I usually almost always raise or call with these facing a 2x-3.5x opening raise, but I'm finally analyzing these situations on pokersnowie and it says to almost always fold. Is this correct? I'm really confused. Maybe I'm losing actually by almost always playing these hands on the button? Please help.

Depends on stack depth, players in the blinds, and who raised.

Yes if you're always flatting these hands, you're certainly losing money

Did you ever check how much equity those hands have against specific opening ranges?

If The original raise comes from 1 or 2 off the button you can use a mixed 3bet or fold strat leaning more towards 3betting.

If you have a HUD/tracker, fire up the holecards report and run a filter for "cold-call = true". Over a large sample, suited connectors will be breakeven at best, but usually they lose money as calls, except in very soft games.
I typically 3-bet 76s and 65s most of the time when in CO or BTN, and sometimes add 54s as well. Some suited Broadways (e.g. ATs, KJs, QJs, JTs) can work fine as flat calls or 3-bets, but T9s-87s are usually folds for me. The middling suited connectors don't serve much purpose, as your flatting range already contains some middle pairs, and hands with better blockers/unblockers and/or stronger draws.

Snowie folds them because Snowie plays against computers that play a near-perfect game.

Against bad players, the ones who will put in way too much money post-flop or have other glaring leaks, like over-folding in certain spots, you can call or even raise.

Calling becomes more attractive if the players in the blinds are going to call more often as well and are also weak players.

Raising becomes more attractive if the players in the blinds are aggressive and will 3bet you often if you just call.

GTO would tell you to fold or 3bet.
But against bad players it's often +EV to call, folding is 0 EV, so calling would be better.

Not too sure about the 3bet, but I wouldn't want to 3bet someone who doesn't know how to fold with a questionable holding.

Yeah it really depends on stack size a lot. I play tournaments so it's different than always playing 100+ BB deep all the time.

I do prefer raising rather than calling as a general strategy.

I've never used a HUD. Can you filter by effective stack size and what position you were in when playing SC?

You can filter for almost anything.

In a word, yes.
I rarely bother with filtering for stack sizes, as I mostly played Zoom cash with auto-rebuy, but I guess it's useful to filter for stacksize in tourneys.

Positional filters are very useful, but you can also use your tracker to set up very specific spots that answer questions like "How well do I do with suited connectors on the BTN when the opener is UTG and I 3-bet?" or "How well do I do with SCs when I open CO and then call after being 3-bet by the SB?"

Below are a couple of heat maps to show profit or loss on the BTN at 2NLz when VPIPing after someone else has opened the pot.

Filter = Did 3-bet on BTN:


Filter = Cold-call pre-flop on BTN (this includes some overcalls and maybe some over-limps too):


While those charts (from a total sample of about 125,000 hands) don't really prove anything, especially as some of the samples are from literally 1 or 2 hands (or even misclicks), and there's a whole lot of variance going on, but the trend I detected is that Axs hands are great 3-bets on the BTN, small SCs aren't necessarily good as 3-bets or calls, but most low-ranked hands would be better off if I just folded them.

Arty 500 hands per sample with like at least 12 hands per chart ?
Kinda like each hand is a 30 time sample ? seems meh sample size at best = tons of variance ?
I am guessing you are low 3 betting your low suited connectors from very late position hoping to take the pot down pre flop and or abandon ship on any flop that is not 2 pair, open ended straight flush draw OR having a flop with an Ace OR King in combo with two low card where you could reasonable Bluff the Ace or King based on your pre flop 3 bet ?

There's definitely tons of variance in filtered samples. For instance, I noticed that I lost money on the BTN with TT whether I called or 3-bet it, and TT is clearly a better hand than 97s which made money as a call.
When I 3-bet 76s-54s, it's partly for board coverage and the fact I'm rarely dominated if villain flats. 65s has more equity vs hands like JJ and TT (or indeed AA/KK) than T9s does. I'm not necessarily trying to rep Ax or Kx on Axx or Kxx boards. I'll usually only c-bet if my actual hand has some equity. So 65hh on Ah7c3s is fine for me, as I have a gutter and BDFD, but I wouldn't c-bet 65hh on KcTc2s, as I have no connection at all, and I'll have other other hands in my range with straight draws, FDs, BDFDs and blockers.

I was on one of my dives in to older posts and found this: http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/show...0&fpart=1&vc=1

I tend to 3bet because it's more fun than folding.

mostly fold unless very weak players are in and you want to see the flop and punish them.

raising when you think they are ones that will fold to your c/bets.

if you dont know your players fold them.

25% 3-bet
25% Call
50% Fold

ez game