KJo vs 98s in MP

    • 666zeus666
      666zeus666
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.05.2009 Posts: 9
      Hi people!

      According to the SHC in equilab (standard ORC, NL, FR) when you are in MP1 you can play 98s but abstain from playing KQo. Is this correct? When I ran this hands in equilab it gives me KQo: 60.36% and 98s: 39.64%. This seems to indicate that what I should play is KQo but never 98s. I am aware that I am probably showing how great my poker ignorance is with this question, but that is precisely why I would really appreciate if someone could helm me.

      Thanks!
  • 4 replies
    • helliaspapas
      helliaspapas
      Bronze
      Joined: 07.03.2009 Posts: 191
      Without being an expert on this as I don't play full ring, KQo is not included for playability reasons.First you are dominated by any AQ and AK and there six people after you, four of whom (if they choose to play) they have position on you.Second you have in your range other hands that would hit better the flops that KQo hits(namely AK,AQ,KQs).A third argument is that your range is biased towards high cards(and rightly so) but you need some starting hands to hit this middle flops too Txx ,9xx,8xx.Lastly to support the playability argument more when you hold 98s you either hit the flop hard or you don't hit it at all so it's easy to play.KQo can make things problematic due to the domination by other hands(as mentioned) and the possible lack of position.
    • 666zeus666
      666zeus666
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.05.2009 Posts: 9
      I'll work on this. Thank you!
    • LemOn36
      LemOn36
      Coach
      Coach
      Joined: 07.02.2009 Posts: 1,356
      When you set up OR ranges, especially in fullring where there's so many people behind you, you need to look at equity against likely calling ranges instead of equity against a random hand.
      if you look at fullring and a very tight calling range you get this:

      Equity Win Tie
      MP2 37.25% 36.77% 0.47% { 98s }
      MP3 62.75% 62.28% 0.47% { QQ-44, AJs+, KQs, QJs, JTs, T9s, AQo+ }

      Equity Win Tie
      MP2 41.65% 40.30% 1.36% { KQo }
      MP3 58.35% 56.99% 1.36% { QQ-44, AJs+, KQs, QJs, JTs, T9s, AQo+ }

      i.e. the equity gap is not that large.

      The reasons for 89s over KQo
      1) KQo is dominated often, people flat AK these days most of the time and it's pretty standard
      2) when you hit a top pair you rarely to never get 3 streets of value because your MP1 range is so Kx Qx heavy it's obvious you hit those boards to decent villains. with 89s you don't really flop good pairs, but you have more draws, backdoor draws that add to your equity so bluffs need to work less often, you have disguised value hands that can get 3 streets etc.
      3) 89s helps you cover more flops, ie. if you would open KQo in MP1 over 89s and wanted to keep reasonable opening frequency then boards like 896 793 etc. you would have just overpairs+sets
      4) 89S plays way better oop 3way. Which will happen a good amount when someone calls and people with good odds flat behind. 3way top pairs lose on value and disguised 2 pairs, tripps and strong draws gain on value, and 89s is just better in this regard.
      5) On the other hand KQo has a blocker effect, so instead of 38 QQ+ AKo, AQs+ theres 27 combinations left in the deck, i.e. you take it down preflop more often.
      Also if people widen their calling ranges to include things like QJo, Q9s etc. the equity gap between KQo and 89s widens again, and since it's likely that people that flat these vs MP1 are fish top pairs gain in value again so KQo becomes better e.g. if there's nits behind you and one fish in the blinds
    • 666zeus666
      666zeus666
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.05.2009 Posts: 9
      I have no words.
      :f_thumbsup:
      Thank you!