QTs

QTs (queen-ten suited) wins 59.5% of the time against a single random opponent, which places it 34th out of the 169 starting hands — the top 20.1% of the range. At a six-handed table (five opponents) its equity falls to 25.3% and its rank moves to 17; nine-handed (eight opponents) it holds 18.0% for rank 16. A suited hand — the flush adds a few points of raw equity.

Its suited/offsuit twin QTo runs at 57.1% (rank 47), a gap of 2.4 points. Sharing a suit is worth exactly those 2.4 points here — nothing about the ranks changes. The hand directly above it in the ranking is KTo at 59.8%, and directly below is A4s at 59.0%, so three hands are packed into a band of 0.8 points.

Played heads-up against each of the other 168 hands, QTs is a favourite against 113 of them and an underdog against 55. Its best matchup is T2o at 77.3% and its worst is QQ at 16.3% — a spread of 61 points, which is why calling QTs simply "strong" or "weak" says very little. 3 opponents land inside one point of a coinflip, the closest being 77 at 50.3%.

QTs dominates 8 hands that share one of its ranks, pushing hardest against T2o at 77.3%. It is dominated by 8 hands in return, the worst of them KTs, which leaves QTs with only 29.4%. 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 suited hands it comes 15 of 78. The strongest hand in that group, AKs, is 7.7 points away, and the weakest, 32s, sits 23.6 points below. Measured against the average equity of all 169 hands, 51%, QTs lands +8.5 points from the middle of the pack, and 33 hands in the full ranking are still ahead of it.

Adding players costs equity steadily: 59.5% against one opponent, 43.3% against two, 29.0% against four and 18.0% against eight. That last figure is 162% of an even nine-way share (11.1%). The Chen formula scores this hand at 8 points, and it arrives 0.3% of the time (4 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 QTs reads as 59.5% 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.