Q4o

Q4o (queen-four offsuit) wins 49.1% of the time against a single random opponent, which places it 95th out of the 169 starting hands — the top 56.2% of the range. At a six-handed table (five opponents) its equity falls to 13.2% and its rank moves to 135; nine-handed (eight opponents) it holds 8.1% for rank 141. Two unconnected offsuit cards — the class of hand most often overvalued.

Its suited/offsuit twin Q4s runs at 51.8% (rank 77), a gap of 2.7 points. Losing the shared suit costs 2.7 points of raw equity. The hand directly above it in the ranking is 97s at 49.2%, and directly below is T6s at 48.8%, so three hands are packed into a band of 0.4 points.

Played heads-up against each of the other 168 hands, Q4o is a favourite against 94 of them and an underdog against 74. Its best matchup is J4o at 74.4% and its worst is QQ at 6.5% — a spread of 67.9 points, which is why calling Q4o simply "strong" or "weak" says very little. 2 opponents land inside one point of a coinflip, the closest being Q3s at 50.4%.

Q4o dominates 8 hands that share one of its ranks, pushing hardest against J4o at 74.4%. It is dominated by 8 hands in return, the worst of them AQs, which leaves Q4o with only 22.6%. A single kicker can move the number by tens of points, and the full table below lists every one of those opponents.

Within the 78 offsuit hands it comes 37 of 78. The strongest hand in that group, AKo, is 16.3 points away, and the weakest, 32o, sits 16.8 points below. Measured against the average equity of all 169 hands, 51%, Q4o lands -1.9 points from the middle of the pack, and 94 hands in the full ranking are still ahead of it.

Adding players costs equity steadily: 49.1% against one opponent, 30.3% against two, 16.5% against four and 8.1% against eight. That last figure is 73% of an even nine-way share (11.1%). The Chen formula scores this hand at 2 points, and it arrives 0.9% of the time (12 of 1,326 combinations).

One caveat worth repeating: every number on this page assumes the opponent holds a completely random hand and that the pot goes to showdown. Real opponents hold ranges, and a range that has already put money in is stronger than random — which is exactly why Q4o reads as 49.1% here but plays worse than that against a raise. Use the 168 rows in the table below to see which specific holdings are the problem, rather than treating the headline figure as a verdict on the hand.