T4o

T4o (ten-four offsuit) wins 43.4% of the time against a single random opponent, which places it 125th out of the 169 starting hands — the top 74% of the range. At a six-handed table (five opponents) its equity falls to 11.3% and its rank moves to 152; nine-handed (eight opponents) it holds 6.9% for rank 156. Two unconnected offsuit cards — the class of hand most often overvalued.

Its suited/offsuit twin T4s runs at 46.7% (rank 108), a gap of 3.3 points. Losing the shared suit costs 3.3 points of raw equity. The hand directly above it in the ranking is 75s at 43.7%, and directly below is 93s at 43.2%, so three hands are packed into a band of 0.5 points.

Played heads-up against each of the other 168 hands, T4o is a favourite against 60 of them and an underdog against 108. Its best matchup is 94o at 73.1% and its worst is TT at 7.2% — a spread of 65.9 points, which is why calling T4o simply "strong" or "weak" says very little. 2 opponents land inside one point of a coinflip, the closest being T3s at 50.4%.

T4o dominates 8 hands that share one of its ranks, pushing hardest against 94o at 73.1%. It is dominated by 8 hands in return, the worst of them ATs, which leaves T4o with only 23.0%. 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 52 of 78. The strongest hand in that group, AKo, is 22 points away, and the weakest, 32o, sits 11.1 points below. Measured against the average equity of all 169 hands, 51%, T4o lands -7.6 points from the middle of the pack, and 124 hands in the full ranking are still ahead of it.

Adding players costs equity steadily: 43.4% against one opponent, 26.1% against two, 14.4% against four and 6.9% against eight. That last figure is 62% of an even nine-way share (11.1%). The Chen formula scores this hand at 0 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 T4o reads as 43.4% 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.