided maybe, moronic no. People come here looking for advice, so they are obviously aware that they are not experts and are not claiming to be so.

Best not to slowplay KQs

Poker Stars - $0.01/$0.02 No Limit Hold'em (8 players)
Poker Stars Hand Converter Tool from CardsChat.com

SB: $4.29
BB: $4.34
UTG: $1.38
UTG+1: $4.83
MP Hero: $2.13
MP+1: $1
CO: $1.20
BTN: $2.90

Pre-flop: ($0.05) Hero is MP and dealt
2 folds, Hero calls $0.02, MP+1 checks, CO folds, BTN calls $0.02, SB calls $0.01, BB checks

Flop: ($0.10) (5 players)
SB checks, BB checks, Hero checks, MP+1 checks, BTN checks

Turn: ($0.10) (5 players)
SB bets $0.08, BB folds, Hero raises to $0.34, 2 folds, SB raises to $0.94, Hero raises to $2 (All-in), SB raises to $3.06, Hero calls $0.11 (All-in), SB returned $0.95

River: ($4.32) (2 players)

Final Pot: $4.32

Showdown:
SB shows (a set of kings)
Hero shows (a full house, fours full of kings)
Outcome: Hero wins $4.11

What's up with the limp preflop?

Also this thread really shouldn't be for beats/brags concerning KQ.

I thought that somebody had already limped, but I think it was probably the person after me had posted the BB because they couldn't be bothered to wait.

Feel free to delete any offending posts. Didn't realise posting rules were quite so tight around here, but whatever, no problem for me.

all depends on the game and specifically on how many cards you will likely see


it's certainly not a tourney life hand, unless you are truly short stacked ... even then i would prefer a pair or an A

i agree that it is very powerful in limit holdem, but in no limit, it is much trickier

in cash it's pretty good, b/c you are far more likely to see all 5 cards, whereas in no limit, if you just call with it, then you will be facing a continue bet and at certain points in tourneys you don't want to pay to be in that position ... unless you have a good read on your opponent ... it would almost be like if you are gonna play it, then 3 bet pre

Doyle ships AQs for $150K into pot of $14K