|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 12/1/2008 4:00:13 PM PACIFIC |
 Brunson's Trouble Hands, Aisthesis, 2. Dec 2003 17:50 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Since I first read Brunson's list of trouble hands, I've been wondering why he includes 98o but not T9o. Other than the 98o, the list is just the hands one would expect: 2 unsuited, unpaired cards T or greater except for AK. The only possible reasons I can think of for considering the T9 worse than the 98 are that hitting the T becomes much more questionable in light of what others are likely to be keeping and that a number of straights including T9 are more likely to make someone else a higher straight. On the other hand, T9 has to objectively be a little better hand than 98. Anyone have any comments on this? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Brunson's Trouble Hands, Schuster, 2. Dec 2003 18:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I really can't say for sure, but the reason may be that with T9, the ignorant end of the straight makes AT the nuts, which is not always a played hand, whereas the ignorant end of 98 gives AK the nuts, a hand which people will see the flop with almost every time, AND are slow to let go. Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Brunson's Trouble Hands, SCOTT FRANCIS, 3. Dec 2003 05:20 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| A related but different question in regards to trouble hands. When I run simulations on Turbo Texas Holdem, A8 suited loses more money in nearly every situation than any other suited A. I cannot seem to get a handle on why this happens. Obviously A2-A5 and AK-A10 have straight possiblities but A6-A9 do not. Why on earth would an A7s perform better under the same circumstances than an A8s. Only thing I can figure is you will play A8 more (somewhat playable kicker if A flops) and therefore lose more. Also, flop will come up 8 high a little more often than 7 high leading to more bets and inherently more losses. Any thoughts let me know. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Brunson's Trouble Hands, Aisthesis, 3. Dec 2003 11:55 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hmmmm... Doesn't that also speak for the superiority of T9 over 98? Anyhow, I'm not much of a fan of either of those hands really. Assuming one is comfortable playing the other trouble (KJo, QTo, ATo, etc.) hands in MP in NL games, is it appropriate to play 98 or T9 there as well? I just can't help myself in viewing both of these hands as decidedly worse than the rest of the trouble hands and hence up to now have even had to grit my teeth to play 98 even in LP. How do you guys view the value of these hands? (Brunson puts T9o in the "trash" group but 98o in the same category as KJo) I would think either one should definitely be thrown away at tables where tigher play seems more promising than loose. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|