When I began playing heavy in 2004 and studying poker, Q10 and K10 were often called "trap hands" when you called raises with them, especially if they're double suited.
In NL 1/2, when facing a raise of 15 or 20 I always fold these hands. Is that too nittish? I notice that Andrew Neeme calls with these hands. Is that something I should be doing too? They call the QJ "the Neeme" but I fold that to raises too. Am I playing too uncreatively?
I eat pizza 2 times a weak- is that too much? Is it unhealthy for my body? Do i need to mix up my eating schedule more?
The boring answer is that it depends, there is no absolutes in poker and nothing is written in stones that you should always make action X or always make action Y.
Like if you have a whale that raises 15 bucks every freaking hand he is dealt, K10 becomes an easy call for value or even an easy 3 bet. Against the average tight 1/2 open raiser though, those kind of hands is easy folds when facing big opens in the 15-20 range.
In spots where you're likely to go multi way then calling with these hands is fine, but personally I'm unlikely to want to see flops with these hands heads up due to being dominated so often. If the Hand is suited then there are also some promotions for straight flushes and such, but I wouldn't take this too much in to consideration
You can also raise them in LP of course
When calling with these hands also tread carefully if you hit top pair
Yeah, the reason I posted it was a 10 buck raise under the gun yesterday for $10. Two callers then to me in the SB. I folded K 10 of hearts and was greeted with this on the flop:
9 Spades J Hearts Q diamonds!
Then bet for 10, call for 10, with a 250 reraise from a guy with a set of 9s. It freaked me out what i missed out on but that's poker I guess. He showed me the 9s before folding.
neeme is by no ways the standard that you should be using to play poker, he gets a lot of things wrong. if you want to play QT or KT it needs to be suited you need to have position and be the preflop raiser. otherwise dont play it.
They are playable in very specific situation. The entire math theory of KTo, QTo, JTo and other marginal hands is vast and can't be described in a little 2+2 post. They are trapping dominated hands ONLY if you intend to win at the showdown, else, you got to know what you're doing.
Last edited by GenghisKhan; 10-22-2017 at 11:06 PM.
I will 3b 60% of time with these hands * deep stacked against an opener cause I want to be HU, cbet take it down most of the time. Especially offsuit these hands are not positive ev
If you can't call profitably, you must raise, just a quote. Play LAG
I'll play these hands in good position, CO and button, or to a small raise in my blinds. The method I follow is the same as SC, don't convince yourself that middle pair is probably good, or that you're not outkicked. I'm looking for big draws or two pairs plus, especially multi handed. HU, I'll play these a little looser, such as flopping top pair, but I'm generally looking for good odds in, and making hands that will pay big if it hits.
I insta-muck KQo to a raise 95% of the time at 1/3 NL without a second thought. Hands as weak as KT and QT aren't even worth discussion, imo. My guess is for them to be profitable against a raise you'd need (a) to be up against a wide opener, (b) be in position, (c) be HU and (d) plan on stealing a lotta pots.
If your plan is to simply cooler someone (as the HH shows), then you have to ask how often hands like this are going to be on the winning end of the cooler. They are much more likely to be on the losing end of any "coolers".
Can't be too results oriented and yes those are gut wrenching moments. As said above, being suited and in position or closing action can make them more playable. In the hh out gave above, if the BB isn't likely to 3! And your call also makes it more likely that he calls as well, I've been know to play a suited hand like that as if it's a small pp so if effective stacks are big enough (emphasis on the pf raisers stack), I might make a call trying to flop big.
