AJ and AT debated with facts from the tables

OK< here we go folks,

$1-$2 NL $400 effective, 9 full ring, 17,339 hands aprox 542 hours in live game


hand #dealt $earned $/hand
ATo==165==$24== $0.15
ATs==54==$659==$12.20

AJo==155==$345==$2.23
AJs===55=$1411==$25.65

There's absolutely no contest between the suited and unsuited AT/AJ. The unsuited version earns but with huge flux and the result between both of them according to by way of approaching "printing" money at the poker table, not worth the effort and headache. Plus on top of all this, playing only the suited variety reduce the number of playing too many hands in the first place by a factor of 3:1. Being suited gives us a huge advantage in volume pots full of fish where having the nut kicker, nut flush or even just drawing to the nuts. (don't forget, in 1/2 games we have like 3+ dudes seeing the flop with us, so being suited is huge)

I`d also like to add,,the sky is blue and grass is green

The stats are nice, but what are you trying to prove, that suited cards are better than unsuited? Did anyone doubt that?

I think OP is saying we should fold AJo/ATo pre and only play the suited variants?

Numbers are wrong. Suited only adds something like 3% additional equity. Again its not an argument whether suited hands are better, they do add 3% equity but this is completely made up.

What OPs number reflect is that having 2 to a flush makes your hand 11 times better in the instance of AJ and 81 times better with AT. I cant see how anyone will actually believe this.

I really am curious where OPs numbers come from. They are in no way near correct. I'm all for having a debate here but you are being way too stubborn on a point that just doesn't have any merit and worse yet, you are making up stats. Please post the source of those numbers.

Regardless you need to open AJo, ATo because otherwise you would not really get paid with your stronger hands, at least online where all the stats are easily seen. So you can't just pinpoint them out of their suited variants. You made some profit you did good, even small loss might be ok probably to widen the ranges.

Also against fish, you should be able to do profit with almost any two cards....

Marginal said:

Numbers are wrong. Suited only adds something like 3% additional equity. Again its not an argument whether suited hands are better, they do add 3% equity but this is completely made up.

What OPs number reflect is that having 2 to a flush makes your hand 11 times better in the instance of AJ and 81 times better with AT. I cant see how anyone will actually believe this.

I really am curious where OPs numbers come from. They are in no way near correct. I'm all for having a debate here but you are being way too stubborn on a point that just doesn't have any merit and worse yet, you are making up stats. Please post the source of those numbers.

Click to expand...

All is wrong because the 3:1 ration of AJs vs. AJo doesn't translate in actual play. Why? - Well, because AJs plays big pots while AJo doesn't survive in big pots. The most AJo wins preflop or on the flop with top-pair a small pot.

But obviously you and many opponents don't know how to handle NL Hold'em. Sad but true. Have you ever played a big pot on the river when your AJo got action on every street and won the pot? -

However, what you're talking about is playing AJs vs. AJo cold without any betting after the preflop. So, we have one bet preflop and then we deal the entire board all the way to the river. Ye, AJs wins 5% more then AJo. This is the result if Poker Stove software of 52% vs. 47%.
Have a nice day

Aces74 said:

Stats show online favors suited heavily ....

Click to expand...

If you play all the unsuited AJo of 12 combos and I only play 4 combos of AJs and fold the other AJo even blind regardless of the action before me and even in the blinds. I just put them right into the muck without not even calling $1 in the SB. How do you like that? - Well, I make far more money with less hands played.

Che said:

All is wrong because the 3:1 ration of AJs vs. AJo doesn't translate in actual play. Why? - Well, because AJs plays big pots while AJo doesn't survive in big pots. The most AJo wins preflop or on the flop with top-pair a small pot.

But obviously you and many opponents don't know how to handle NL Hold'em. Sad but true. Have you ever played a big pot on the river when your AJo got action on every street and won the pot? -

However, what you're talking about is playing AJs vs. AJo cold without any betting after the preflop. So, we have one bet preflop and then we deal the entire board all the way to the river. Ye, AJs wins 5% more then AJo. This is the result if Poker Stove software of 52% vs. 47%.
Have a nice day

Click to expand...

this is my last post. No AJs against a random hand only has 3% more equity than AJo against a random hand. So your results do not make sense.

I think that we all already know that suited cards have better chance than unsuited. If you want to compare AJ suited and AT suited, I think that all will agree with me that AJ suited have better chance to win but poker is a tricky game. You could never know for sure.

Marginal said:

this is my last post. No AJs against a random hand only has 3% more equity than AJo against a random hand. So your results do not make sense.

Click to expand...

Why do you have any posts to him? Seriously though.

Marginal said:

this is my last post. No AJs against a random hand only has 3% more equity than AJo against a random hand. So your results do not make sense.

Click to expand...

Ha ..., ha..ha ha ha ha ha LOL:elefant:

Suited only brings marginal better equity than off suited. this is a proven fact. If you are folding A10o and AJo in the SB to an unopened pot, you are in fact losing money.

TheNutz4You said:

Suited only brings marginal better equity than off suited. this is a proven fact. If you are folding A10o and AJo in the SB to an unopened pot, you are in fact losing money.

Click to expand...

Obviously everybody on this forum is a very nice guy. I mean it. You all learned playing from the books and that's why argue with me. You all trust and believe the book because you;re not aware that the books have written by con man. Why an expert poker player will write a book related to poker strategy that makes money in the first place. You guys never put that question. Just read and fallow the book recommendation and in the process lose your money.

I give you an example:
I sat this: "If you don't flop, if you miss the flop, you got very very small chances to win the hand for a significant amount" - That's the fact, Jack
To prove this we make an experiment: We play by the following simple rule:
9 handed ring game, NL 500 effective. Any one of you guys play guarantied only premium hands. Any hand but do not benefit of the flop, turn or river cards. Another words, the dude with the premium hand plays his two cards vs. the entire table that each one has to choose help from the board combine with his pocket cards. You can play every hand AA/KK or QQ and still lose if you miss every hand the flop/turn/river.

This game is a FLOP game. Your strategy has got to be build around this principle. Now, I'm not gonna tell you guys how is done. But this is the big secret. Who you guys think makes more money: AA vs. AK on a flop of Axx or the AA raising so much that blow away the other AK/AQ out of the pot even preflop?

You guy only find golden OPs on CC. It is such a great place, I love it. Maybe you and Aaron Soto can have strat talks together and take over the poker world. I think he is close to Vegas

IPlay said:

You guy only find golden OPs on CC. It is such a great place, I love it. Maybe you and Aaron Soto can have strat talks together and take over the poker world. I think he is close to Vegas

Click to expand...

Thing is, Che is prolly super smart and good at poker, but the way he attacks people and his unwillingness to look at something from someone else's idea or angle is narrow minded and foolish.

Rigt these are my results. Please remember that I use all the money to the next level so overall I’m break even, and thus very bad 2NL-10NL all hands, rake ~4.5% removed from the results. ATo is not part of my UTG 6max range usually.


Open AJo 1751 hands: 4.8 bb/100, AI adjusted 7.73 bb/100,
Open ATo 1129 hands, 37.34 bb/100, AI adjusted 39.16 bb/100


Lols ATo is way better, so maybe you could fold AJo, but surely not ATo Then again any positive bb/100 is good, one could even consider 4.8bb/100 very good result.

Open AJs 578 hands: 175.19 bb/100, AI adjusted 149.71 bb/100,
Open ATs 569 hands, 7.77 bb/100, AI adjusted 34.41 bb/100

But I'm not considered to be nit, nitty tag maybe, I would guess looser players are making even more money with it.

braveslice said:

Rigt these are my results. Please remember that I use all the money to the next level so overall I’m break even, and thus very bad 2NL-10NL all hands, rake ~4.5% removed from the results. ATo is not part of my UTG 6max range usually.

Open AJo 1751 hands: 4.8 bb/100, AI adjusted 7.73 bb/100,
Open ATo 1129 hands, 37.34 bb/100, AI adjusted 39.16 bb/100

Click to expand...

You don't understand how the math works in No Limit and I don't ever play AJo or ATo because I have no idea how to play them. I seriously mean it. I don't know how to play but what I know for sure AJo or ATo needs miracle perfect perfect flops to build a monster. They don't flop TPTK, no nut flush, no nut-flush-draw+pair, no sets, ... no nothing but trouble ... etc

Now, here we go:
In probability theory, the Law of Large Numbers (LLN) is a theorem that describes the result of performing the same experiment a large number of times. According to the law, the average of the results obtained from a large number of trials should be close to the expected value, and will tend to become closer as more trials are performed.

For example, assume that a pot odds ratio is 1: 4 and a player gets positive Expected Value compared to the outs ratio. Assume that the size of the pot is $ 160 and the call cost is $ 40, for a ratio of 1: 4. With a positive expected value in every 4 hands, a player could make money in the long term. The problem is that the pot odds do not have a sensibility for the amount of money in the pot. Thus, we get the same pot odds ratio when the pot is $ 1,600 and the calling bet is $ 400, which also gives us a 1: 4 ratio. Clearly it is not a same experiment because the amount of money.

If, of your 10,000 trials of a 1: 4 ratio, you try 9,500 times with the ratio of $ 160/ $ 40 and 500 times with $ 1,600 to $ 400, the 500 trials with the larger pot does not provide a representative number overall. You could potentially win or lose a huge amount of money with the larger pot that overshadows your wins/ losses with the smaller pot. You need a stable number of trials. So, if you are a player who plays in high stack live games and low stack online games, all those plays should be accounted for separately. If you choose, for example, 10,000 trials, you should apply this number of trials to each type of game individually and separately.

Have a Nice Day

Well you could start by googling "poker difference ev and eq" - btw not only you

TheNutz4You said:

Thing is, Che is prolly super smart and good at poker, but the way he attacks people and his unwillingness to look at something from someone else's idea or angle is narrow minded and foolish.

Click to expand...

No, his strategy may work in super soft 1/2 games with a bunch of drunk tourist but he would get crushed by any average thinking player. He has the thought process of a 2004 pre boom NIT.

I also think Che doesn't understand what EV is while at the same time he is telling people they don't understand how math works in NLHE.

People that think like Che is why NLHE will never die.