[Closed] difference between suited connectors and one gap suited connectors

with 98s, you have more chance to straight, you need
(5,6,7) or (6,7,T) or (7,T,J) or (T,J,Q)

with 97s, you have only
(5,6,8) or (6,8,T) or (8,T,J)

1) download Pokerstrategy Equilator;
2) enter data;
3) results: 97s vs 98s = ~35.3% vs ~64.7%
4) real difference = 2x

1) download Pokerstrategy Equilator; 2) enter data; 3) results: 97s vs 98s = ~35.3% vs ~64.7% 4) real difference = 2x

so J5o is better then 45s for you ?

"results: 97s vs 98s = ~35.3% vs ~64.7%"

[ x ] Useless answer.

Real Answer is the one about straight possibilities.

If you can play suited connectors profitably and have good postflop skills you can probably make very similar plays with one gapper suited cards profitably.

You might even find that people give you less credit for a straight because it is (often) more disguised.

Originally posted by Jackalof
1) download Pokerstrategy Equilator;
2) enter data;
3) results: 97s vs 98s = ~35.3% vs ~64.7%
4) real difference = 2x

86s vs 76s = 66% vs 34%

Originally posted by Jackalof
1) download Pokerstrategy Equilator;
2) enter data;
3) results: 97s vs 98s = ~35.3% vs ~64.7%
4) real difference = 2x
5) crappy calculation try j9s ws 89s

If you compare two hands and one of them is dominated the result is no surprise.

The question is too general. As asked the answer is the gap!
More seriously, it's all down to how, when and where you play them and who against as Smileyphil pointed out. As usual it's all situational.

I think the thread was not to compare sc with sg . on the contrary, you compare sc (89s) with any 2 and sg (79s) with any 2 and see. even tho i think would be really close.

Generally with Suited Connectors and Suited Gappers your preflop equity is very Poor (all in situations).

What you are instead playing on is implied odds from catching very strong (flush or straight) hands postflop.

This of course requires two skills:
a) Noticing when we have strong preflop implied odd situations.
i.e. a tight player raising who is likely to stack off, multiway pots where we are likely to have excellent pot odds.

b) Postflop skills including good use of pot odds/implied odds and knowing when to semi-bluff.

Realistically you require slightly better situations to play Suited Gappers than Suited Connectors since you are slightly less likely to make a hand. However if you can recognise these situations well both hands should be profitable.

If you are unsure when to play them I would suggest entering limped pots in late position to begin with before branching out to more speculative areas. (Calling raises)

Edit: Although I know the theory I am not an expert on individual situations. I am primarily a short stack player so any advice from pro big stacks would be good.

As someone already said, the difference between them is the chance of making a straight.

But, IMO, it's not a really big difference, at least not for me... as when I decide to play these hands (gapped or not) I'm actually already thinking about pulling a bluff, it's really situation dependent, sometimes I'll see a flop against a certain opponent in a certain scenario and I'll just decide not to play the hand any further because of various factors, but whenever I decide to play one of these hands (be it just calling a raise, raising myself or 3-betting), I don't see a flop with a "fit-or-fold" mindset. And I think doing so is a big mistake, a lot of people (probably most people) tend to focus too much on their own hand strength instead of their opponent's.

Its probably a hideous play. (Infact I have no idea how it can be +EV)

But!

I seem to do quite well 3betting suited connectors. You have to look for situations where the villain can fold of course.

i think it's always +ev when you get at least 2.5 to 1. I play almost everything when i get 2.5 - 3 to 1 preflop

Originally posted by Smileyphil
I seem to do quite well 3betting suited connectors. You have to look for situations where the villain can fold of course.

If you have enough FE PF, you actually can 3-bet any two profitably.