Lol at Jon Locke randomly generating bad flops for J5.

Using that argument, what if the flop is 55J or AQ3hhh!

Lol at desertcat for choosing opponent ranges of hands that only dominate our range.

Using that argument, what if the other players hold exactly ak, ak, ak, ak!

You guys are better posters than that.

You are missing my point entirely. you can't just fold bdfd/bdfd on tons of board textures then say we have 12% hot-cold on stove to justify preflop call

+1.....

Lol back. My point was J5 is an often dominated hand. You will fold over half your flops, forfeiting equity. The occasional times you flop a jack you will still lose 2/3s of the time and pay more bets for the privilege. If you flop a 5 it's even worse. There are so many situations where you can never raise or bet the best hand and do many where you call with the worst.

Plus saying "I'm getting 7:1" is very different when it's 4 to the flop versus 6 to the flop (19.5% equity at 7:1 > 14.5% equity at 7:1).

When we getting lunch?

All points duly noted.

But here are the crux of where the discussion for pf should center on:

If h/c equity doesn't paint a realistic picture, what systematic way do we have for determining what hands to call with here? I think most naysayers are saying that it's hard to come up with boards that we smash, so we simply should fold. I'm saying that's not good enough; you'll have similar problems with other marginal hands here, aka Qxs/Kxs. Most of both sides of yay or naysayers are essentially giving experiential advice.

And maybe to clarify, I do think it's ok to call with J5s, but I'm equally open to the possibility that we shouldn't. What I'm more interested is a means to determine what else I should or shouldn't call with here (Qxs? Kxs? 85s? A8o?)

For some of the points you made callip, yes, baby SCs likely do better than J5s, because the straight value makes for more robust hands that hold up by the river. There is similar analysis done in SSHE about why we shouldn't just all call suited cards on the button given great odds, the main reason being high card strength (Qxs/Kxs/Axs will make pairs that are more robust).

And yes, I think the above sentence can serve as a reference point; SSHE's EV graph shows Qxs being slightly +EV on the button, and Jxs being slightly -EV, for small stakes ~15 years ago. But it's at least borderline, and you're not going to get 7.5:1 / 8.5:1 /10.5:1 on the button easily.

"that this is how we want the fish to play" - fish equally donate money holding onto "good" hands for too long when the action dictates their overpair has nearly 0 equity. Much of money made in poker is just simply making better decisions.

Maybe it's not the best way but I just played a ton of hands and (1) watched what players better than me would show up with in these spots. If I would occasionally see a hand like J5s turned over then I would spend some time trying to analyze why there are doing something different than me
(2) I would analyze my own data based on similar hands once my sample was big enough..... and while everyone will say sample sizes we to small I also liked st the data of other players. When you filter for T2s-J6s and cold called sb you'll be shocked how. If your sample is when looking st other players. And while they'll surely play worse postflop it should give you a basic guideline. For example if they are winning with J5s then we should feed be playing it (hint it wasn't)....

Then after spending enough time doing this I reached my own conclusions for what to play in various spots, J9s in tough games and as KQ as J7s in special games

Now my conclusions can easily be wrong but I've also concluded that it's close enough and I don't care enough to go back to show my work or do it again. When I see good players start to turn over J5 here then I'll go back and Re examine my work. Until that day I'll keep folding

Could you elaborate on this? You are saying that you looked at data for other players in your games who coldcalled T2s-J6s in the SB in a pre flop situation like the one OP posted? Presumably, then, you are only looking at hands where they showed the hand down (and not where they folded before showdown). Is that correct? And you still are claiming that a hand like J5s is a loser, even when filtering for only times where it went to showdown?

Hats very easy to account for (or st least take into account). What's our winrste with A5s what's their winrste with A5s only including showdown, what's the difference....

It's also easy enough to tell if winrste are bad enough.

Did you get a lot of situations of 4 players calling bets before you in the sb? or others in similar spots?

Q8s or K3s are also be hands that are oft-dominated. Are you also dumping those in the SB? Everyone saying to play J5s knows its a marginal hand, but the price is good enough and the opposing players are terrible enough. Giving 'ranges' of only dominating hands isn't helpful. Listing one or two bad flops isn't helpful. Imagining only worse case scenarios is not sound reasoning.

pair of Q or K get outdrawn less often when you have the best hand

1. Again, position matter's.
2. You ask a question that you answered yourself below.
3. No, you over exaggerate there.
Fish loose money by calling down with weak hand pf & post flop at a high frequency which add up overtime

Sure those scenarios aren't all inclusive. But the point is even when J5s flops well it isn't that profitable. I think the best way to evaluate it is to enumerate flops and see how much equity you have in each scenario. When you flop a J, a 5, a flush draw, two pair, trips, nothing. But even then you'll overcount equity, you'll usually lose extra bets when you lose with trips, two pairs, flushes, etc.

For example you'll win 58% when you flop two pair so half the time you lose extra bets, AJhh wins 64% when it flops two pair, so 6% of the time you are winning extra bets instead of losing extra bets.

The idea you can calc equities and just deduct some random amount like 2% for RIO doesn't make any sense to me. Each hand has its own individual challenges/strengths that make it more or less likely to put in extra bets behind or ahead.

In the case of Q8s and K3s, they both have about 2% more raw equity than J5s (18% vs. 16%), but they have less RIO. When they flop the best top pair they are significantly less likely to lose to an over-card. When they flop two pair they are more likely to hold up.

There are lots of players better and smarter than me that have done way more work than me and have much larger databases. I presume they concluded J5s is a loser since they never have it here and if my data (albeit to small for you) affirms that conclusion it's good enough for me.

i found it was in my best interest to just assume they were first and spend my time doing stuff like learning mix games.
Mid/when the time comes I start to observe people calling with J5s there then I'll probably just copy them while I go back to J drawing board and try to figure out why they are doing it and if I've been wrong the whole time.

and they're less likely to make an under flush or have their flush redrawn on

I'm totally fine with using anyone's database. I'm just asking what data we're looking at. And I'm assuming database means online play, which we all agree is considerably harder (and can easily be bots that we're playing against). I'm just intrigued by whether this database has data on "4 players entered the pot, we're in the sb". Feels like it'd be hard to come by online, especially post black Friday.

I don't think Q2s-Q7s is profitable in this situation online in the sb, but I have nothing to base it on except for the quality of opponents. I think it's also easier to bluff and/or show aggression online. Live players are generally dripping with information, if you just observe or prod them enough.

What would you do with the following hands in the sb, and how do you think it differs online vs live:
1. JTo/T9o/98o
2. A2o-A8o
3. Q2s-Q7s
4. K2s-K8s

Then same above, from BB.

My answers (just instinct, without h/c equity):

1. Position mitigated somewhat multiway, but agreed that we benefit being in position in that we can decide how to squeeze ppl with our equity edge when we flop well.

2. Lets say 6 ppl all enter the pot for 2bets. Do you still fold J5s? What if it's a splash pot? Point is, at some point, the pot odds are enticing enough to want to enter the hand. How do we decide?

3. We can agree to disagree here. In my experience, fish lose money in a lot of different ways, and experts make money capitalizing on those mistakes. In no particular order, these mistakes include:
a. Playing too loosely preflop.
b. Chasing with incorrect odds postflop.
c. Unwilling to fold top pair or overpair under any circumstances.
d. Tilts easily when bluffed
e. Hates being bluffed so will showdown regardless
f. Not betting for thin value
g. Bluffs too frequently
h. Never bluffs
i. Gives off tells.
j. Doesn't adjust to table dynamics.

But you can essentially sum it up as, if a player deviates from GTO, we can exploit it.

1. You know, when Winning 1BB/hand is great and you have position on the river with the choice of betting and gaining 1BB more or checking Behind and saving 1BB, position is a really big deal.
So when OOP, your Full equity is almost impossible to realise but your opponent will damn sure make you pay your full RIO value tho.
So with trash hand like j5 you will often end up winning the minimum and losing the max as well.
So when you check equity, when OOP , be very suspicions with Trash hands even with Great odds.

2.yes i still fold j5s in SB.
Think of it this way, what hand strength you think usually is needed to win a 6handed pot ?
This should make it clear why a hand like 56s is better to have in this situation compare with j5s.

Montreal, we don't disagree on whether position is valuable or not. It's the extent of that value weighed against the price we're getting and the strength of our hand. J5s is not the same kind of "trash" that 72o is.

I don't think you understood the point of #2, else your reply has to be wrong. If the pot is something outlandish: say, 1 million dollars. Calling with ATC is correct and it's not even close.

Obviously, at 8.5:1.5 (or 10.5:1, etc.), it's not obvious how good of a price it is. (I think it's pretty nice price. And if Qxs is marginally profitable on the BTN given 3-4 players limping, don't see why Jxs can't be marginally profitable given slightly better odds though difficult OOP.)

But again, quality of opposition. I'd imagine Qxs and maybe even Kxs are losers on the BTN in some lineups, even with 4 players entering the pot ahead of time.

If you would play J5s for a raise in SB if 8 players were in, so why not play it when 6 are in? Ergo we should play it if only 4 are in cause pot odds aren't much worse, and J2s cause it's basically the same hand. Given J2s doesn't have much high card value, we should also play T2s all the way down to 72s, which gains value from being disguised and has a strong advertising effect.

Then you're clearly not reading people's posts or think you're good at trolling.

Callip's post points out that, changing some assumptions, even h/c equity may sway to a fold. Not sure if I agree or disagree, since then we'd have to start debating IO and RIO.

Try adding something constructive.

You're wrong about RIO already being factored in. Hot/cold equity by its very nature assumes that we're all in preflop. For the method most people use, it matters -- they look at immediate odds, look at h/c equity, and fudge for position. If a hand is particularly brutal for RIO, it isn't factored in. So of most of the time we win we don't make much extra but we make expensive 2nd best unfairly often, you need to factor that in somewhere. So making J's no kicker winds up being dominated way more often than dominating other people's 5's, the hand is worse than the equity calculator. Think of playing 43s in a game where most suited hands are played, it has the same issue.

You're saying "yay, 5 outs" with a hand that almost never has the best 2 pair. When the pot gets enormous, we have the worst of it uncomfortably often. These are probably in the class of hands where you get away with stuff at 6/12 and post ridiculous win rates and then strangely get crushed at 20/40 or 40/80. Maybe that's the "they're all bad at poker, so we play more hands" factor?

Ill retract my statement on RIO being factored in; I was thinking along the lines of being dominated being reflected in the h/c equity. But Dougl, you are still missing the point Im making. If you dont want to use h/c equity to judge J5s, by what means are you using? What do you do with suited queens/kings here?

You trying to use my moving up or not as a means of slighting my credibility is really just dodging the question. At least Jon aptly points out that it is largely experiential evidence. The "it works in 6/12 but not 20/40" is more a reflection of opponent quality. "They're all bad so we play more hands" is valid: more pertinently, it's how wide to extend that conclusion.

Change the hand to Q2s. Or K7s. How do you proceed to analyze?

After this thread I'm going to start playing a lot tighter from the blinds. However I might play looser with suited hands on the button.