Understanding how to play suited connectors in Texas Hold’em poker is a skill every player should get to grips with before hitting the tables.
Suited connectors refer to hands composed of two consecutive same-suited cards such as 8♣7♣ or 5♦4♦ or 6♣5♣. These hands have massive potential, but players must be careful with them.
Players can make costly errors if they do not consider factors such as stack sizes and opponent behaviour. Read on as we look at some of the mistakes to avoid when playing suited connectors.
Overvaluing Suited Connectors in 3-Bet Pots with Short Stacks
Three-betting suited connectors against opponents with 60 big blinds or fewer is a one of the most common mistakes poker players make.
Suited connectors are famed for thriving in deep-stack situations but they can be hugely ineffective when stack-to-pot ratios (SPR) shrink.
They can be excellent three-bet bluff candidates with deeper stacks because they have the power to make better hands fold pre-flop.
Suited connectors also be played post-flop while providing significant implied odds by hitting big hands such as straights or flushes.
However, the reduced SPR limits post-flop manoeuvrability and lowers implied odds against shorter stacks. Three-betting these hands becomes a less effective strategy.
Players must consider flat-calling or folding when up against a short stack pre-flop raiser.
When the stack sizes are shallow in tournaments, suited connectors are not so attractive. With a meagre 50 big blinds, players see their ability to leverage the implied odds reduced.
Opponents are more likely to shove or call aggressively, with barely any room for themselves to manoeuvre post-flop.
You need to know when not to three-bet to avoid unnecessary losses and stay competitive, whether playing a competitive tournament or cash games.
Misjudging Opponent Types and Situations
Players should never three-bet bluff suited connectors against calling stations. It is a common mistake, and you may pay dearly for it.
There is only a little chance of you getting them to fold which means you lose a key incentive for three-betting suited connectors.
Calling stations tend to call with hands that overpower suited connectors such as A♠5♠, K♠7♥ or J♠8♣ while increasing the likelihood of nasty coolers when you both hit trips or flushes.
The wise move would be to avoid bluffing calling stations. Try focusing on value-betting strong hands. You can fold your suited connectors or be passive in your play in these situations.
We have recently seen the pitfalls of misunderstanding hand strength at the top level with Chinese-New Zealander Sosia Jiang at the Triton Million.
The Kiwi ace held K♦Q♦ and pushed aggressively against chip leader Daniel Dvoress. The move backfired spectacularly. Dvoress had A♣K♣ which trumped her seemingly mouth-watering hand.
Her mistake is a cautionary tale about understanding the context around hand strength. Success in casinos online NZ often hinges on grasping the odds and knowing when to hold back or go all-in.
While K♦Q♦ is a strong hand in some situations, it loses its prowess against a tighter opening range or superior hands. Tournament dynamics played a critical role in Jiang’s case, but knowing when to fold premium hands can help reserve chips and extend longevity.
Against loose players, expand your range to exploit their tendency to overplay marginal hands. You need to narrow your range and focus on stronger holdings for tight players.
Suited connectors can be effective in both contexts, but you must be masterful and pay attention to the opponent’s tendencies.
Misusing Suited Connectors as Four-Bet Bluff Candidates
When choosing hands for four-bet bluffs, consider elements such as blocker effects, post-flop playability and implied odds.
Suited connectors usually don’t meet the critical criterion of blocker effects. They typically have negative blocker effects, blocking hands your opponent might fold such as K♠6♦ as opposed to strong hands they will continue with like K♠K♥.
Suited connectors have decent playability and implied odds, but the low SPR in four-bet pots kills these advantages. The wise move would be to prioritise hands with better blocker properties such as A♠5♠ for your four-bet bluffs.
Use suited connectors in situations where they can be more potent. Playing them in the wrong situation can yield diabolic results.
In a scenario where you bet with 8♠7♠ against a player who frequently continues with hands such as A♠K♠ or pocket queens, it will be nigh impossible for you to force a fold. Your post-flop playability will be compromised due to the limited SPR.
This is why it is crucial to understand the nuances of hand selection. Reserving suited connectors for spots where they can thrive is key. It ensures your strategy is robust and adaptable.
Born in Deauville, France on February 14, 1948, Monique Laurent was responsible for what Richard Marcus – who cheated casinos worldwide for $25 million – described as ‘ one of the greatest scams of all time’. Working in conjunction with her brother, who was a roulette croupier at Casino Deauville, and her husband, Laurent came up with an innovative scheme to influence the outcome of each spin of a roulette wheel by inserting a tiny radio receiver into a roulette ball.
After much trial and error, a sculptor friend designed a duplicate roulette ball, of the same dimensions and weight as a standard ball, which could be unobtrusively introduced into play at any time. By pressing a button on a radio transmitter, concealed within a cigarette packet, Laurent could cause the roulette ball to divert into a group of six numbers with an accuracy of 90%. Bearing in mind this was 1973, the use of radio transmitters represented a new level of sophistication and the fraudsters were able to make five million French francs in a week before the casino operators got wind of any wrongdoing.
The subterfuge was eventually discovered when the amorous casino manager, who had been rebuffed more than once, noticed that Laurent always stood close to the roulette wheel, but never placed a bet and appeared for all the world to be a largely disinterested spectator. Of course, she also always carried a cigarette packet, but never smoked. His suspicions aroused, he alerted security staff, who discovered that a radio signal was being transmitted in the vicinity of the roulette wheel. The police were called and when asked for a cigarette from the ‘dummy’ packet containing the radio transmitter Laurent could not, of course, provide one; the cigarette packet was confiscated, the transmitter discovered and the fraudsters arrested.
Dennis Sean McAndrew, who officially changed his name from Dennis Andrew Nikrasch, but also used at least half a dozen aliases during his lifetime, was the mastermind of the biggest slot machine cheating schemes in history. At the time of his death in 2010, he had the dubious distinction of being in the so-called ‘Black Book’, which lists individuals who are forever banned from casinos, in both Nevada and New Jersey.
In the late seventies and early eighties, when slot machines were electro-mechanical, McAndrew and his accomplices used distraction techniques to take impressions of keys used to open slot machines, fashioned new keys and, later, opened the machines and physically rigged the reels to winning jackpot combinations. Collectively, they stole a reported $25 million a year from Las Vegas casinos.
In 1983, McAndew began an eight-year prison sentence after pleading guilty to using a set of magnets and locksmith tools, dubbed the ‘Nikrasch device’, to illegally manipulate slot machines and defraud Las Vegas casinos. Following his release in 1991, McAndrew adopted more sophisticated methods to cope with the evolution of slot machines in the interim. They still involved opening slot machine cabinets but, rather than physically rigging reels, reprogramming Erasable Programmable Read-Only Memory. (EPROM) chips, without removing them from the machine and thereby invalidating security measures.
In 1998, McAndrew was convicted for a second time, for swindling over $6 million from various Las Vegas casinos, including nearly $2 million from the Luxor alone, between September 1996 and November 1997. He had also travelled to Atlantic City, with a view to fraudulently winning a $5 million slot jackpot, only to be foiled when the jackpot was won legimately beforehand. A search of his residence revealed an ‘Aladdin’s Cave’ of slot machines, microchips and other incriminating evidence. McAndrew was sentenced to a further seven-and-a-half years’ imprisonment, of which her served six.
A former computer techncian for the Nevada Gaming Control Board – on whose Excluded Person List his name has appeared since February 20, 1997 – Ronald Dale ‘Ron’ Harris was responsible for series of lucrative and, for the most part, undetected casino scams in the nineties.
Initially, he secretly, and illegally, devised a slot machine rigging program, which was installed by unsuspecting representatives during the checking of the machines in question for correct operation. Once installed, the program allowed the jackpot to be triggered by a predetermined sequence of coins. Between 1993 and 1995, Dale and his partner in crime, Reid Errol McNeal, successfully swindled Las Vegas casinos out of hundreds thousands of dollars.
By late 1994, though, Dale has switched his attention to slot poker and keno machines and devised a program that allowed him to predict winning plays without meddling. That, too, proved successful, reportedly yielding $10,000 from a Las Vegas keno machine in the space of five minutes in December 1994.
However, the subterfugue was ultimately discovered when Harris and McNeal hit a $100,000 keno jackpot at Bally’s Park Place, now Bally’s Atlantic City, in Atlantic City, New Jersey in January 1995. Sloppily, McNeal, who was not carrying identification, requested payment in cash and, when state gaming officials arrived to verify the jackpot – as was legally required – he was arrested.
Harris fled the scene, but left behind damning evidence of the scheme and he, too, was arrested on his return to Las Vegas. Both men were charged with attempted theft by deception, conspiracy and computer theft. Harris was convicted and sentenced to seven years in jail, of which he served two. At the time of sentencing, District Judge Peter Breen told Harris, “There is no question the depth of your betrayal was complete.”