Valuing suitedness

[6a6yJIbkO_o]

I feel that most players undervalue suitedness when considering preflop all-in situations, and overvalue it in hands where postflop play is likely.

I have arguments to back this up, of course, but I'm starting to think the most productive discussions are ones that start with a pretty vague and open-ended OP.

How do the rest of you feel about suited vs. unsuited hands, and in what situations do you think people give too little or too much importance to that?

 

[jmbluffnstuff]

Overvaluing suited hands is a mistake that a lot of newer players make.

Being suited only adds 2-3% to the value of your hand.

The odds of flopping a flush are 1 in 121. And even if you do so, the chances you'll win a big pot are low, your generally only going to get called by a bigger flush, or someone who has flopped a set. If your against a set, this player still has 10 outs, so based on the rule of 4 and 2, they still have a 40% chance to make a FH or quads post flop.

A JQ calling pre out of position is still dominated by an AQ from position, even if the JQ is suited.

Don't make decisions on playing suited cards pre flop, make decisions based on the value of the cards. Make decisions with suited cards after the flop.

Even post flop if you have caught 2 suited to match (only around 11% of the time this will occur), you still are only going to make your flush 1 of 3 times seeing both the turn and river.

Don't overvalue suited cards. The strength of the cards is far more important.

 

[Yoshiaki]

The real value of the suited hands is that gives you more capacity of playing flops , where a flush draw will come 10.94% of the time or even a backdoor flush draw, and that gives u a bigger chance of cbetting with more equity.
Despite what i said before, tons of ppl tend to overvalue suited hands as jmbluffnstuff says, specially if their postflop game isnt good.

 

[MinhANguyen]

It is the exact opposite. Suited cards have more value postflop. A ton more. Going all-in with AKs and AKo does not make a big difference.

Suited cards do however carry more value when you are the aggressor. You can flop flush draws + overs, FD + gs, FD + pair, FD + OESD, and FDs which have pretty good equity against a ton of ranges. Also can have BDFD. We can either get them to fold the best hand with a c-bet, turn barrel if we pick up a backdoor flush draw, and get paid off when we make our flush. It is much harder to put the aggressor on a completed draw than a cold caller/overcaller, and you will get paid much more often.

A mistake beginners make is calling, cold-calling, or overcalling raises with hands because they're suited. You have to have good reasons to do so, and if "it's sooted" is the answer, then you shouldn't be calling.

 

[starting_at_the_bottom]

I feel that most players undervalue suitedness when considering preflop all-in situations, and overvalue it in hands where postflop play is likely.

I have arguments to back this up, of course, but I'm starting to think the most productive discussions are ones that start with a pretty vague and open-ended OP.

How do the rest of you feel about suited vs. unsuited hands, and in what situations do you think people give too little or too much importance to that?

Nobody likes folding sooooooted cards at the micros. Its almost as if their sole existance in life is to hit as many flushes as they can.

 

[BigJamo]

Like all hands, they should be played depending on their strength and ones position.

 

[STL FAN]

Hope all is going well and glad to meet you. Having learned poker playing limit cash games and staying with Lee Jones starting hand chart; suited starting hands are heavy on the chart but small suited hands have their place based on position is just one aspect. Even though, it only adds a small % to the starting hands pre-flop. Not playing any hand in a vacuum allows understanding how to play suited hands, based on opponents, their position, and my position. Floating position to get a free card, not just calling and hoping to hit, semi-bluffing, independently these are all good tools but combine them when a person will get combination draws then applying these tools. Otherwise, trying to catch, playing one pair, can become a weak play in the long run as an example. Knowing how to play them properly becomes vital for adding image at the table because of how it is applied differently than that of my opponents.

Patience, discipline is keys to be successful and not always pushing draws in a vacuum. 10,000 situations of having 9 flush draw outs on the flop, 47 unseen cards, 3 community cards, 2 hole cards, the 5 cards seen is the only empirical information, 9 into 47 is a little over 5-1 from this I need 5-1 to see the flop or I can fudge and see some at 4-1. Whether I am seeing both cards, seeing the turn and river independently, or pushing on the flop; even just seeing the turn and not the river; I am 20% for 10,000 situations of making a flush draw. I lose 8,000 busted flush draws, I store this information mentally to trigger my mindset not to overvalue situations because this is just discrete theory that I follow as an example, but also to search for the best spot if I decide to push the flop as another example. However, each hand can produce a flush roughly 36% of the time in a vacuum because of the 4 and 2 rule and the odds of the game as an example.

Now my opponents always observe the 4 and 2 rule which is correct but mentally 47, 46 unseen cards the odds are truer, for the long run, for my game as an example; I accept poker is a journey and mentally I am never tilting over my outcomes whether flush draws or any situation because of this understanding. I am not looking to go all in pre-flop with suited hands, even AK suited, I still play unsuited connectors, and they have their time and place to play just like all starting hands. I play my flush and straight draws in the same manner as set mining for a flop.