Most of us understand how the best starting hands do not necessarily become the best finishing hands in No-Limit Texas Hold'em.
It's always nice to look at AA or AK or sometimes even 99 and know that you certainly (or probably) have the best starting hand out of all the players before the action starts. However, four betting rounds later and five community cards later, even AA can be vulnerable and not guaranteed to win you the pot.
While we know this to be true, there are times when there is still a psychological barrier to accepting the fact that your good starting hand will not be the winner. For some players, this barrier becomes more difficult to overcome when they play their strong starting hands in unorthodox ways – when their “advanced” play actually leads them to situations where their hands lose value (and should probably be thrown away).
Be very careful with strong starting hands – don’t be fooled!
I saw this happen during a home game a few weeks ago. A hand started and I was in early position and was dealt something like :Jc :4d and I gave up. The player to my left limped in and the table folded to the player in the cutoff who also limped in.
There weren’t many limps in this game, but occasionally they did happen, so it didn’t seem surprising to see the button and both blinds join a five-way pot. This was an example of what poker author John Vorhaus once called a “limpede” in his “Killer Poker” books – that is, a player in early position calling, which encourages a stampede of limpers.
It's the cutoff player we're focusing on in this hand because, as it turns out, he limped in with :Qc :Qs . He was now one of five players to see the flop. :Td :8d :7c .
The action checked to him, and he bet big – about 3/4 (75%) of the pot, if I remember correctly – and both the button and one of the blinds called. The turn brought a :3d , adding a third diamond to the board. This time, the player in the blinds donkbet (approximately 1/2 (50%) pot), the player with QQ called, and the button folded.
The river was a :6c . Now there were four cards to complete a straight with that diamond and the player in the blinds was betting again. The guy with QQ hesitated a little before calling and was already shaking his head when the other player showed :Kd :Jd who had made the flush.
Then he showed his QQ and grumbled about how he knew he was behind and should have folded on the turn.
Analyzing the play after its completion – pre-flop
Strategically speaking, his decision not to raise preflop was obviously a bad one for several reasons. He's not raising the pot with one of the best hands in No-Limit Hold'em. He's not doing anything to guarantee himself the best position postflop (and in fact the button also called, meaning he can't act last postflop). He's also inviting the "herd" that came in after his limp, and even he's more certain that he has the best starting hand relative to the other four players with his :Qc :Qs , and that his QQ is now less likely to win against four opponents than against just one or two.
We can all agree that limping preflop was not a good idea. In some cases limping may not be a bad play, for example when there is a loose-aggressive player to act who you are confident will raise (and with a wide variety of hands, including many weak hands). You could even re-raise, but in most cases this would not be a profitable play.
Analyzing post-flop
Regarding his post-flop decisions, I think he ran into that mental barrier I mentioned above. He knew he had the best hand pre-flop, which led him to feel like he “deserved” to win the pot even though the action and board clearly showed that his QQ would not be good at showdown.
I also believe that his attempted "advanced" play (the preflop limp) compounded the issue, making it harder for him to fold his pocket Qs. He was so clever in "hiding" the fact that he had a strong starting hand that it made it even harder for him not to play all the way through and show everyone what he had (when he didn't even need to!).
In other words, while the preflop mistake was small, the calls that followed were bigger and more costly mistakes. It is the latter, the more costly mistakes that people make more often and with stronger starting hands, in part because they have a sense of entitlement brought about by the preflop advantage.
Most of us would play pocket Qs aggressively preflop, as well as other strong starting hands. However, when we raise with QQ and someone calls, and then postflop that player shows aggression towards us on a connected board, for example T-high, we have to be prepared to fold our hand.
In Super/System, Doyle Brunson said of pocket Aces and pocket Kings that “one of two things will often happen…either (1) you’ll win a small pot, or (2) you’ll lose a big pot.” This doesn’t always hold true, of course. However, the bottom line is that being dealt a strong starting hand is no guarantee that you’ll win a big pot soon after.
Don’t let a strong starting hand fool you into believing that there’s no effort to be made to win a pot with it. Having two good starting cards should be seen as a good first step toward winning chips, not a promise of profit. Don’t let such hands blind you as you play the hand, becoming a barrier that hinders rather than helps.
Article translated and adapted from the original: Don't Let Strong Starting Hands Trick You Into Thinking You “Deserve” the Pot
Português do Brasil 
English 
Español 
Deutsch 
This post is cool, strong hands make us relax and we think they win on their own, I've made this mistake several times, as the article says, an effort must be made to make it profitable and winning!
Exactly! After all, no hand guarantees 100% preflop. And we have a tendency to think that 70~80% is a guaranteed win.