![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
I was reading an article on the internet the other day about a hand that Johnny Chan played and I was very suprised by the way Chan played the hand. You can read the article at. http://members.iquest.net/~brikshoe/Chan_profile.html
The second half of the article talks about a 5 day marathon game between Johnny Chan, Chip Reese, Doyle Brunson, Roger Moore, and a French millionaire. In which there was a very strange hand. I'll post the exerpt here. ------------------------------------------------------- It started with the Frenchman, showing a ten of diamonds, raising Doyle Brunson's jack. Chan showed a six but had a pair of kings (one of them a diamond) underneath; he re-raised, which forced out Brunson, then watched the Frenchman re-raise him. "He don't know what I'm raising on," Chan said, "so when he re-raises, I figure he's trying to sell me on his hand. Make me think he has trips or a pair of hidden aces. But I peg him for two high diamonds in the hole, ace and queen. I know by now he likes to raise on the come. I know if he's got trips, he just calls there to suck me in." On the next card, the French-man caught a ten of clubs, giving him a pair of tens showing; Chan picked up a four of hearts. When the Frenchman bet his pair of tens, Chan raised, then watched the Frenchman re-raise him again.
Almost anyone else would have taken the re-raise to mean the Frenchman now had trips or at least two pair and that it was time to fold. But to Chan it meant the opposite: "When he re-raised me" Chan said, "I knew for sure he's playing two high diamonds in the hole. No way he re-raise me earlier on a pair of tens. And if he got aces with the tens, he don't re-raise me now because he gotta be scared 1 have trips the way I'm betting."
On fifth street, the Frenchman caught a seven of diamonds and Chan got a nine. Still with only a pair of kings, Chan re-raised again in the face of the Frenchman's bet, and this time got only a call. "I figure he still needs a card to make his hand, I gotta bet mine for value. Even though I know he's got four diamonds, he's still about a two-to-one dog against me."
After the sixth and seventh cards were dealt, Chan still hadn't improved. But when the Frenchman bet, Chan called the $38,000 pot with his lonely pair of kings. All that early raising and re-raising, and Chan was certain the Frenchman had nothing in his hand but dreams. Sure enough, the Frenchman's last card — a nine of clubs — hadn't helped; his first two hole cards were the ace and queen of diamonds. Exactly as Chan had figured. -------------------------------------------------------
It seemed to me that Chan was fishing pretty hard here. Saying that he is a 2-1 fav on 5th. With a pair and a 4th flush pluss and overcard to Chan's pair the French player was actually the 2-1 fav or better. For Chan to say "I figure he still needs a card to make his hand, I gotta bet mine for value" sounds like he has no idea what is going on and has little understanding of basic seven card stud fundamentals. He was just lucky to end up with the winner at the showdown. Has anybody heard this story before? What does everybody think about how Chan played this hand?
Comments appreciated
I'm sure Mr. Chan would be willing to play anyone here in a stud game. Of course, no one that has been criticizing his play would risk enough money to make it interesting.
First, the story is being told by a reporter with dubious ability to relate the facts. Second, given the discussion that Chan *relates* a bet on 5th street is correct. If you don't see this then I recommend not getting into any tough, shorthanded 7 stud games. We are given less than complete information about the dead cards (i.e. the suits) and Chan had all the information. Chan is representing a very big hand here, why would he check 5th street? Even if he is a slight underdog through the hand, He's not an underdog for the 6th street card! In addition, he gives a sharpened hatchet to the frenchman if he just calls. Can you see why? If you can't, I suggest you analyze the play on 6th street in the different scenarios that are likely to unfold.
I suggest you don't have any idea what you are talking about. There is no bluffing or plays to be made at this point the pot is 38,000. The best hand at the showdown will win this hand. And the Frenchie is a BIG favorite to have the best hand by the showdown thats a fact. If you still don't understand this I'd be happy to play YOU heads up or sit in any game you sit in as my EV goes through the roof as soon as you sit down.
THEY have a knack of seeing that one move consistingly that a amature will over see. Chan knew he had 2 high diamonds in the pocket, what you fail to understand he observed. Didn't you read his rational thinking how he came to this conclusion??? after 5 days!!! how he likes to play draws this way... precision hand reading is and art in its self...especially in high stakes poker
Is Can going to push the French off a hand? No, of course not. That's why he should check call fifth. I don't care if Chan pairs his board on sixth, the French is calling it all. Each raise Chan put in on fifth showed a lack of understanding, that's what I am saying. And I will play Chan, 3-6 at Foxwoods. I will buy in for forty dollars.
Ship it,
I'm not here to battle egos and say that I would happily play you head's up (but I would). And isn't that the beauty of poker? That our two opinions can be so different and we can each be confident of our own success? Of course, my opinion just happens to coincide with a two time world champion and second money leader in World Series history who frequently plays in the biggest games with the best players in the world. Yours coincides with . . . yours.
I guess I'll have to go through the process of explaining the value of the play, because your mind isn't open enough to consider the value of a world class player's decisions (Chan).
The players have put in several bets on the first 4 streets, the pot is quite large. Could you agree that Chan has enough equity in the hand to call a 5th street bet? Good, I thought so. Who has position in this hand, (and is likely to keep position through the hand)? Chan, Correct? Chan is basically representing rolled up 6's in this hand. He knows that the french man doens't have trip 10's (because of his 'read'). Why would trip 6's just call based on the frenchman's 5th street card? Is Chan supposed to change the hand he's representing on 5th street? That would seem intuitively bad. And it is!
Think of the possible scenarios on 6th street:
Case 1) French catches a diamond.
a) Chan improves his hand
b) Chan fails to improve.
If Chan improves he may have the opportunity to look at 7th street without a bet in order to fill up. This is a huge advantage, because his chances of filling up may be small (if he makes two pair). In addition, if his board pairs, he may win the pot right there.
If Chan doesn't improve, he checks behind French or folds to a bet.
Case 2) French doesn't catch a diamond and fails to improve.
a) Chan improves his hand
b) Chan fails to improve.
In either case Chan bets and then evaluates the 7th street play based on a new read. (This mostly involves the decision to bet for value). He calls to in order to pick off the bluff which he does.
If I understand your idea, Chan should call on 5th street, uh . . . call on 6th street if French doens't improve and the what on 7th? Call? Sounds strong, I would be terrified to play someone who employed this strategy.
Ed,
You make some excellent points. However, if Frenchy buys Chan's representation of trip 6's, why does he bet out? We haven't considered that Frenchy may have read Chan for a big pair in the hole by this point of the hand, and knew the correct odds(~1.5-1 in his favor).
Frenchy HAD held his own(relatively) for four days against Chan, Doyle, Chip and Moore. Not bad.
IMO if Chan just calls 5th, he saves bets if Frenchy catches an A,T or Diamond on 6th. He get's the 'missed' bets back, on 6th, when he can raise as a fave if Frenchy bricks.
No way Frenchy folds under any circumstances in this hand, the pot's too big.
Bill
You guys can stop licking Chan's balls. He made a mistake, not a huge won, but a fundamental error. No, he is not a true pisser, he just made an elementary mistake on one street. Since no is folding in the hand, not even Chan (anyone who thinks otherwise is wrong). Chan just thought he had the better hand when he didn't. I still claim the Frenchy is better than a 2-1 favorite. You simply cannot justify his play. He did an amazing job on every other street however, and thats what makes him one of the greats.
Chan: KdKc/6c4h9h Frenchy: AdQd/TdTc7d
If Doyle had: Jh, Chan is a 1.59-1 dog Jd, Chan is a 1.43-1 dog.
If they both brick on 6th, Chan becomes a 1.18-1 fave.
If Chan pairs one of his board cards on 6th and Frenchy bricks, Chan becomes a 2.35-1 fave.
So, IMO, Chan should've checked behind on 5th, so that he saves a bet if Frenchy flushes or trips on 6th. IMO the only reason for Chan to bet 5th would be if it might make Frenchy fold two small pair on the river, which it wouldn't have, or gain an extra bet if they both make monsters(unlikely).
Frenchy's river bluff was moronic, but he played the rest of the hand right.
Difficult to do all the math at the table, but a player of Chan's calibre should know that a four flush/underpair/overcard on 5th is not a 2-1 dog against a pair.
that the writer is recounting the hand accurately.
A big if.
Bill,
It's difficult to dissect a hand told 3rd party. You make some strong points also. In considering French's play, I don't think he played particularly well. He overplayed his hand by a lot, early. At some point in the hand, a strong player is going to give his opponent credit for a great read or a big hand, either way, the gratuitous raises were not sound.
In addition, when you consider the match up on 5th street, an important calculation is the chances of French making the flush (or catching a 10 or Ace) on 6th street. When you do the calculations for 2 cards to come it will skew your results because there is another betting round on 6th street. Chan is not an underdog when just considering 6th street. The only cards that are horrible for Chan on 6th are a 10,Ace or diamond, and I feel that the other advatages of raising on 5th outweigh the consideration of being a slight underdog thru 7th street.
The money in the pot is significant in that it makes the tactical play more important than the 'odds' play. Raising costs Chan an extra bet when French catches a death card on 6th and Chan bricks, but he retains control of the hand, and will make more money if he improves. I feel that calling in this situation, is a weaker play than raising. If Chan were out of position the situation would be entirely different.
What you have here is one hand out of ? muucho. Johnny Chan explains the hand after the fact if we are to believe the reporter that this is Chan's explantion. Detailing after the fact is relatively easy and sometimes gets a little out of whack. The fact of the matter is that stud is played with hole cards. I don't care how good a read one has on another player you still must be unsure of what the other player has in the hole unless you see his cards. Chan may just have put this guy on a hand and decided for whatever resason to play the hand aggressively. I've done that. I've been correct a number of times and incorrect more often than I would like to remeber. But it is still only one hand in a marathon session.
Note that the Frenchman correctly (probably) put Chan on a big pair in the hole and believed that Chan would fold to his reraise when he paired his tens. I don't believe he reraised because he felt he was a favorite although I'm sure he felt he had outs. Now when Chan calls the pot is so big that he must continue on with his play of the hand and try to win anyway he can even with a fruitless bluff on the river. Chan probably considered the size of the pot more than what was let on in the detail of the hand.
We all know that calling a paired door card is normally a losing proposition. Chan knows that but sometimes you correctly or incorrectly call. Especially if the pot gets big. And maybe if you have been playing a marathon and feel you got a good read on an opponent. Still it was only one hand.
vince
Give Chan a break ... so he goofed on the odds, B.F.D. nothing worse than having rank amateurs find fault with a world class player... even at this level they make mistakes once in awhile.
JV,
What a clever person you must be. I'm sure to follow the wisdom of a person with such a refined way of expressing himself. One, who is likely not worthy to polish Chan's orange in stud or any other game. The raise on 5th street is correct, he is roughly a 2:1 favorite to be ahead after 6th street. And this is the last response I will ever make to any of your posts. There are plenty of bright, good people on this forum, and I won't waste my time with anyone less than civil.
To G. Ed Conly,
What can't you get? He is not a favorite on fifth street. Assuming no one is folding, Chan should not raise. Is that so hard? Let me repeat, when you are not a favorite (which has been verified a thousand times)and do not have a best hand, it is not correct to raise. Sure if the Frenchman misses on sixth, he is no longer the favorite but that doesn't matter until he misses on sixth street. And by the way, I am heartbroken that you won't respond to any of my posts, I might have to take some Nyquil to get to sleep at night.
This is the truth! He had the complete control of the situation since he had assumed his opponent so well. He could see every improvement of the french man (except the river---no doubt). Yep he played very very aggressive but he didn't win catching a miracle card...he won because of his incredible reading hands! Nice hand, Chan! Marco
Certainly there is no need for the sniping!
Anyway, I dont agree with the statement that you should never raise if you are not a favorite. If you think about Ed's post a litle, I think you will see that he made some valid points.
My guess about this whole brouhaha is that the reporter did not descibe the situation accurately or fully, and the issue of dead cards for frenchy is not completely resolved.
But Chan won, and he is one of the best players ever, and given a choice between him and the reporter of the story, I'll take Chan.
Pat
all those braclets ,all his millions, all you fault finders, do I since some jealousy in you "Ship It", come on you want Chan to return his braclets? give me a break!!!
JV,
Perhaps you haven't noticed, but G. Ed Conly is one of the best and brightest posters on this forum. His analyses are sound and he doesn't "imagine" what the ev of a situation is he works it out and he's right. If he says you're wrong, then you're wrong and it would serve you well to learn why you're wrong rather than be rude or obnoxious to him.
SammyB,
I didn't start the sniping. Mr. Conly did. I am glad to see that you think he is a good poster and a good card player. I could care less. I am telling Johnny Chan that he made a mistake, if I can tell Johnny Chan he made a mistake I think I have the right to tell G. Ed Conly he is wrong. The fact is Mr. Ed Conly is wrong. He makes some intesting points about what could happen on the later betting rounds but that doesn't change the fact that Chan knew his opponents hand, which was better than his own and raised, in a situation where his opponent wasn't going to fold. My claim that Chan made a mistake can be backed up by simulation. God himself could not argue that Chan was right to raise fifth street. This is an amazing blunder for such a good player, that is why I think the post is interesting. If a total pisser posted this same hand everyone would laugh and tell him to quit, but because Johnny Chan the master did it, it must be right since he doesn't make mistakes. By the way, for all of you that don't understand why Chan is not a favorite on fifth street, go play hold em. Get top pair bet it, if raised call it all, and if ever checked to you bet again. You will do fine over there. By the way, I am jealous of Johnny Chan. I am jealous of Micheal Jordan too, because he is a better basketball player than me. Oh yeah,I am also jealous of Tiger Woods, Randy Moss, Garry Kasparov and some others.
As a mainly hold'em player, I have some insight, I believe, into this hand. Ask yourself-would I play this hand differently IF I KNEW WHAT THE OTHER PLAYER HAS?? For example, I have not seen one post on this that considers the likelihood of Chan and Frenchy BOTH hitting two pair. Also, Chan can fold if frenchy hits a diamond on 6th, and he does not have the outdraw. This makes the math not as relebant as most of you believe. Ask what chances does frenchy have to make the hand ON A PARTICULAR STREET, not what are his chances to make the hand ON ALL STREETS. I believe this is what Chan's thoughts were. Finally, if Chan does know what his opponent has, AND he hits a pair on board also BEFORE Frenchy hits another diamond(or even if on the same street, Chan has some added equity on out re-drawing Frenchy. I haven't seen any of you consider all these other "calculation oriented" scenarios. You have all just considered the odds of one particualr scenario-what is the afvoritism of frenchy's hand. Other things need to be considered also, most notably the redraw odds, and the both hitting 2 pair odds.
Yep, last 2 answers were good in my opinion. I played only 3 months at high limits at 5 card draw--- very famous game in Europe (with a deck of 32 cards, 4 players). Buy-in with all-in structure: about $5000. Half time hands were all-in. I called a guy who pushed all-in ($8,000 about) after drawing 1 card. I called him with 2 Jacks (almost nothing with 32 cards) and won! No doubt I was fool but I have a complete control of that player (very high staked but super aggressive). Same control (sorry for comparizon Chan) had Chan in that game. Odds, math, probabilities: all tells that have no value when you play 5 days long and when you are one of the best player in the world! Marco
Marco you need to look at this again - control or no control you can't change EV. This isn't about calling bluffs or making reads, the cards are all layed on the table. Chan is not in control if he is raising with the worst hand with the logic "I have a higher pair, he must hit to win." Pisser talk.
As Vince suggested, chan isn't folding even if a diamond hits, they are both flipping their hands over at the river.
Yep, but in relation of his good previous reading hand, he has 2 very very crying calls on 6th and 7th. It's certain, when Chan evaluated his opponent hand have to worry ONLY if frenchy has hidden Aces (very unlikely frenchy has tens in the hole)
Any word from Sklansky/Malmuth/Zee on this????? Where are you guys on these controversial issues?????
Sammy,
Thank you for the nice compliment. I am posting the following information for those players who care about a correct tactical evaluation of the situation. The bets on 6th street and 7th street are independent bets. It would be incorrect to establish that a drawing hand (albeit a favorite with two cards to come) is the betting favorite unless both players are all-in. With a bet to come on 6th street, the two events need to be considered independently. As an exposed hand problem, assuming that Chan had a 100% read on the hand, the following are true of the 5th street to 6th street probabilities:
P that Chan fails to improve folds to a bet on 6th street (French -A, 10 diamond): 22.99%
P that Chan wants a free card due to a certain combinations of cards falling: 7.01%
P that both players improve and Chan is still ahead of French: 4.63%
P that French improves, but Chan still must continue with the hand: 10.61%
P that French catches trip 10’s and Chan makes Kings up: 1.10%
P that Neither player improves: 53.66%
Notice that Chan will fold ~24.1% of the time on 6th street. Chan will bet on 6th street ~63.6% of the time! Chan will want a free card ~12.3% of the time.
These numbers should clarify the argument for a raise on 5th street. Being able to recognize this in the heat of battle is why Chan plays Killer Poker, and others make vulgar references that are supposed to pass as strength of conviction.
Ed,
Great post. I don't play much Stud, so this is a new concept to me. Did you factor in bets saved when Chan just calls on 5th, and the fact that Frenchy will not fold under any circumstances?
I'll do all the math when I have time(not that I don't trust your figures.... :) )
Bill
Bill,
I made further clarifications in a thread on the "High Stakes" forum, as Ray Zee had some thoughts about these same considerations. It's under 5th and 6th street probs.
you all are forgetting that if frenchie catches on 6th street then chan can fold...also the overall texture of playing may cause frenchie to pay off chan's big hands in future...he made a reeeel pro play..the advantage a top no limit player who has extreme confidence can have...imho
It may be intuitive that the made hand beats the underpair and the draw, but the hand that will win the most money by the river is the frenchy. Johnny Chan knew his opponents hand and couldn't play correctly. He should be stripped of his bracelets. Go back to no limit holdem, where the entire game is reading.
Just think you are sitting there all fustrated over Chan's unorthodox moves in no-limit holdem the power of money prevails and timely bluffs...and no "suspicious'" I did not miss the point in Ship It's fault finding of Johnny Chan's mis calculating the odds in that situation...its about sitting at the table for 5 days straight with the frenchman, you get to know how people play by then wouldn't you think....sometimes mathematics is not the reason to make your decisions, especially in high stakes poker.... Mr. Chan is a millionare by playing unsound poker in certain situations... so quit your bitching about it... ye mere mortal amatures. NIGHTSTICK CRACKS AGAIN.
1993 $1500 buy-in; beat Mansour Matloubi in the headup.
Nightstick,
You made some great points, but given the situation; limit poker(no matter how high the limits) and a big pot(Frenchy ain't folding at any point), Chan 'needs' to recognize an elementary 5th street matchup and act accordingly.
Bill
p.s. Chan is certainly one of the five greatest all-around players in history.
We were playing $2-$5 Slick-ippe and I had trips snapped on the river on a 2-outer by some jerkstore playing a backdoor low. That seems to happen all the time
Makes me want to stick to Bicester and Spinning Dog of the Nile.
That seems to happen in all of the "ipe" games. Starting hand selection is skewed a bit, because "middle ball" hands are frequently more playable for high, because the relevant up cards stay available longer.
Have you ever thought of the ramifications of not rotating the card selection?
The Indian Casino near my home town has recently increased the cost of buying an unseen card to a sizeable amount in its "Slick-ippe" game. This has stopped a lot of the backdooring on river street by the jerkstore's bestsellers. You might consider doing the same in your game.
That also frees up the board and makes it less likely that you'll see the same 2 cards the next round.
That does seem to help. There is nothing worse than looking at the Jack-Eight offsuit two or three rounds in a row.
We've always played it as 6-card stud (2d, 4u). Each player gets the hole cards, then a bet. Dealer exposes 2 cards and UTG can select either one for free or pay to take an unseen card. Option for each player, then bet. First option on card rotates for each of 4 up cards. Played hi-lo, with or without qualifiers and can be cards-speak or simultaneous declaration.
Is this the game you guys play? Weippe is 1 hole card and Tripe is 3 hole cards.
Great game.
Stack O' Chips, it sounds like you guys are playing the New Orleans version. We play the "Western" version, where you have a twist available, including a deucy twist, after sixth street. Do you ever play that version?
I'm not a big fan of a deucy twist in a game with two hole cards. Especially considering the fact that you had a choice on every card anyway -- a little too much deception. Plus, the card you roll doesn't give away any information, because it's frequently the extraneous 6th card that doesn't play in your hand anyway. Interesting thought, though. Wonder if anybody else out these has tried your Western version.
While slick-ippe and tripe each have their advantages, I have always felt that the true measure of any ippe player is his ability in classic weippe. I prefer to mix the duecy twist in once in awhile, but when played without the duecy twist, you are more than likely to catch some stupid spud who forgets about the duecy twist and incorrectly exposes his hole card. These kinds of players make your EV almost limitless.
Stay off the rail.
Actually, the deucy twist in classic weippe is more acceptable, for reasons stated above, because there is only one hole card.
As for the "stupid spud" forgetting the rules and trying to deucy twist in an "up for an up; down for a down" version, that is part of the reason for overcomplicating games -- to trip up the people who are always talking when the dealer announces the game. Glad I never do that.
Same answer as Lucky's. We have never traditonally played it with a deucy twist. If you want that additional card I'd rather give everybody a 3rd hole card -- a true "7th street."
Slick-ippe can never be played when you play with idiots that worry more about screwing you over than improving their hand. What do you guys do to prevent this problem?
I have been a frequent victim of this ploy. No doubt that is because I try to project a hostile, less-than-honest table image. The only way to beat this strategy is to make it too expensive for these morons to play. If they bet, raise. If re-raised, cap it.
Stay off the rail.
The Store, you sound like a guy who often plays in our weekly game. While most of us play a friendly game to mostly socialize, one particular Jerk is constantly jamming the pot for no particular reason. In fact, we hardly ever play one of our favorite games, Hore's Half-Acre, because this Jerk always caps the betting on second street. In fact, at last night's game he did this very same thing, and was easily our "best seller."
I must thank you folks for your thoughtful discussion of the ippe family of games. I too have had some experience with these games. My experience has been in a dealers choise arena rather than the more common no limit ippe tournament. In the dealers choice arena, I have found the following rules very helpful: 1) Don't listen to the jerkstore 2) Once you recieve your cards look at them and them toss them in the center signifying that you fold and will not be participating- some like to wait for someone to bet prior to throwing in their hand. However, waiting for a bet, even a small bet, increased the possiblity that you will not follow this rule and will waste money calling a bet looking for cards that will never come. Obviously these rules do not apply in a no limit tournament environment. Did anyone video tape the slickippe tournament on ESPN last weekend? What a wonderful display of slickippe technique.
Sound like one on those dealer choice games the begins: I learned this when was working on an oil rig in Lousiana.
Best strategy is to fold quickly and then when the deal comes to you, play regular 5-card stud (if anybody remembers what this is), hope you get a high pair at the start, bet it all the way and collect.
Someone reminded me of a hand I played about 6 months ago, and I would like to get a critique of my play (from what I can remember).
$15-30 stud. By 4th street I have an open-end high straight draw. On 5th street I paired one of my face cards and bet, and got raised by Zack (a good player who sometimes pushes a small edge on the come) who has something like 6, 7, 8(not suited) showing. So, I figure him for a small straight. I call, everyone else folds. On sixth street, I make a broadway straight and bet, and get raised again by Zack.
We raised and re-raised 6 times. As I said, first I put Zack on a smaller straight. But after 4 raises, I re-thought this, and decided that he must have trips. Zack can be a kind in-your-face type of player, and I dearly love to get right back in his face when I believe that I have the advantage. On the fifth raise Zack tells me that he has a full house, and I reply that he can't have a full-house on 6th street with no pair showing - and I then made the 6th raise. He just called.
Now I'm fairly certain that he has trips, but he has to catch to beat me, and I don't want to back off because, well, because it's Zack, so I bet the river. Zack called without looking at his river card. I threw my straight on board as he squeezed out his last card. He made a full house on the river and took the pot.
I had a read on Zack, and knew that I had him beat, but also knew that he could draw out on me. I felt that I had the advantage with the made hand, but the size of the pot due to all the raises made it correct for him to call.
What (if anything) should I have done differently?
All comments welcome.
1) If he were a good player he would not have put in 6 raises on 6th street with what was obviously the worst hand at the time. You either had a pair showing or 4 to a straight so he had to know he was beat if he was a good player.
2) If he were a good player he would not have called in the dark on the river. (In fact there's no hand he could call with even after looking, either raise with a full house or fold the trips.)
You played the hand fine. Just unlucky to have been beat by an idiot who seriously overplayed his hand.
Tough beat, Zack played the hand like a total moron. He is really hurting, and he couldn't even raise the river, what a joke. You played the hand fine. I can't believe Zack would play a hand like that.
Zack maybe not such a moron. Zack had rolled trips. SM&Z in 7CSFA Say that they should be played fast. But if this were a tight game where a raise on third street steals the antes and the bringin/limpers, Zack was correct to slowplay. If Zack had raised on 3rd st, you should have thought about folding. On 5th, he probably figured you for two pair, thus the raise. Again an opportunity to fold, though it would depend on the pot odds. On sixth street, you probably should have called earlier. While Zack would have been incorrect to 6-bet it (if they rules allowed), each of his raises individually was probably correct. (Assumming all his cards are live, his odds of hitting a full house or better are around 2.7:1) You probably should have called after he raised. On the river, he was playing with you. Regardless of his river card, there is too much money in the pot for him to fold. Remember he probably figured you for two pair.
I think the reason that Zack told you he had a boat was to see what you had, you let him know that you didn't have one by your answer. If you had it to do all over again and played dumb, (obviously he mustn't think too much of you to say that with no pair), that his boat better be bigger than yours, do you think that would have changed things ?
My point is that you bit and he got the information that he wanted, I still think you did the right thing in terms of reraising but "well it's Zack" tells me he's in your head so bare that in mind amd give him free reads.
I think that you are right about Zack being in my head. Tough to admit, although apparent to me now - thanks.
I don't know how Zack might have reacted if I hadn't made my comment. With or without the comment, I think he realized that I had him beat on 6th street, so he didn't re-raise.
I still don't understand his blind call on the river - i mean it doesn't make logical sense to me. If he had an out to beat me, then why didn't he look first? Maybe he had already given up on the hand.
Bruce K,
I think Bruce knew you had a straight and he also knew you would raise till the cows come home on 6th because of his cards showing. You probably beat him in a similar way in the past and he was returning the favor. Or he just doesn't like you because your a better player. This might just be all BS but I think he knew what he was doing and all his cards were live so he took a shot. More info would be helpful as to how big your pair was compared to his trips and did he have them rolled up etc. Just remember this hand still owns you because your still thinking about it and maybe that's what Zack wanted to be able to use this against you, but if you think about it before you enter the next session with him you can use it against him.
Paul
well stated...more here than just this hand isolated...reminds me some of discussion about johnny Chan being a fish on a hand where he made a great read and jammed when his opponent had math edge...somehow these plays can unnerve certain players (What's the use of playing correctly) and/or set up revenge as a motive rather than playing game optimally,,jmho..but i would jam my last dollar with the straight and no pair showing..of course bankroll considerations might vary some player's decisions here too
My pair on 5th street was Queens, I believe, but there was another queen out. Zack was not rolled up, but made his set on 5th street. His play may have been motivated somewhat by revenge, because I have nailed him a few times before, but I think that he probably put me on two pair instead of the straight, and that's why he raised so many times. The last raise I put in convinced him I had the straight. I think he was a broken man at that point, and that is why he just called in the dark on the end - because he realized that he had read my hand wrong. It seems to me his play of just calling on the end was the worst decision he made, because I would have paid off another raise.
Thanks for all your comments, they have been very helpful to me in thinking about this hand.
Bruce K.
It's a no brainer. Don't even think about it...reraise until you are out of chips. There is no way he is a favorite in this hand unless maybe (haven't done the math) he has a 4 flush with his trips and ALL his cards are live. Seeing how his trips were hidden this means he DID not have 4 cards to a flush on his board. Raise away. It happened to me once when I was playing low limits 2 years ago...a guy put in 8 raises in 6-12 with trips against my straight. Got him all in and won it.
You should not have told him he couldn't have a full house and raised sixt street until you were all in.
Vince
The same thing happened to me at 10-20 pp. I show an Ace (K-Q no suited in the hole), he limp in 3rd, I raise he reraise. In 4th I catch a Jack and blank for him. He bet, I call. In 5th I cacth a ten for a broadway, he catches another blank. From this point until the river is a battle of raises (I have the absolute nuts and he continues raising me with an ACe showing and some blanks no suited no connected). Obvious on the river I only call his bet: He had full of ACes with a running pair, he started rolled up. I think, according with an above answer, that he surely was rolled and, seen the rarity of this hand, he didn't want to believe he could losing with that hand, even he well figured you have you beaten (he knew very very well you had the nuts along the way). Marco
Marco,
Sounds like you played the hand correctly except for the raise on third street. 10-20 stud is not a limit where you need to be real aggressive on third street. When you made the broadway, if you where the one that kept raising, then you played the hand, regardless of how rare, correctly. You cannot ask for more than getting all your money in with the best of it. (I assume you only had a buy in or so in front of you. If it was your entire life's savings well now that's a different matter.)
Vince
Vince Lepore wrote: "You should not have told him he couldn't have a full house and raised sixt street until you were all in."
I don't understand. Can you elaborate on this thought Vince?
Bruce K.
"You cannot ask for more than getting all your money in with the best of it. (I assume you only had a buy in or so in front of you. If it was your entire life's savings well now that's a different matter.)"
I copied this from a reply I made to Marco, who described the same situation as yours. You were a big favorite on 6th street to win the hand. He had at best 10 outs (Assuming all his cards were live). Assume there were were 30 unseen cards (probably more) then you were at least a 2 - 1 favorite to win the hand. Get that money in there. He's giving you even money when you are 2 - 1. Now if it is your life savings don't bet it all no matter how tempting. But bet a good portion of it.
vince
I am not as familiar with this game. Is it anything like Slick's House? This Bo guy sounds like someone who stays with a 2-7 off-suit and then whines about getting sniped by a 64.
I thought 2-7 offsuit was the best starting hand in Slick-ippe.
The Setting: Regular Wednesday night PL Omaha Tournament at the Silver Star, Philadelphia, MS. $10 buy in, $20 rebuys, $40 add on. A little more than 40 players start the tournament. Down to final table with nine players. Top seven players finish in the money.
Our hero is in the big blind with T3,500 remaining after posting T2,000 blind. UTG players makes it T5000. I respect UTG as an excellent player who continually finishes high in these tournaments and has several years of experience as a poker player. I would rate him as one of the top players who are considered regulars at the Silver Star. Tight/aggressive would be my characterization of him although he is not above using position, image and all other weapons available to him to run a stone cold bluff. In other words, he is a respected, formidable opponent.
He raises and makes it T5000 and has about T2500 remaining in chips. My T5500 stack before the big blind had me 7th in stack size at the table. UTG is probably 6th in chips. Only one player has a huge chip lead on the rest of the table. Remember, nine players and only 7 get paid.
Following UTG's raise everyone including the small blind fold to me. My cards are Ad-2d-4h-5h. UTG could have a good hand or he could be trying to pick up the blinds.
I'm faced with calling his raise or folding and possibly being down to 1500 after the small blind passes me. I might could hang on and two people would be eliminated and make a small profit on my $50 investment in the game.
QUESTION 1: What do you think I should have done? Call, go all in with my extra T500 or fold.
I'm thinking why can't I be looking at a monster hand, too. Well, at least, I have a suited ace. Also, four cards to a wheel straight. Dang, these sure are little cards, though. I remembered earlier that I had knocked out a player when I had 3-4-5-6 on the big blind when I called his all in raise which only cost me an extra thousand dollars. I had made two pair to beat his pair of queens that he held in his hand.
QUESTION 2: What other items should I have been considering concerning my action against UTG's raise?
I called and raised all in the extra T500. We laid our cards out. He held K-Q-Q-10. ARRGH!
Despite this I sucked out. I made two pair 2's and 4's to his Q-Q. I doubled through, picked up a few hands later and finished third. UTG was now crippled and held on to finish 7th. A interesting side note: UTG's significant other wound up splitting 1st and 2nd money. She knocked me out, in fact. The person who had come to the final table with a huge chip lead despite being very inexperienced at Omaha, tournaments and pot limit games blew his chips against the more experienced players eventually and finished 5th.
QUESTION 3: What do you think about UTG's play? Was the raise in early position a good move? Should he have just called?
QUESTION 4: Would you have gambled finishing in the money away with my raise all in with nothing but wheel cards in a high only game. There were nut flush and straight possibilities. I wasn't sure I would receive a hand with these possibilities again and be blinded out of the tournament.
All thoughts and observations are welcome.
mredge
anyone play in these??? I want to play the stud tourney on sunday. how are they?? how many players??? any tips??
thanks
billy b
Billy B,
$20.00 entry fee; one $10.00 rebuy. Usually draw around 100 players. I rarely play in these because I'm a lousy stud player. Tips: I'm a lousy stud player and have made the final table in 3 of 7 entered. Take from that what you will. Good Luck.
BTW, starting time is 10:00 am.
went today, 126 players. saw some really bad play I didnt do too well made it to the 300-600 lvl got beat by an old guy that played almost everyhand. Hopefully i will get better cards next time. only had about 2 playable hands in 2 hours and one of them was the one I busted out with K's + Q's
peace
billy b
These tourneys are excellent. The fields are soft, the softest I've ever encountered at any level anywhere. You get plenty of chips, and the levels increase slowly enough that you get plenty of play, i.e., it's not a total crapshoot, but a tourney that allows more skill than most at this cost level.
$15 + $5 gets you T1000, and $10 rebuy gets you T1000 more. Always take the rebuy, because it's cheaper than the original buy-in. Don't bother waiting, just take it as soon as you can. There will be plenty of time before you're all-in, if ever, and you very likely won't bust before the rebuy period ends.
Have fun.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Hi
I am playing 7 card stud poker, circa 5$-20$ (ante 2$) in Europe.
It is a very loose game, with some bad players and few good players. The casino take 6$ at the antes in every pot (2$ is going to a special players pot. But you can only win 30% of that special pot, if you get straight flush), plus they expekt to be tipped off about 3% of every winning pot.
Is that worth playing ?
Regards,
Michael Anderson
I'd have to know a little more about this game. But I tend to doubt that it is worthwhile. $6 is a VERY, VERY steep rake for any game. Frankly, I don't understand how they could take this out of the antes. How large are the antes? $1 a player?
To really determine whether the game can be beaten I'd need to know the average pot size. If the average size is $60 and usually heads up then the answer is no...at least not for me. I am not 20% better than the pool of people I am ever likely to play. I don't think I could beat the 20% vig on my winnings (10% of the pot with half of the pot being my money would be 20% vig on my winnings). But if the average pot size is $240 and multi-way then I think I could.
Good luck.
Sounds like casino Marienlyst in Helsingør Denmark. Is It ? I used to play there and did pretty good. I could win one big bet every hour, but I dont think I can keep that up. Because the conditions are so bad I no longer play. I agree most players are very week, and they need to be for us to have any chance. The rake is steep, but even worse are the tips for the dealers. They are so greedy and in the long run this game must be hard to beat. If you do play make sure most players are very bad. And never play shorthanded. Because they drop $6 no matter how small the pot is, no one can win shorthanded.
Good luck
Anders
Very good guess Anders.
It is Casino Marienlyst in Denmark. The ante is 2$ a player and it is normal multi-way handed (5-7 players). I don`t really know the average pot, because I have only played there for a couple of hours. But it seems to me, that it is not worth playning, I guess
Forget that game! Take an airplane and go to Vienna at Concord or POkerworld clubs. Good atmosphere, good (and weak) players, good service, good food, good dealers. 7 stud is the most famous game there (but I think you know it) Marco
5-10 stud at the Trop in AC. Weak game, even for the Trop. ON the river I miss a flush but have a pair of sixes, hidden, with a K and A on board. There are two other player both weak players. One has a possible straight on board and one appears to have nothing. I am first to bet on the river.
I thought about bluffing, as the first opponenet may have missed his straight and would fold if he missed. The other player had nothing, and I was not sure where to put him. Both called bets on fifth and sixth after I bet, so I wasnt sure what he had. I put him on two small pair, and he was the type who would fold, since my board was fairly strong.
I thought that I could bluff any one of them singly, but I probably couldnt bluff both. So,I checked,and it checked all the way around. First player had nothing and the second had a pair of sevens,and won the pot.
The question is whether it is worthwhile to bluff in this situation. The pot was approximately $80. I am fairly sure that the second player would have folded with only a pair. Was it worthwhile to try? Any comments appreciated.
Pat
You probably could have bluffed me if I had an unimproved low pair, but you ain't gonna bluff the Trop weekend visitors who are there for the action. You might bluff 1 of them, but the other will, "have to keep you honest". Forget the check raise since they never "get it" in the 5/10 game
Interesting and very frequent situation in weak-loose games. First, you had to notice if those players loved to play many come hands (as often happens) or they played small pairs even they look at scare boards with higher cards (especially Aces). I think that table was a mixture of these things. What was your previous play? Did you always bet with Aces up or Kings up? And when you had these hands, they called you with weaker hands? Even a super-loose player remember this river betting (better when they lose that pot). If I were in your place no doubt I surely fired a bet (after a brief theatral glance at their boards so to give an idea that I'm almost sure I'm not crashing against possible flushes or straights or paired doorcards, etc). If I'm called and lose the pot: good advertising! Weak players love to chase me in future rounds (you know very well). If I win, all the better. In my games, I win in the most part only when I made these voluntary errors. When I play in the right tight-aggressive play after some minute I don't get anything from the pot. I appreciate very much your reply, Patrick especially about stud games in Vegas THanks, Marco
$10 to win $80 isn't too bad for this kind of bluff.
If the straight hit, you lose. But if he missed (about 3 out of 4), his fold may help convince the next player to fold. I guess the first fold sometimes lends a little credibility to your bet. Especially if the first player is known as a good player. Against weak opponents, the first player to the left is the most important one to convince. I've seen this work a number of times at low limits.
DJ
While playing stud over the wekend in a 5-10 game, I began to wonder whether it is worthwhile to play a certain type of starting hand aggressively. Namely, starting hands such as 8A/8 or 9K/9 and these types of hands that will make a high two pair. The game I usually play is 5-10 at AC, which is a weak game.
The problem is that these hands do not want multiple callers. So I frequently reraise on third, fourth and/or fifth, depending upon what I think is necessary to knock people out. Typically, I will raise on third, then raise on fourth or checkraise depending upon the players in the pot, my position, the boards, whether the A or K is my door, and whether I think I can knock them out with a checkraise. For example, I played a hand this weekend where I checkraised on fourth after a raise on third with 6A/6K and my opponent folded after stating that he thought I had trip sixes.
I realized that there are two potential problems with this strategy. Firstly, my reraise, especially on fifth requires that I put in $20 or even $30(rarely) to knock out players. Even when this is successful, in the typical 5-10 game the pot is not that large, and it may not be worthwhile to reraise to $20 if the pot is small.
Secondly, the raise on third is, in essence, a semi-bluff. Most times you do not get the pot heads up, although usually there are only 2-3 callers. Even this situation is not the greatest, as it requires the reraise or raise on fifth, thereby costing me even more money when these hands come up.
While I have no doubt that this is the correct way to generally play these type of hands at a higher limit, I am not sure that these hands are increasing my win when i play them in the manner described in a game where there are usually smallpots. I am not concerned with the situation when there is a good sized pot in 5-10, as my strategy, I think,is close to correct.
So, the question is whether it is worthwhile to play these hands, and in what situations,and when they are played,how fast should they be played in a game where there are generally small pots.
Any comments are appreciated.
Pat
Pat,
I'm not sure what you mean when you say the pot is not that large. If you are speaking in dollar terms, because the game is 5-10, then absolute size is not important. The bets you will need to make to knock people out are proportionately small. If you are saying the pots are small because there are initially only a few limpers or callers, then that is precisely what you want. A hand like you describe plays well heads up which will likely result in a smaller pot.
I agree 8A/8 and 9K/9 are pretty decent hands that should be played agressively. I find that it is much easier to limit the field if the kicker is the door card. That also has the advantage of hidden power when you hit trips. Sometimes I can tell that raising 6A/6 on third will not have much of an effect so I won't even try it. I like to wait until 4th for a possible high card and then play fast.
Another consideration is when someone else has a probable pair higher than your pair and lower than your kicker. Many times it is better to let him do the raising. If he is directly to your left you can then reraise and really put pressure on others to drop.
I have asked myself these same questions. Since I play 5-10 at the Trop often, I feel compelled to comment, even though I have no answers.
In your second paragraph, you state, and I agree, that these hands (8A/8, 88/A) cannot stand many callers. The problem then, as you know, is that the 5-10 at the Trop typically features a plethora of callers coming in with who knows what. This being the case, you have an up hill battle with these hands. If I'm close to the bring-in and "know" I'm going to get callers, even if I complete the bet (3rd Street), I'm more inclined to limp, and hope someone late raises so I can re-raise. My hand has to be live, of course, or it's better to toss it, I'm sure. If the game is aggressive, as well as loose, I can't see playing this hand in early position at all. If I'm in late position, and miraculously no one, or only one player has come in, then I can come in for a raise, or re-raise. I can't see raising in late position if several player have come in. They won't get out (typically). I'd rather limp, and go for a raise or check-raise on 4th Street.
Your door card is important. I normally like pocket pairs because of the potential to hit a concealed hand, but the drawback with 88/A, for example, is you probably will be first to act throughout the hand. If you had raised on 3rd Street, and several players called, betting out on 4th Street is pretty impotent. You are virtually compelled to opt for a check-raise. That's okay, if someone in late position will oblige you with a bet, and your raise will knock out the rest of the field. However, this not such a bowl of cherries, in my opinion. It's possible/probable that the bettor has something, and chances are it's better than a pair of eights. I don't like playing hands when I'm behind, am first to act, and am doubtful that my opponent will muck his hand.
On the other hand, with A8/8 you probably won't be high, but hitting your best card (8) may mean you don't get the hand paid off. If your opponents couldn't care less about someone pairing his door card, which is often the case in these games, I'd rather have A8/8.
This post is longer than I wanted it to be, so let me wrap it up. These are semibluff hands, and in loose games typical of the 5-10 at the Trop, semibluffs don't have the value they have in games where players might actually fold. I don't think these hands are automatically playable.
Tom D
you said, "So I frequently reraise on third, fourth and/or fifth, depending upon what I think is necessary to knock people out."
Does that not depend on (1) knowing the players (2) your position (3) your up cards and what you are representing and (4) your table image? If you think the reraise will get you heads up, then it is fine. My experience is that the players who call the reraise at this limit usually have what they represent, and the only people you get out are those who would contribute to the pot and who you could beat. Calling a reraise tells you either (1) he does not believe you or (2) he has you beat. Since you cannot tell what he has at this early stage, you may be making a mistake at this limit, although 3rd is the cheapest street to make a mistake on.
Additionally, I find that check raises do not work real well in the 5-10 game at Trop. I suspect we have played in the same games before.
You get right to the heart of this problem. While you are correct that I think about the considerations mentioned, the greater problem is that someone who calls the reraise in this limit is usually has a stronger hand than someone at a higher limit. If I knew for a fact that my heads up opponent had, for example, a pair of kings (as opposed to any number of hands that a tougher player or a higher limit player might have such as a three flush or a small pair with a flush kicker) then my play is likely incorrect.
As you aptly state, and as I realize since we do play in the same type of game in AC, the caller of my reraise usually has a high pair and not the other possible hands. This may make my hand unprofitable, and that is the question I have; does it?
Perhaps S/M/Z can help with this problem?
Thanks for the input, Pat
This may be an oversimpification but if all the cards were turned up and you saw that your opponent had a higher pair than you, what would be the answer to your question ?
6/12 stud, I have 4A/4 and call the unraised $1 bring in, aces and 4’s live. Fourth street I get an ace, and bet the $3 max as I’m high, four callers.
Fifth street, 4A/4A8, I’m still high and bet my Aces up, 1 call, raised by XX/K(X)J, 2 clubs, call, I call and last person on my left calls.
Sixth street, 4A/4A88, 3-pair, A/4/8’s all live. The raiser picked up another club, no help to the 2 others. I was going to check but didn’t want it to be checked around, so I bet and got called and raise by the apparent flush. Person to my right thought long and folded. I was the only caller and when it got heads up the raiser asked if I wanted to check it down blind before the river. I agreed as I thought I was behind to a flush.
Got my 8 on the river for a boat and I quickly rolled them over as she showed her flush made on sixth street.
Bad play on my part (esp. betting my 3-pair, thinking I would be raised, but not wanting to reraised myself once heads up)?
1. was there a $6 max on fourth? your post says $3. MAybe I am unfamiliar with this type of game,butI assume that the bet on fourth street was $6.
2. With that in mind, the pot on fifth street was approximately $152. You should have checked and called on sixth, as it was clear that she had a flush. By betting, you must think that you will get raised thereby cutting your odds in half, and you risk the reraise knocking people out which you do not want. If you check-call on sixth your call is a good one due to the six outs.
You don't say how many callers there were on third, so I dont know how many cards you saw, but with all six cards live you had good pot odds. Depending on the number of cards, i.e if there were 5-8 callers on third, your bet might even be OK on sixth if you anticipated a raise. If there were six callers on third, then by my calculations you saw six other cards on third and fourth, and five on fifth and sixth,leaving you with 6 cards out of 30 or 4-1 against. In this situation a bet is OK, but not the best play unless you thought the flush was not made. In any event you would call either way. I presume you would not have bet without the two extra outs, since that would be a bad play.
You didnt get that lucky, as in this situation you had good odds. But you may have misplayed on third, or maybe not.
Pat
3. I think you played incorrectly on third street as you should probably have raised (but see my prior post about this type of hand!). On fourth street your bet is OK, but you should have considered checkraising, which you may have done but your post does not say.
Pat,
Six players called the $1 bring in, I was 3rd to call and didn’t want to raise to $3 with a pair of 4’s. I was high on 4th street with my Ace/4 and I think if I tried a check raise it would have been checked around and I wanted some folds with my Aces up. I’m limited to a $3 bet on 4th, unless there is a pair showing.
Even with the raise I wasn’t 100% sure of the flush, maybe kings or jacks up, with a draw to the flush.
Thanks for your input.
I agree with Patrick. Check and call. I would not have raised on 3rd street unless I was trying to get money in the pot. You will not scare anyone out of that game on 3rd street.
Does anybody know of any good books or sources of information for manila poker.
I have never seen any discussion about it.
Can anybody tell me anything usefull about the two and three card versions of the game.
??
I suggest you post the message at www.pokernetwork.com, the Australiasian poker site.
I know Bob Bell (he also reads the site) here in New Zealand wrote a load of strategy articles that were printed in "cards" magazine, if there are any of these articles on the net the guys at pokernetwork.com should point you in the right direction.
Personally I'd stay away from it, that 4x bet on the river card leads to too many suckouts.. I think good players have a better edge at the standard games..
d.
The best sex in the orient.
I appreciate very much your comments about this hand. Game: $10-20 about, ante $2, bring-in $5. 8 players, in the most part weak opponents. I have (9-3)3 off i'm the bring-in I open, 2 callers, a guy with a 9s showing raises. All fold, I call and 2 other players behind me call (totally 4 players). 4th card: a 3 for me, 2 blanks for 2 callers, a Jack of spades (same suit of his doorcard) for the raiser. I bet the maximum ($20), 1 player call (i don't remember exactly his hand, i think a King off in the board), the raiser with 9 showing raised me, I reraised, he capped me. 5th card: blank for me, 2 offsuit for him. In this point I love to bet. Why? First I want to know where I'm, second I don't absolutely want to give him a freecard (for his eventually flush of spades). I bet, he raised, I reraised, he calls. 6th card: a blank for me, an ace offsuit for him. River: No help for me, I check, he checks. Result: I lost vs a trips of Aces. Questions: 1- I did a mistake raising in 4th card with my trips of 3s? 2- I did a mistake to set up a battle in 4th, 5th and 6th card? 3- I did a mistake figuring he was wuith 4 flush, trying to get a freecard? 4- It was a mistake to think he probably had no trips of 9s as I had one 9 in my hole? Consider also in that table I'm known such a very aggressive player. My opponent who won the hand is mediocre in 7-stud. Comments appreciated. Marco
It might be easier to read if you spaced things out more.
You played the hand well. It was obvious he had aces, possibly kings. You owned him, I would just check and call on sixth and the river. I love you maximum bet on fourth street, it got you tons of extra bets with the best of it.
with no overcards and no scare card, I would have folded on 3rd street. I figure him for a big pair, not betting on the come. if you get stuck with 2 small pair, what are you gonna do? if you had an A, K Q showing and a pocket pair, you might play with a low pocket pair. at least tou have a 12% draw on 4th street that is legit. As i say again, I would have folded the crappy 3's
I think you played well after third. However, the call on third seems out of line. You have a low pair and a partially dead, somewhat low kicker.
If he has a large pair in the hole then you are a big underdog without any overcards.
If he has split 9s then your kicker is even more dead and your pair is lower than his. Also making you an underdog.
Once you hit your 3s you played well. I can understand him raising you on 4th, but not on 5th. He was lucky to catch that ace after that. Also, he probably should have bet the river. I assume you would have called.
Although I disagree with your call on third I think he played much worse. When you came out swinging on 4th you were at least advertising trip 3s. However, he never played as if he thought you had trips.
First thing: Thanks of your answers. I totally agree with Maurice, I played bad in 3rd, really bad. But I'm happy to heard I didn't do a mistake jammin the pot in 4th. By the way, I'm preparing a post about 4th card play. I have to explain things in a better graphic fashion, sorry for this. Marco
I would have folded for the raise on third. Also I think he played the hand much more agressively than he would have if he had a four-flush, so I think it was a mistake to put him on that hand. This is especialy true after he raised you when you paired your door.I would not have reraised on fifth either.
You see the problem with playing this hand for a raise--you sometimes catch the perfect card and still lose.
Pat
Marco,
You said in your post that the other players were mostly weak, and the player who finally won the pot was mediocre. In this situation, I would have to put the raiser on Aces or Kings in the pocket. If he were a strong aggressive player, I might put him on a pair of 9's with an Ace or king kicker.
In either case you are running uphill to catch him. You have a 9 in the hole so one or maybe two of you kicker are already out. You do not have a kicker higher than his doorcard, so even if you do make two pair with the 9 you have, you cannot be happy with the hand.
Your 3's were live, so I might have called the raise if the 3's were both in the pocket, and I had an Ace or King on top. Then if you call, he at least has to wonder if you have another king in the pocket, and are just slowplaying. If you then catch the third 3 you can raise and he would put you on Kings up at most.
Since you did choose to play the hand, and made a set on 4th street, you did the right thing in raising til it was capped. He never suspected you had trips, and just got lucky on sixth street. I think that you played it fine once you were in the hand, but again, I think it was a mistake to come in with that hand for a raise.
I misread the post. I thought everyone limped. You should have folded to the raise. Your hand has little equity. Multi-way you could try to pick off a trip if the doorcard would get paid the whole way.
We had such a good discussion about the "ippe" games that I thought we should talk about bicester, which is an old Mike Caro creation.
Generally played hi-lo with a qualifier, each player is dealt 5 cards and can draw up to 3. Flop will eventually be 4 up cards, turned one-at-a-time. Each player must prearrange his hole cards and roll an up card for each of the first three flop cards. Player must use exactly three cards with two board cards or all five in hand and no board cards.
When the game is 8-handed, a variation is to deal each player six cards, with no draw.
Beats the heck out of king push, although the latter does have the merit of eliminating certain undesirables right away.
Any experience with this game?
Full table, 15-30. I'm low with 3 up, A, 6 in the hole and bring in for $5. Four others limp in. 4th street Ronnie catches another nine to pair his door card and bets $30. Ronnie is losing a little, and his emotions have begun to run away so that he is on tilt a little. He is bluffing and semi-bluffing frequently - especially if he starts with a pair. So, based on his current state of mind, I don't believe that he started with a pair of 9's, and tripped up on 4th street. I catch an Ace on 4th to give me a pair of Aces.
So, believing I have a read on him, I raise to $60. He stares at me, and it's hard to explain, but I could see it in his face that he DIDN'T have it, and Ronnie is not an actor. He called.
5th street he catches a five and checks, and I go against my read and check along with him. My thinking was that if he did have trips he may have just called on 4th so that he could check-raise me on 5th. If he did have trips though, he would not check again on 6th for fear of missing another bet, so I reasoned that if he checked again on 6th then I could be sure he did not have trips.
Ronnie catches a jack on 6th street, and I catch a six to give me two pair. I bet and Ronnie calls, then calls again on the river and my two pair are good.
My raise on 4th street was intended to take command of the pot and find out where he was. Should I have went ahead and bet into him on 5th street? If I did and he raised, I would have to call, and then it seems that I couldn't be sure where he was at.
I have used this play against four different opponents within the last 4 or 5 months, and it seems to work really well. It also seems to leave my opponent and others at the table talking to themselves as well - because no one expects you to raise the guy who has just paired his door card and bet the maximum. So I gain a psycological advantage against the other players from it also.
What are the flaws with this play, and how might I get myself into trouble with it?
I am trying to improve my game, and so I am critiqueing plays that I use frequently. All comments are welcome.
How likely is Ronnie to raise on third street with a pair of nines? If he's on tilt even a little, surely this would be a good enough hand to pump on third.
Is Ronnie the type of player that will bet the minimum on fourth holding trips?
Does he know you well enough as a player to raise to get a free card on fifth, in the case that you don't have aces? Your read on him may be good, but what about his read on you?
You seem to know this player well enough to discern his regular action on these two streets, tilt or no tilt. Personally, I'd bet into him on fifth, and call his bets on sixth and seventh assuming he popped it back on fifth. His action is a little weak for the hand you fear if he's acting the way you say he is.
Ronnie would not normally raise on 3rd with a pair of nines unless he is losing and is trying to get his money back. Ronnie is definitely not the type to bet minimum with trips - he plays a very straigtforward game. He never raises to get a free card. Very predictable.
As far as his read on me - I think he put me on Aces or two small pair.
If he's that straightforward, then there's only one hand you could hold that would beat his three nines on fourth, if he had them. Most players are going to re-pop on fourth with trips here, and it sounds like Ronnie is one of them.
I'd still bet fifth for value, although there is the possibility of Ronnie catching two pair at this point. He may be aggressive enough in this situation to check-raise in that case, but it seems to unlikely that someone would play three nines in this manner after just calling your raise on fourth.
There were three ways to play this hand. 1) Raise as you did and play as you did. 2) Fold on third street. 3) Call him down or bet if he checked.
I prefer option 3 because of the reasons you gave. He is on tilt and will probably bet throught the river with open nines and a worse hand than yours. I also would not raise when I made Aces up.
Vince
Hi Bruce, I don't like your check on fifth street. Two main reasons...If your read is correct and Ronnie does not have 3 9's then you have given him a free card when you are ahead. If your read is correct, then if Ronnie does check raise then you can safely throw your hand away. You don't gain any information by checking. It causes other problems as well.
If Ronnie now bets on 6th street because you showed weakness, what do you do now? If your read is correct, you should throw your hand away, but I would find it almost impossible to throw my hand away at this point. (This includes those times you make 2 pair as you did or just have a single pair of aces). Because his bet may have been made because you showed weakness as opposed to him showing strength.
If you know on 5th street that you are going to fold to a bet on 6th street if your opponent leads, without gaining any additional info about your opponents hand, then I think you should bet 5th street and get your information immediately.
The only caveat I have and it doesn't sound as if Ronnie is capable of this, is if Ronnie would check raise on 5th street with 2 pair representing trips. If that is the case, then I think you can make a case for yourself to check and hope he checks again on 6th street.
John Gaspar
Alright enough scientific analysis. Your read is he doesn't have 3 nines so Raise and Bet Bet Bet aces beat nines shoot it up.
Thanks to everyone for their responses. This has been very helpful to me.
I agree that I should have stuck with my read and bet on 5th street. Then if I got raised by Ronnie I could be fairly certain he had the trips and just throw my hand away. At least this way I would not have missed any bets, and I would have an opportunity early in the hand to get a response from Ronnie as to if he was tripped. Either way, I find out early in the hand and either push it or drop it.
Vince suggested a call-to-the end, with no raise as a good approach to playing the hand. I don't like that option because I don't know for sure where I'm at in the hand. I would rather fold the Aces and go on to the next hand.
As I said in my original post, I felt I had a good read on Ronnie in this situation, and that is why I played the hand the way I did. If it had been a different player, or if Ronnie's state of mind were different, then I probably would have folded the hand, rather than risking more bets against possible trips.
I have some experience with Omaha/8 but I don't know any formal starting hand theory. I'll play a bare A2xx except from very early positon. And I won't play A3xx offsuit from any positon. But I do play A2s and A3s from any positon. I don't cold call raises with the A3s and am weary about cold calling with A2s depending on my kickers but I usually play. As far as hands that don't have an ace I try to play 4 high cards like Q10J9 or KK10J something of that sort? And from the later positions I might play a hand like 23QJ double suited. Does this sound about right? My friend was saying that I play too many of the A3 suited hands. Do you agree.
Also how do you feel about playing big high hands up front? I was just playing the other day and had AAKK single suited and I raised it up front. Go 2 callers. The flop came J46 rainbow. I bet. Good decision? Anyway it was raised and I called. Was that a mistake? The ace came on the turn and I just check called the turn and the river. The raiser had QQJ4 for 2 pair and the other player had a low.
Comments Apreciated
Anything less than that, or some other decent book, will be very incomplete information, and will lead to errors that are much more costly than the price of the book.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
I don't much like O8 but play the tournaments - I like to look at it as a nut nut game so If I don't have the nuts on one end or have a strong draw to the ultimate nuts I really don't like the hand.
Otherday I player 8899 2 suited flop was 8K9 what do you do - I lost it with 2 sets.
The game sucks - pure luck.
Tough beat with those two sets NOT. But anyway as long as we are on the story of beats I'll share a new one with everybody. 8-16 O/8 myself and 2 other players see the flop for 3 bets I have middle position with A2310 double suited. The flop comes
2410 with 3 of my suit. Giving me the Nut flush Middle 2 pair and a draw to the nut low or steel wheel.
Not bad eh?
The turn is a 4 bet get one caller. The river is an Ace I bet he calls.
He shows his QQ104 to scoup the pot. I love this game.
This game involves luck no more than any other poker game, but I can imagine that it doesn't suit your style. Rather than trying to flop the best hand, you much more often play to flop the best draw, and that is where much of the money is made.
It is a drawing game, but that doesn't mean that more luck is involved, just that the luck more often expresses itself on the river than in HE or stud.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
I agree with Greg. Its not just pure luck. Omaha is a game of drawing hands, where stud is a game of chasing hands and holdem is a game of bullshiting hands.
Played correctly I find that O8 is similiar to watching paint dry, very boring to say the least.
That being said I suffer through some very profitable days.
I agree that Ray's book will be very helpful to most players but it's really a simple game, you play the nuts and hope to scoop. I played about four hands in what was a 75 hand tourney and won easily last weekend, again I was bored to tears but it was a great evening.
Ship It - I don't know about the stud part of it, but you have the Omaha and the hold 'em correct, IMHO.
You are pretty close to my philosophy regarding opening hands. Kind of depends who you're playing against and the circumstances. I'm not playing to lose money, but neither is my primary goal to win money. If you go around folding A3XX suited, the game simply isn't much fun. Sometimes it's wise in tournaments, but playing that way is a bit too tight for most ring games, IMHO.
Overall, you may not win with A3XX suited, but even if you don't win, I doubt that you lose much either, and when you hit a flop with a 2 and another low card or two, or you hit a flop with two or three cards in your suit and no pair, you're definitely going for the nuts.
Buzz
Nice hand---A23x flop A23 I have had this hand more than once. I love this game. Coyote
kanscoyote, you really should stop playing that hand, kinda like getting beat with pocket aces....LOL
Rounder - no offense, bud, but read Zee's book. That hand has trash written all over it. What do you hope to make? Middle set?
I think you must be playing in some incredibly tight O8 games. The games I play in, I'll always play A3s and A3-decent-decent from just about anywhere. The reason is these loose fish types will ALWAYS(atleast 90% of the time) bet the nut low DRAW so that if there are two low out and not much action, I can be sure that my second nut low is good and jam the pot when the low hits.
I've found that to be one of hte most profitable plays I've learned in last ocuple of months of playing O8. Loose/weak O8 players bet when they are on nut low draws and you can value bet 2nd nut lows, b/c they'll check and call w/ 3rd nut and 4th nut low-some kinda high hands.
8899 is garbage. Were you in the BB?
I played against an 89 once as well with AA36 (suited). Raised preflop by me with 7 players (many cold calling).
Flop 889 Bet, I raise thinking there is not an 8 or pocket 9 (cause they're trash) and figuring I can knock out any A2 to back into low. This seems a mistake in hindsight - with 7 players I should have assumed there is an 8 and my aces are dead.
One caller and then I'm re-raised (guess I misjudged) I call and hope for low card of my flush suit. Big danger now that I am against A289. Planning to fold to bet on the turn if I have no nut low draw. Other player calls as well
Turn is an A. Player 1 bets, I raise, Player2 calls and player 1 re-raises and then I raise. Player 2 cold calls.
Only thing I can lose to is pocket 8's but player 2 looks so disgusted with player 1 that they must both have an eight.
Betting is the same for the river card and even though the low did come, I scoop against 89, and 8A.
So I re-iterate 8's and 9's are the worst sort of garbage.
4/8 omaha hi/lo just sat down
limped in early position in a passive game with As 3h 4s 8h
Four people took the flop
Ad 4d 4h
I bet, all call turn is a 6s
Ad 4d 4h 6s
I bet, call, then someone raises, cold caller, and then what is the best play?
Call, Raise? Should I raise for value, even if I might be beat? I also don't want to eliminate the one possible weak low draw behind me.
river-Ks
I check, new bettor, a raise, a cold call
how do you proceed?
Even though I wouldn't presume to qualify to answer this question re the subject, I will put in my 2 chips worth.
Weak full houses are a difficult hand to play in Omaha/8. They win money, but they get beat a lot in expensive pots. You lost some value on the turn when the low was made. I'm not sure betting out on the turn is correct.
Your big worry here is someone slow playing A's. You might be beat by a hand with 66 or KK and other value to play (in a weak game by a naked KK), but by the river you are looking at a good sized pot. With 4 players in the pot, the lows are not so much afraid of being quartered, and you could well have 2 lows pushing the pot on the river. I think you have a crying call on the river. Pray that it doesn't get capped.
After the flop, the hand is not the nuts, but is very playable.
"I bet, all call turn is a 6s
Ad 4d 4h 6s
I bet, call, then someone raises, cold caller, and then what is the best play?
Call, Raise? "
I vote for re-raise here. More likely you are against lows than a higher boat. Re-raise and see what happens. Your re-raise here is for value.
"Should I raise for value, even if I might be beat?"
Yes. Re-raise for value. The odds are in your favor.
"I also don't want to eliminate the one possible weak low draw behind me."
Low is already on the board (A-4-6). No one should be "drawing" for low anymore. Someone (maybe more than one) likely has 23XX. That is more likely than your being beaten by a higher boat. You want to make it as expensive as possible for someone with a high pair. Forget about worrying about knocking out a low draw; you need to knock out any high draws.
"river-Ks"
Ugly.
"I check, new bettor, a raise, a cold call how do you proceed?"
Doesn't look good. I think you have to hang in there. You may have a winner. Even if you don't, if you fold here your opponents will make the game even moe difficult for you.
"Weak full houses are a difficult hand to play in Omaha/8. They win money, but they get beat a lot in expensive pots."
I agree with Fred. Just one small point. Yours is not exactly a "weak" full house, since you have fours over aces. One of your opponents is more likely to have fours over sixes (that would be a "weak" full house) or fours over kings (still "weak") rather than the other way around. Would someone hang in there with a pair of kings or a pair of sixes after the flop? (I wouldn't).
I agree the thought of someome slow-playing a pair of aces is scary. Sometimes you need courage to play Omaha high/low.
Just my opinion. I'm no expert either. Just a student of the game.
Buzz
2 players had a 23 nut low. And somebody had pocket aces for the nut full. Only had to pay two bets on the river though.
Buzz, re the KK, 66 players, it's hard to judge without knowing how tough the game is, but the hands I was considering were a combination like 23KK or 2366, where the player is basically going low but makes an accidental high.
That being said, I've had players beat me by hitting a 2-outer with a big pair on the river.
While it's the hand to fear, I was supprised to hear that there was a lurker with A's. He of course made a horrible non-raise on the flop.
Fred - "the hands I was considering were a combination like 23KK or 2366, where the player is basically going low but makes an accidental high."
Good point. I thought about that possibility. 2366 is so awful that I disregarded it, but you're right about some opponents playing it. 23KK is a hand more likely to be played by an opponent.
"That being said, I've had players beat me by hitting a 2-outer with a big pair on the river."
Me too.
"While it's the hand to fear, I was supprised to hear that there was a lurker with A's. He of course made a horrible non-raise on the flop."
I agree, especially because I think you have to make the low draws pay or fold. You also want anyone lurking with a four and hoping for quads to pay for that priviledge. Yet I like to mix up my play, thus allowing for an occasional non-raise in situations like this.
I know players who almost always slow play big hands after the flop, waiting to trap you on the turn. (Sometimes they slow play when they hit on the turn, waiting to trap you on the river). After they have done this once or twice, you sort of get to expect it. Aces full after the flop is such a strong hand that, in all honesty, I would expect two opponents against whom I have played to slyly (they both think) slow play it.
It's difficult to allow for someone slow playing a hand that should probably be bet, unless you are familiar with the betting patterns of that player. Even then, you're going to get stuck sometimes (as Ship It did here). But you can't let those players intimidate you.
With fours full of sixes, I might well have quietly folded. With fours full of aces, I wouldn't. I figure Ship It's fours full of aces is a four to three favorite to win on the river, when all the cards have been turned, if he has no useful information as to his opponent's hands. (0.57 to 0.43, assuming Ship It started with seven opponents). My point is that IMHO Ship It is the favorite here and should win 4 times out of 7. Of course that means he should lose 3 times out of 7. This was one of them.
Just my (calculated) opinion. Never a guarantee my math is correct.
Buzz
ship it,
Ad 4d 4h and you have As4s3h8h.
I would check and fold. Too many holes in this ship for me.
paul
Paul - As8h4s3h is not the underdog when the flop is Ad4d4h. Period. You do realize that As8h4s3h is the favorite here, right? I don't mean just the favorite for the moment (after the flop), but still the favorite on the river after the next two (random) cards are turned.
Buzz
Oops. Change my post just a little bit. I was tired and used the wrong article. Substitute "a" for "the" in several places to make my meaning clearer, as follows:
Paul - As8h4s3h is not an underdog when the flop is Ad4d4h. Period. You do realize that As8h4s3h is a favorite here, right? I don't mean just a favorite for the moment (after the flop), but still a favorite on the river after the next two (random) cards are turned. Buzz
Buzz,
Four people take the flop plus you. A passive game with limpers who are looking for an ace because they have 2,3,xx in their hand. Could also have a AAxx limper in there also. Everbody got helped by the A except you. An Ace means tighten up since you didn't hit the flop with a 2 and a Spade. I would save my money for a later hand. Also it was unraised suggesting that nobody has A23x in their hand giving the AAxx more credibility. Slowplaying AAxx is almost automatic in this situation waiting for the turn and bigger bets. Your also out of pos'n to play this hand aggressively to eliminate people. Another reason I would check is to see who bets and who drops. In this case everyone would of stayed, so therefore I drop.
Paul
Paul - Thanks for explaining your reasoning. Very logical. Makes sense.
Not raising pre-flop with a pair of aces in late position makes sense to me, and slow playing aces full after the flop in some games also makes sense. Thus I would be aware of the possibility an opponent might have a pair of aces.
And yet....
I was sitting in an Omaha high/low game earlier today then the flop was A-A-4. Since I had already folded before the flop, I was just an observer. The turn was a jack and the river a king. Someone at one end of the table who had an ace, for trip aces, bet the flop and then bet the turn. The winner of the hand was someone who called both bets out of position with a pair of kings, caught the king on the river, and then bet the kings full of aces for value.
I consider it a mistake to play an aceless K-K-X-X in a full game when there is a pair of aces on the flop, and betting the kings full into an opponent who has been betting all the way and who very well might have aces full seems stupid, but there it is. Earlier today I saw it happen. Moreover, it's not unusual for me to see my opponents making mistakes.
When I respond to posts, it is in terms of my experience in the games in which I play. $4-$8 is within the betting range of the games in which I do play.
I can see someone playing a pair of aces here, but I also can see someone playing 6-4-X-X, K-4-X-X, or even worse.
Games differ. Opponent's play differs. Even if I was in the game, it would be difficult for me to know for certain what to do. A rule of thumb in backgammon is, "When in doubt hit." One of my personal poker rules is, "When in doubt call."
However, I appreciate your logic, which would be correct in many games and, as it turns out, is correct here. Gives me something to think about.
Regards,
Buzz
"Four people take the flop plus you. A passive game with limpers who are looking for an ace because they have 2,3,xx in their hand. Could also have a AAxx limper in there also. Everbody got helped by the A except you. An Ace means tighten up since you didn't hit the flop with a 2 and a Spade. I would save my money for a later hand. Also it was unraised suggesting that nobody has A23x in their hand giving the AAxx more credibility. Slowplaying AAxx is almost automatic in this situation waiting for the turn and bigger bets. Your also out of pos'n to play this hand aggressively to eliminate people. Another reason I would check is to see who bets and who drops. In this case everyone would of stayed, so therefore I drop."
See my original qualification re expert status, but I don't agree with a lot here.
First of all, this must have been just a passive game, but an exceptionally passive game. There were 2 players with the nut low after the turn, in a 4 player pot, any they managed 1 raise between them. If the game is this passive, I don't see that you would get a pre-flop raise even from a A23x. By itself, I don't think this is much evidence of a lack of split A's in the other hands. The fact that there was no pre-flop raise is some evidence that the A's were not there. Sure, there could be an AA limper (as there evidently was), but the odds say no.
As Buzz pointed out, this is actually a GOOD flop for you, even if it is a dangerous one. You are already pl.aying for 5.5 small bets (the original post I think implies the blinds folded) . Betting the flop into this board may win immediately against something like 1 high draw, and 2 dry A2 or A3's. After 3 callers, I think betting the turn was too much, but it's close. Not betting the flop may be a big mistake if you split the pot with a 25 that makes a low on the river, when you could have dropped him with a bet on the flop. Ideally, you want 3 low limpers chasing you to the river, and to scoop a sizable pot when no low hits the board.
I also think the A's made a terrible slowplay. Giving free cards to the low draws is exactly what you don't want to do. Raising here doesn't even cost much if the betting goes the same way. Ship It will probably check the turn, so there are 8 small bets on the flop, and only 4 big bets on the turn, instead of the other way around. And not raising my cost half the pot, or all the pot if another 4 hits on the turn (not to mention the 235 of diamonds).
FTS,
"Weak full houses are a difficult hand to play in Omaha/8. They win money, but they get beat a lot in expensive pots.
Your big worry here is someone slow playing A's. "
This is what you wrote and it is hard to tell exactly who is doing the betting, raising, who has high who has low in this hand and how many are playing.
Isn't that pretty much what I'm saying. By checking and seeing what the other players are doing you can better decide what to do with your hand. Since 3 people called at least one of them probably has 23xx. Now what do the other two have to stay or call A23x, AAxx, 34xx, etc. Since nobody raised the bring-in I feel that it is unlikely that there is an A23x. IMO there is a good probability that someone has AAxx. Since nobody dropped after the flop with a single A2 or A3. In this scenario nobody would of dropped, therefore I would of dropped. For someone to slowplay AAxx is pretty standard and raise on the turn when the bets are doubled in a passive game this way he keeps everbody in and doesn't let anybody think he has A's.
Paul
In a recent 15-30 stud game, I was the bring-in with 333. I just opened with 5, two players called, the the last player, a long time pro and the best player at the table, raised with a T up. I called, as did the other players.
The turn brought blanks to me and the next player, but the last two players caught tens, giving the first QT and the second TT on the board. TT bet 30, I called, QT raised, TT reraised, I called, QT called all-in.
TT bet 5th and 6th streets, and I called. On the river, she threw her hands up and said, "What the hell are you calling me with? You know I have 3 Tens!" Neither one of us improved, she won.
I called on the chance that she had AA in the hole, or that I would fill up and she wouldn't. Do you think I should have played this differently?
Did you want QT in there with you, especially all-in for a freeroll in a sense?
The T catch by the Q strengthens your catch/dont' catch scenario, but catching on either end by the good player cracks you regardless (unless case 3 floats down...)
I think I would have raised fourth street to drop QT and other hangers, putting you ahead (trips vs. Aces up) and sweating, or behind (overtrips) with some chance to catch a winner.
I would have played the same way, I thing we both have to fast play low trips to force players out. A full bet on the bring in and a re-raise before the turn, a raise on the turn would have had you heads up (Heads up to trip tens in this case)
remember the old axiom....2 out 3 times when the door card pairs means trips 67%... this is one of the cardinal points in stud I never ignore.... a raise from you on fourth or fifth street should gave you some solid info about TT's hand ,,,saved several big bets.
I agree. reread 7csfap. paired door card by an opponent (esp a good one) usually means death. Only chance was to raise on the bring-in an/or reraise on 3rd st to try to knock as many opponents as possible.
Nightstick, the old axiom says that a pair doorcard means trips 67% of the times WHEN SOMEONE STARTING WITH A PAIR and not all the times! About the hand I think you didn't make great errors as it's very very hard to release a rolled up trips (maybe only with a higher trips exposed in some other board). We all have read in this forum how many times this thing happened. Strange to note, many times a paired doorcard with another card of that rank out (in early boards, of course) means trips. Marco
The old axiom is wrong. Assuming she started with a pair, then it is true that 2/3 of the time she has a split pair. But, once the door card pairs, Bayes' law comes into play. When you 'know' someone started with a pair, and then they pair their door card, the chance that they made trips is 4/7.
The intuitive reason for 4/7 vs. 2/3 is that it is easier to match your kicker (3 cards) then match your pair (2 cards).
Of course, all calculations assume all relevant cards are live.
I have been victim to this in 10/20 and 5/10 games. I now would have reraised 3rd street. The action following would have told me a lot about the hand. The worst thing your re-raise would do is to tell everyone you most likely had trips. The TT might have folded. On 4th st, the T pairs. If he bets into you, you are in trouble and should consider tossing the hand even with trip 3's. If he check raises you, say goodbye. The confusing part is the other T which I suspect was instrumental in making you stay, but that is not material. As someone above posted, pairing the door card is a bitch when it is against you. If you cannot get respect from your raise which is obviously trip 3's, you are beaten.
3BB,
When I get raised and I'm rolled up with no matter what, I reraise. This way I can tell if the person has trips also and to put a little fear into him/her if they don't. You probably would of dropped ptl, and all-in, since the reraise would of told them you have trips and that's what you want them to do since you only have trip 3's. Now the good player calls and you get his T. He checks you bet you win!!!
Paul
I usually agree, but sometimes if I have an ace showng and am rolled up. I will not necessarily raise as to suck some players in by representing AA. The nice part is it gives me some control over the group. and I knlw if the other big pair or trips improves because I can see what falls (until the river of course)
Brett,
My thought has always been that you don't want to play small trips against a lot of opponents(I could be very wrong about that). A re-raise on 3rd from you certainly would've defined EVERYONE's hand, wouldn't've? :)
You'lda likely made $39 profit had you re-raised, but I'm not sure if that's the best you can hope for when rolled up. Would you have RR'd had she a A or K doorcard?
Bill
I would have played the hand the exact same way.
Some possible differences are:
1- reraise on 3 to get hand heads up. You will definitely get action from the 10's all the way down but if they are a tight player, you won't get too much action. If they are a good player, you will get action all the way unless you make an open pair.
2- reraise on 4 to get hand heads up. I would do this as a conservative maneuver as I don't give 10's 3 10's at any point in this hand.
With a 10 hitting, I didn't give that player 3 10's at any point of the hand until she opened her mouth. In fact, I would have raised on 6th. The original raise didn't give away much as any good hand, including non-pair hands could have been raised in that spot.
Even after all the raises, I don't even put her on Aces up because I think she could have been reraising to get you out and play with all-in. Certainly any two pair is a raising hand there as Q10 has to be put on Q's or a draw and a two pair reraise is common. I might even have raised on 4 after 10's 3 bet the pot. Then if 5 bet, I might have given her 3 10's but at that point I am calling all the way due to pot odds.
Folding is not an issue during this hand, ever. Unless you put in 6 bets on 4th, in which case you might fold on the river.
Just my two cents worth.
Yes. A vodka tonic before the hand might have helped. Plus you should have reraised on third street. Anyone that doesn't agree don't know how to play this game.
vince
Doesn't reraising on 3 kind of depend on the nature of the game, who's playing, and what the images are all around? In general, I don't want to play 4 handed but if they are players that love to call and hate to call double raises, and if the original raiser could have a combo hand like KJ10, then raising would be the worst option.
Ideally you want to play heads up against the big pair but the worst possible case is everyone folding or playing the 10's heads up and her folding on 4th or 5th.
I prefer heads up action to the end but I want action to the hand. If I think there is even a 20% chance all might fold and I win between $30-50, then I am slow playing for sure.
Russ,
When you are the bring in with a very small card and someone raises in a multiway (3 or more opponents) pot your absolute must play is to reraise regardless of the game type. If the pot goes heads up there is a lot of dead money in the pot already so you are not just winning the bring in plus if they all call you now have a big pot with the best hand and a lot of callers. I want a lot of players with a big pot if I can't get heads up or 2 opponents tops with small trips. A reraise into a 3 or 4 way field usually gets me one or the other. In stud players call more when the pot gets big because Sklansky and Malmuth taught them too, so playing these small trips fast is the way to go in these types of situations. My opinion.
Vince.
I have to agree with Vince. If you reraise you do a couple of things (1) get more money in the pot (2) eliminate the straight/flush draws if they have any brains because your draw to a full house or quads overshadows their draw of 2 cards to the straight and flush and who would play those odds against you? (3) put you in a place to possibly get a free card if you want. By not reraising when you are the bring in is essentially slow playing, and your hand is not strong enough to slow play. The avg winning hand in a 5 way pot is about trip 7's. If you reraise you will probably (or probababably as GW Bush might say) be able to control the action. High cards bet 4th street and might check to you. Looking at the bord determines your next move.
Thanks for all the responses, but some of you didn't read the problem correctly. Anyway, I don't usually reraise when rolled up. I think that I'm so far ahead, I'd rather let the pot build first.
It doesn't make any difference if I reraise in the games I play, and that includes the 60-120 game I played tonight. If they're coming, they're coming. The price doesn't deter them.
Raising after she paired her doorcard wouldn't have worked either, since she plays well enough to represent the hand whether she has it or not. I thought that my only chance to get through this without losing a lot was to just call her down.
Something you all missed, and that I missed while playing this hand: I said I called hoping she had 2 big pair. She is a player I respect, and she also respects my play. She told me later that if she had AA in the hole, she would have backed off, because she knew something was up when I kept calling.
Had I been thinking about what she was thinking I was thinking she was thinking, etc, I would have folded the hand on 5th or 6th. There was nothing she could have that I could beat. Like she told me, the Poker Gods just put out the case T to distract me.
Next time I'll pay more attention, but next time the player holding bigger trips will be an idiot calling station and I will pay him off all the way.
I don't think there is any way you could ever have even thought about folding this hand, at any time, against any player worth anything. The only time you could even have imagined it is if the player is an absolute rock who is not capable of realizing the q10 is all in and will only reraise with trips (there are those players out there, like the one I checked called with quads after she 3 bet my open pair on 6 with 3 to a straight flush. I should have folded but couldn't and a top professional looked at my hand and said how could I not raise again.)
I just don't think the 3 bet on 4 vs. an all inner is enough to convince me of trips with one out and because she raised a weak pot. Even if I think she will only bet on 5 into me with trips (that's a real strong assumption, because checking two pair on her part is really weak), the pot is offering me 11-1 on 5th and around 5-1 overall for two bets of which I am less than a 5-1 dog. So even if the hand is played face up after 4th betting, you will still call.
That means the only possible folding time is 4th street which doesn't give her any credit for possibly making a move to get you out and play the all in heads up. A sharp player might have made this move with 10-10/AKs or something like that. She could have put you on two little pair playing because the 10 was out or a pocket pair higher than 10's that you decided to slowplay. By the way, I assume your blank was a 7,8,or 9. Otherwise your hand could have read a straight draw or a high pair above 10's after starting with suited cards.
Just my two cents worth (if it's worth that much).
On further consideration, the only time I could have folded would be 6th or 7th. There was no bet on 7th, so that leaves 6th. There was too much money in the pot by then, so folding would be wrong there also. I guess I was just destined to lose the least I could.
Anyway, I don't usually reraise when rolled up. I think that I'm so far ahead, I'd rather let the pot build first.
It doesn't make any difference if I reraise in the games I play, and that includes the 60-120 game I played tonight. If they're coming, they're coming. The price doesn't deter them.
If they're coming anyway, why not make them pay? It seems to me that if you know they're going to call anyway, you might as well get as much money in there as you can when you've got the best hand. Small trips aren't a hand for slow-playing. I'm starting to think that big trips aren't either (I may post a recent hand a bit later).
This is a good point, and I'm going to think about it. I guess the reason I don't raise is my experience playing in LV where they would all fold if I did. Since I know they won't fold, raising is probably the best move. I can always back off later.
"I don't usually reraise when rolled up. I think that I'm so far ahead, I'd rather let the pot build first. "
3 Bet,
You cannot be serious. How can you feel you are very far ahead with three three's in a multiway pot? If you have 4 opponents, a high % of the time someone will pair their door card making the hand very difficult to play if at all playable.
Vince
On the other hand, if you have rolled up 3's and someone will call you down with 2 fives or something, why in the world would you want to drive them out of the pot when they effectively have 2 outs against you (and even if they hit you have redraws)? When I'm rolled up I just look for the way that will likely make the biggest pot on the river, because I'm a huge favorite against any amount of callers, and if I lose the hand due to letting a pair of 5's in for only one bet instead of 2 on 3rd street, so be it.
I've also always thought that by slow playing I would be able to get more money in the pot by check raising on a later street.
Vince, there are some people whoo feel this way, and it might be OK if you are sure your opponent has 2 pair an d will call and his cards are dead, but I agree, you have to play the small trips fast and leave the slowplaying to big cards. I do know people who like to trap in 1-5 and 5-10 games, but it is a loosing proposition IMO.
Just because The Great One named a play after you doesn't mean you can make statements and let others elaborate. Please show your work next time or you won't get credit.
Yeah but at least you didn't fold when you had queens up showing and JJ bet the river with jacks up.
Only a butthead would do that.
I only could find maybe one scenario where I would call with the hand that is described. In the BB. All you scholars out there can you think of another instance where you would call with 3s4oJsXo. I understand everything that is written but I just don't see it coming into play that often. Am I missing something (of course) but what is it then???
Paul
Paul you creep,
i guess i have to answer it before i get into too much hot water. i hate you guys that read everything too carefully and then think about it. really there arent many times anyone in his right mind would be in the pot with that hand. except as you say for a ride in the blind or as a dumb steal and getting callers. but the hand was put in to illustrate a good concept of throwing away what looks like a hand with alot of wins but doesnt really have much of a chance. you could contrive quite a few similar spots whith better hands that would play the same but with my thick skull it never occurred to me. notice that it may play well headup and thats something to think about. how's disney land?
Zee,
Nice PL or NL (crs) game at O 11 $1000 buy in 1/2 HE 1/2 O8. Met John F there and talked for a while. He's too thin makes me nervous!! Dealers are much better in Cal then FW. Played at HG and Comm. HG has the button drop. A little different but at least you don't have to chop!! Traffic stinks, the problem is how many people can you fit between the ocean and the mountains? Answer go to Cal. Played mostly HE, but did play 7CS, 7CS/8, O8.
Read your book on the plane again and I thought I missed something wasn't picking on you this time but I'll be back!!!
Creepee
yea JF is sure skinny. when he turns sideways and sticks his tongue out he is easily mistaken for a zipper. i like him anyway. its surprising how oceans 11 has maintained their bigger games for so long. maybe the management has it together.
Paul - Ray'll probably give a definitibe answer himself, but let me try anyway.
I think Ray's point is that you should be drawing to the nuts with several opponents, even though you have shots at both high and low here. A secondary point is that if you are playing heads-up, the fit with the flop is not so bad. Even though I agree with you that it's probably not a hand you would play much outside of the big blind, the hand Ray chose does illustrate his point very well (IMHO).
That said, to try to answer your question, in addition to the big blind, you might play the hand (1) in some tournament situations where you're trying to eliminate a short stack and (2) in some steal situations (although several opponents would probably not be in the hand in either of those cases).
Buzz
I'm a holdem player, I'm trying to expand my game by paying for my education in 3/6 Omaha Hi/Lo. No doubt I'm making some fish plays along the way! The game in question is generally loose low limit stuff, the players in this hand don't seem any better than me or anyone else! Here's the turn of events and I'll post my excuses below…
I have only $26 left and am about to quit the game when the blinds get to me.
2 early position limpers, 1 also limp with 2c3dQs6d. Player after me (PAM) raises, all fold to the SB who calls, BB calls all other players call. Six players see the flop of
2h 5c Ah
Everyone cheks to the PAM (who has bought the button), he fires, SB check-raises, I cold call, PAM re-raises, SB re-raises (cap) I cold call, PAM of course calls.
Turn: Td.
PAM bets, I raise all-in $8.50, SB calls.
River 4s !!!!
PAM & SB check it down.
PAM shows: 4c 7c Ad Ac SB shows: Tc Kd 6h 4h
I scoop $95 with the wheel and a six high straight for high.
Here's my thinking.
1 preflop I would normally muck this hand, but as I was leaving and short stacked I wanted "one more hand", The lack of an ace and the "dangler" Q in my hand makes it a dog.
2. On the flop, I think should have folded to the cold-call, I had an inside draw of a high straight but there is a flush draw, my low looks like it could be good but there could be a made wheel already, so at best I might be quartered. In the heat of the battle I just called.
3. On the turn, I'm pot committed so I throw it all-in.
I'm pretty sure my play is suspect throughout, I'd appreciate comments, especially on how the other players played this hand as I don't think anyone played correctly….
d.
Darren - Wow! What a hand! Congratulations on your win!
I urge you to consider attending "gamblers anonymous."
Seriously.
Whether you do or not, get yourself a copy of Ray Zee's High-Low-Split Poker and read the Omaha section before playing Omaha high/low again.
Good luck to you.
Buzz
Let me see, PAM and SB cap a wheel flop without either one having a wheel.
Treasure this game.
Since everyone plays poorly your starters are not as bad as they appear. You were lucky but considering the play of the opponents you might expect your 2nd nut low to be good.
Substitute Ac for your Queen and you have premium starters.
The raises put you in a bit of a spot since it now looks as if 34 is out there.
You didn't say if you split low or not.
You probably shouldn't stoop to their level too often
Yeah, substituting aces for rags would make a lot of unplayable hands playable. You don't get to do that, though, at least not where I play. He should have folded before the flop, and probably should have folded on the flop. The bet and the raise make it look like at least one wheel is already out there, so he's looking at trying to spike a miracle four, with at least one probably gone. If he does get his wheel, he runs the risk of getting quartered or worse. I really don't think he can cold-call a raise in this spot.
The original post indicates that he scooped.
Yes he should fold preflop. Cold calling on the flop looks wrong as well.
You might have better uses for your money than on a hand with a flop like this.
Nobody should say that you aren't allowed to gamble with other gamblers, though.
This is true. The hand in question is poor but against a table full of poor players it may allow you to at least look like you're gambling with them. On this hand you are and if you play too many like this then you really are gambling.
I'd be very interested in what someone like Daniel N. would have to say about these types of hands against poor players.
I would guess that Daniel N. would say it's trash and you shouldn't consider playing it. When you show down crap like that, the lousy players aren't going to think, "hey, he's gambling like the rest of us." They're going to see what looks to them like as good a hand as any. You're not getting any advertising value. Save your money for a decent hand.
8-)
That's true. They're going to see a pretty good hand, in their opinion.
40-80 stud game, 8 handed...
3rd street:
6 seat brings it in for $10, 7 folds, 8 seat (loose player) raises to 40 with the Th showing, I call with (TsTc)9s (I didn't reraise because there were all big cards behind me, maybe I should have?), seats 2 and 3 fold, seat 4 (fairly tight aggressive player) calls with a Qc showing, all others fold.
4th street:
Me: (TsTc)9sJc
4 seat: (xx)Qc3c
8 seat: (xx)Th6d
4 seat bets, 8 seat calls, I call.
5th street:
Me: (TsTc)9sJcKs
4 seat: (xx)Qc3c3d
8 seat: (xx)Th6d4c
4 seat bets, 8 seat calls, I call.
6th street:
Me: (TsTc)9sJcKsJs
4 seat: (xx)Qc3c3dQd
8 seat: (xx)Th6d4c9d
4 seat bets, 8 seat calls, I call.
River:
I catch a blank. 4 seat checks, 8 seat checks, I bet, they both fold.
Comments?
Interesting Hand. Did you consider folding on 3rd? If you had a Big kicker or a non dead pair then the re-raise would have been natural. I suppose with the straight flush kicker your hand has some multiway value to it. Whats the ante in you're 40-80 game. Some are $5 and some are $10 this probaby has the biggest impact on your decision. Did you take note of how many clubs were out on 3rd. If this player would ALWAYS only call with a club draw here and never re-raise you basically own him the entire hand. I'm kind of suprised by this player's fold on the end it seems like alot of players won't allow this play to be made and call in this spot.
you are one of a kind George. All your post are great, especially the one where you checraised Aces up on the river. As for this post, normally I would avoid trying to push someone off two pair on board, unless you have a bulldozer handy. However, I think it is good odds for the play. It all depends on if you think a player will allow this play to be made on him.
By the way, nice post ship it.
I'll bite. I can't defend doing anything with this hand but tossing it on 3rd Street.
Tom D
where did you say this game was?
vince
BTW - If you don't raise third street you should fold. In fact a fold is probably better. Of course with opponents that are quick to fold to a bet on the river maybe you should play every hand.
A couple of replies said to fold on 3rd street.
I'm curious why this would be correct, unless you give us more information about the player who raised with Th in the door?
I guess the problem is that if he has tens, you won't know when he makes 2 pair, but he'll see your second pair on board. If he doesn't have tens, then you won't know if he makes trips. Plus, the tens you'd like to catch are dead.
However, he doesn't know you have tens in the hole, which allows you to outplay his split tens in many situations. What with the dead money from the antes and bring-in, this would seem to overcome the disadvantages I mention above.
Of course, if this player is highly likely to have a pair higher than tens in the hole to make this raise, a fold certainly seems correct to me.
So, being a stud fish, what am I missing?
Thanks, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Greg,
"I didn't reraise because there were all big cards behind me, maybe I should have?"
Why even get involved unless you raise as Vince said to get it heads up. You have a 9 showing that isn't going to scare anybody unless they think you have a high pair in the hole. Your taking a big risk with that many players behind you with big cards. Your out of pos'n with a pair of T's and one showing. Drop is probably the correct move.
paul
Funny, I remember this hand a little differently... Why not tell the real story?
I will. Just wait. I just wanted responses for it this way.
I was the one who had the Q33Q showing and folded, but I wanted to see the hand from the perpective of the other player so as to get more informative answers. (I think it worked.)
Do I think it was a correct fold? I don't know. That's for you to decide.
Wow what a laydown. Maybe you sould have bet the river to represent Q's full and push somebody off Jacks full or a straight. Plus that has the added benifit of not allowing you to be bluffed of your hand.
Believe me, of the 2 other players in the hand, if I bet the river, they're calling if they can beat my board. So there's no equity here in bluffing.
I've thought about this hand a little more, and I keep coming back to this: If I'm going to make a mistake, I'd rather it be a bad call on the river for a loss of one bet instead of a bad fold for a loss of 10 bets.
Yes I agree with you to a point, but on the other hand I would have laid 10 to 1 odds that he had me beat, just knowing the player.
What about a check raise on the river? I'm not really proposing it, but it certainly would throw a scare into jacks full. Also, it is a much more reasonable bluff than a bet in this situation.
5 seat brings it in, 6 seat, knowledgable, intelligent, wiley, handsome, middle-aged player, H, calls with T up, 8 seat, old smoker, S, raises with Q up, 4 seat, aggressive young guy with goofy shirt, the same one who folded with QQ33 below, G, reraises with an A up. H and S call, all others fold.
I don't remember all the cards, but 4th street was basically blanks, no straight or flush cards or pairs. G bets, H and S call.
5th street has the same texture as 4th, G bets, H, who has caught a 7, raises. S folds. G calls, even though he should know that H would not raise into Aces with a small two pair, and that he probably has trips.
6th street, H pairs 5s on board and bets. G calls. H bets river and G calls, H shows 7s full of 5s. G later said he had Aces up first four.
H justifies his call on 3rd and 4th: S has been seen raising with flush draws, and likely does not have Queens, and G is agressive enough to represent a hand whether he has it or not. Pocket 7s might well be the best starting hand, and even if it isn't, the deceptive nature of tripping up with no pair showing will make up for starting in the negative.
Comments on all players and plays?
The aggressive young guy with the goofy shirt (me) had aces up on 5th, not 4th, but that's immaterial.
The retard who called 2 raises with a pair of 7's and won the hand, I don't know what to say. But really...
I question the call on 3rd street but I don't really care about that for analyzing the hand. I don't think I would have called there but I'm not saying it's necessarily wrong. It's just more or less not my style of play. The rest of the hand is more interesting and is something that comes up often enough that it's worth discussing.
If I had your hand I would not have raised on 5th street because you don't want to knock the 3rd player out of the hand when he's effectively drawing to 2 outs (if that). Plus, let's say he pairs an upcard on 6th street and is high, he would bet out, I would raise with my aces up, and you would 3-bet (to further earn your nickname) with your trips, building a much larger pot with me and the other player in the hand drawing near dead. Even if he doesn't pair you at least get one more bet out of him on 5th street with him drawing slim.
Now. Like I told you after the hand...I wanted so badly to find a reason to fold on 5th street after you raised me, and even more so on 6th after your board paired. This choice has very very much to do with the player who is raising you in this situation as I know many of the players I play with in these stud games would raise with 2 pair in that spot (myself included). But in that spot I was almost certain you had trips and didn't follow my instinct that was telling me to fold. Shame on me. Generally in those games when I can't really read a hand that someone is playing aggressively I lean more towards calling them down than folding just based on the aggressive nature of those particular games, but like I said before, it's very much player-dependent.
But I must commend you on one thing. I'm glad you're posting some hands to this forum. I can't stand to read the same old hold'em hands over and over anymore and it's good to see some stud hands posted. I just find them much more interesting, probably because it's the game I play the majority of the time.
Given your scenario, of course it would be correct to wait to raise on 6th. But I saw something on S's face when he looked at his card that told me he wasn't going to call on 5th. I also suspected you might not bet 6th, since I had been calling all the way. I decided to get the money in there asap. I was pretty sure you would call me down, unless you had been bluffing. In that case, I wouldn't make any more off of you regardless of when I bet or raised. Maybe I'll try it your way next time.
3BB wrote:
>Comments on all players and plays?
You're right, that H fellow is quite handsome. But the wiley part? Unless you mean Wiley Coyote.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
it's wile e coyote.
a modern day sisyphus.
scott
Playing 40-80 HOSE - on the stud 8 or better round. Seat 2 raises the bring in with A up. Seat 4 calls with 7 up, I call with 7 up, A, 2 in the hole. Seat 8 calls with face card. Don't know much about seat 2, but my initial read is Aces with a low card.
4th street seat 2 gets a 7, seat 4 gets a brick, I get a 6, seat 8 gets no help. Seat 2 bets, all fold but me and I just call.
5th street I catch a Queen, seat 2 catches a 6. Bet and call. 6th street he catches a 5, I catch a 4. Now I have 7,6,4,2,A. Seat 2 is showing 7,6,5,A. I think about raising but hesitate. Maybe seat two started with 2,3 in pocket and now has me beat?
River I catch another A to give me 7 low with pair of Aces. Seat 2 bets, I again consider a raise because if all he has is Aces, my Queen kicker will win, but I decide to just play it safe and call.
Seat 2 has 7,6,5,3,A for low and Aces w/a Ten for high. So I just edged him out on both low and high.
I felt afterwards that I missed a raise either on 4th or 6th streets. Should I have considered a raise on 6th after pairing the Ace?
I don't raise here. More often than not, it's a split pot. So, of course, the question is how often you scoop vs. how often he scoops. He has a 3-straight showing, and making that straight is how he will scoop you. He will make that straight more often than you will scoop him, is my guess, although I don't have any numbers to back that up.
later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
I would have raised him on the river but not before then, because I would guess your hand would scoop more often than his. He could easily be betting one pair and a low, and his low is almost certainly worse than yours. The only thing you have to watch out for is a straight and even then, if his straight is 8-high and he has no more low cards you still split with him. The only hand you fear here is a 7-high straight. If you think it's likely he has exactly that, don't raise, otherwise I say go for it.
You not only missed a good chance to raise on the river, but you also missed a good chance to fold on 5th street. On 5th street you really have to fold this hand. If I assume that your opponent had a 4-low on 5th street, and neither of you had a flush draw, then you had pot equity of about 25%. In other words, on average you'd end up with 25% of what's in the pot right now.
While it might loog good when you are facing 3:1 pot odds, with 3 betting rounds, you'll have to pay one bet on 5th street and 6th street. You'll also have to pay one bet ont the river about half the time when you make any low.
So you're looking at 1.7:1 odds for a hand which requires 3:1 odds.
On 6th street you probably shouldn't raise. Against this particular hand, you've only improved up to 43% equity, not quite half. You might bet as a semi-bluff ONLY if you though this player might be pushed off his clearly good hand.
But when you do get to the river, I think you're almost guaranteed to have the best hand at least one way, so you should have definatly raised then. You have a better one pair than he does (unless he caught a K), and if he has a high better than your one pair, then your low will almost surely be the better low. The only way you lose both ways is if he ends up with a flush.
Assuming that he hold AA33567 going into the river, and you hold AA2467Q, then you've got about 70% equity in the pot. Yes, it's finally time to raise.
- Andrew
My last line should have read:
Assuming that he holds AA3567 going into the river, and you hold AA2467Q, then you've got about 70% equity in the pot. Yes, it's finally time to raise.
- Andrew
Fold ing on 5th would be a bad idea. the 40/80 game has a huge ante, there were several players on 4th for a raise. Yuo agre getting much better than 3-1 to chase, and you have a (small) chance to scoop.
Also, A lot of players raise with MANY hands with an ace up, so if this player might still be "swinging the bat" with that ace, your situation is meven better.
I would have played the same way except to raise as soon as I paired aces.
Good luck. Where was this game?
Sorry, I just don't buy that. What were the antes in the 40/80 game? $10? Even at that rather steep, but generally acceptable level, then you still should fold on 5th street. With $10 antes you are getting about 2.3:1 effective odds, still way to little for your hand.
If for some reason the ace is going to raise his bring-in with 7 players to act behind him, with a poor hand, then i'll let time wear him down rather than chasing here. There will be other chances in the future to destroy this player.
- Andrew
I'm not sure I like the call on 3rd street. Your weak up card can be a problem. If you read him for Aces and a low card, you should fold. The scoop potential of your hand here isn't very good.
The game was at Harrah's in East Chicago, IL. This was my first time playing the game. I usually play $15-$30 stud or hold'em. I have read Ray Zee's book on stud hi/lo, and Max Stern's book, and play small limit hi/lo regularly on Paradise Poker. Harrah's does not spread stud hi/lo, and the only time it is played is as a part of the HOSE game.
Regarding the game in question:
The ante was $10, 7 players initially, and the first raise was to make it $40. One caller before I entered the pot for a total of $70 + $10 + $80 = $160. Pot odds of 4-to-1 on my call, and I picked up a tell that seat 8 would call.
Since there were so many callers, I felt my implied odds were favorable. Of course that changed on the next street, but anyway, that's why I came in to the pot.
On 4th street I had 4 to a low, and I figured that the other player had a pair of aces and at best 3 to a low, so I felt my call was justified. Then I catch the brick on 5th street, but call anyway. That was probably not the best decision, but I thought that I still had the best draw for low, and decided to gamble here.
I agree that I should have raised on the river - I was pretty sure I had the best low, and my high might be good also.
Thanks for all the good comments.
You said yourself that you put this guy on Aces with a low on third, therefore, I'm wondering why you're in this pot on 4th when you're drawing to a rough 7 for 1/2 the pot, heads up, and an unlikely chance to make top pair. First you have to hit the hand, then it has to be better than his low, then you get your money back (plus 1/2 the antes). Expensive gamble for small return. But when you hit the Q on 5th, your involvement should have been done.
Yes, you should have raised on the river, but be thankful for any piece of this one. In 8 or better, you just have to stay with starting hands that have a chance to get both ends. With his raise on the A, even with the other callers, I'd be feeling alot better with 7,6,5 or 7,6,4 than 7,2,A. But I'd be ready to dump quick. Once it got to heads up, you have an uphill battle at best. Keep playing hard!
Thanks Glen,
I agree with your analysis. It seems that my stud 8 game definitely needs work. I know that in stud 8 you want to start with hands that have scoop potential, and a 40-80 game is certainly not the place to loosen your starting requirements. Maybe playing the low limit stud 8 on Paradise Poker is contributing to this tendancy, as I sometimes play a hand like this at the 2-4 level. I know better than this, though. Discipline, discipline, discipline.
Thanks again.
40-80, Richie brings it in with a 3 up. M calls, I raise with an A up and 66 underneath. I've been having a bad night, mostly due to no starting hands. Richie 3 bets, M folds, I say,I gotta take one off. Richie frowns. 4th street, I catch a 6, Richie gets a 3. He bets 80, I raise, he reraises, I call.
I ask, do you have four 3s? He says, I just don't believe you called 120 with pocket 6s. He bets 5th, I raise, he backs off and checks and calls to the river, with AA in the hole of course.
Should I have folded on 3rd when he reraised? (I'm not interested in Richie's opinion. I think I already know what it is.)
If I was Richie I would think you have a pair of aces, esp. because he has the two in the hole. He backed off beliving you had two pair Aces/sixs.
No way would I folded on 3rd street. If 7 or higher was raising, likely I would have folded or weakly called as I was tring to represent aces.
Why would you raise? You think the 66 is a raising hand; maybe if no one came in before you, but you have M seeing your A and calling. I would have just called with a pocket shitty pair. Are you getting 7:1. You will need trips if you get any callers. I think you should have just called and kept M in the hunt. You played it wrong but won anyway. Why do you pkay the 666 so strongly when below you slow play 333? You better read some more
carmende
Gee, I guess I need a genius like you to show me how to play. Come on out to Casino Arizona and take all my money. Only problem is, I don't play $2-$4.
In case you can't see the difference, the 333 was a roll-up, meaning the first three cards, and the bring-in. The 666 was on 4th street, and was obviously the best hand. By playing it strongly before the flop, I was representing Aces, but everyone here except a moron like you already knows that.
You know where you can shove your attitude. If you don't have anything constructive to say, go away.
Please relax amigo. I mean no harm. You say flop-was this stud or holdem? If you play like that you need mucho pesos to play in my league. You are on tilt just from my note. Mabe see a doctor if you get so mad
carmen
I wouldn't have folded on 3rd street. Is Richie capable of reraising with a wide variety of hands? My guess is that he is. You also said that you weren't doing well, which would be another reason to try and run over you.
Even if you are absolutely certain that Richie has a big overpair in the hole, you must call. He can't make two pair without you knowing it. When he does make 2 pair or trips on 4th, you have already made your trips and have to punish him.
One thing I don't get is the 3 bet by Richie to $120. Did the bring in come in for 40? On the east coast, the first raise would have been to 40, and Richie would have made it 80.
John Gaspar
I must have screwed up on the betting, maybe M raised and I reraised. I know it was three bets to go.
Richie probably put me on a steal, and figured I would fold when he reraised. It would be his opinion that I should have, as his raise meant he could beat three big cards or a small pair.
I think the betting sequence is very important here. If M raised and you reraise, as a semi bluff, and Richie reraises, he is shouting that he can beat your small pair and doesn't fear M coming over the top. This means to me aces. He knows it is very unlikely you have what you are representing and he will take the pot right here. But this doesn't change my original post. For 40 more to go on 3rd street, you have to call because you're still getting the implied odds to continue.
John Gaspar
See man you dont know what you talking about. you play to pissed off
I think you played it perfectly.
At the luxor a few days ago I saw a $2-10 spread limit 7 stud HL with a qualifier of 2 pair or better for Hi. I wasn't playing it, but my friend who regularly plays regular 7SHL sat down and beat the game rather severly, but left because he didn't like the structure.
It's that last rule that made my friend get up. A forced ten dollar kill bet where between the bringin and the hoggie they have the option to either call $2 or $10 (they are forced to act twice).
He made some strategy decisions I agree with; what is everyone's opinion of how the strategy should differ from regular 7SHL.
Well, obviously you should be much more willing to play a low draw headsup against a high hand, as you can actually scoop. It changes the river strategy a lot, you should bluff more. I'm curious what other posters will come up with.
It would seem to me that high pairs are basically useless since you have to improve your hand just to have a shot at half the pot. I would guess that 3 random low cards would be a favorite over a high pair in this game.
Hi all,
I am the friend spoken of in the original post. I disagree that high pairs shouldn't be played. If you don't play them, I believe you're giving up a lot of potential profit. I don't know the stats, but very often they improve to 2pair or better. Also, in the game, low hands that continued to call because they paired up and were hoping for more pairs could (easily) be beaten by a higher two pair.
I agree though that high pairs go down in value. One should leave if you haven't improved, or if there is jamming on the later streets by a low and perhaps a low two pair.
I think though that a high two pair should jam with made lows, to make the maximum value out of their hand.
One interesting thing about the game was that people would bring in for a raise on 3rd street with ANY 3 low cards, which made me less nervous on later streets when they were betting because chances are they _didn't_ have whatever high hand would have been the nuts, given their board.
This sounds like "bannana republic" poker played in El Jefe's territory, stay away from it is my advice.
Hey all.
I can't seem to find a stud game larger than 4-8 (and the weekly 8-16) being spread on a regular basis in the SF bay area. Any ideas where I could find one?
And any ideas where a decently sized stud 8H/L is being spread around here? Thanks.
Oaks on thursday/friday: 9-18 in the late afternoons. call to see if it is going
Sorry-I thought said a game stud. That would be easy in the SF area
Looking for ways to improve this part of my game.Im getting much better with card ranks but suits are a problem.There are lots of books about memory improvement any recomendations.
Ben, I love 7-stud and I read ALL books, articles, etc. about this very beautiful game. My girl-friend teaches "memory improvement" in a Psychology DEpartment' University. Believe me, one of the only good ways to memorize suited cards in 7-stud is:
- First, note the most part of suited cards showing (i.e. 4 0r more diamonds cards showing)
- Second, note the other major number of suited cards exposed (for ex, 3 clubs)
-Third, consider all live cards the remaining suited exposed cards but, if you can, NOTE the ACe of a determnined suit exposed (esp when you have 3 suited cards of spades and you look at the Ace of spades in some other board).
-Fourth, you have to notice the play of other opponents. Generally speaking, an opponent who calls in early position with a low card when behind him there are many higher cards, it means he has 3 suited cards: let's look or remember quickly whether his suited cards are live (except you play in a very stupid table...). If a player raises with an Ace or King showing not live, think about 3 suited high cards in his hand, esp if there are many players in that hand (but it's possible his high cards are totally alive).
I think this is the sole way to remember suited cards, that is if that suit constitutes a threat to me... If you do a too precise analysys, you can lose many good tips for your hand.
Marco
This should open a floodgate of various opinions. Here goes:
The game was $5-$10 stud. $2 force bet. Player on my left is the force. 5 other limpers. I have 7,8,10 2 suited. All 9's, 5's and 10's are live. I call as I can not be raised. I catch an Ace. I check, the guy left of the force bets his jack doorcard after catching a blank. All call to me. A review of the board shows all 9's, 5's and 10's still live but one ace out, also on 4th street. I call, the force folds. (6 players) I catch my 9 on fifth. Same guy bets $10, 2 others call, I call. I catch the 6, making my straight on 6th. I check raise and get paid off by all. I bet out and get paid by 3 on the river.
Now, the question. A few of my poker buddies went beserk on my play. The comment was " I thought you were a great player, but now?" Was this play so out of line?
Let me qualify my play by letting you know a couple of important facts: (1) I would never have called on 4th without the 9 or A. If I hit the 6 first I would have dumped, I don't play for gutshots unless the odds are mega sized. (2) I never play this hand if cards aren't ALL live and I am last to act. If any 9 is out, 5 or 10, I would vacate. In short it is a specific $2 play.
My feelings about this specific hand are because I feel that most players would play 8,9,10 in this position. And if they hit the open ender on 4th they'd marry the hand 'till the end. If I hit the 9 on 4th same situation, but I have 4 cards to make the open ender, other hand gives you 8 (if all live). I took 1 extra card off for $5 because of the ace's up possibility. I would never have called 5th street without and ace or a nine, never.
So, in closing, this is a $2 play, rarely a $7 play. The implied odds are huge. I've made alot of money on this, at many levels. The real beauty is that the hand is hard to read so you get paid off alot if you hit.
I said all 5's and 10's live. I meant the gut card and both ends. The hand happened months ago, but these guys are still talking about it. It might have been 6,7,9 2 suited. In any case the strategy of it is what I'd like opinions on.
One note that may shed light on the play: I devised this play from playing Yahtzee. So few times do you make a large straight from 1,2,3,4 or 3,4,5,6. So much easier from the 2,3,4,5. I started going for them by rolling 2 dice to a 2,3,5 or 2,4,5. Hit the inside number first, then roll one dice for the openender.
I say that this hand can be played for a profit, although I can't get a true run on a computer using the following criteria:
Never play the hand for a full bet on 3rd. Never call 2 bets on 4th. Never play if gut card and ends not live, all 12 cards. Only play if 5 or more players in for the force. Only play from last position. Dump hand on 4th if you miss the gut card. Only exceptions are if you make a pair, hit a live ace, as I did. Dump if looking at any strength, especially flush cards.
If someone knows how to run this with such specific criteria and get the math done, I'd love to hear.
That criteria is close to being right. With some refinements, you will make more money.
I'll assume you meant 6,7,9, 2-suited.
You'll make the straight about 14% of the time, but if you miss a connecting card on 4th, that drops to about 7%. But even if you catch a 5 or a 10 the probability of you making the straight increases to about 23%. Obviously if you catch the gap, your chances shoot up to near even-money (approx. 42%). You also have a longshot backdoor flush possibility (about 3%).
Thus, if you can limp cheap on 3rd, throw it away on 4th if you miss any help, and don't let them cut down your implied odds with a double-bet on 4th, you should make money. Note that this only applies to a multi-way field, although your criteria for 5 players is a bit strong. 4 opponents looks to be a money maker also.
The key here is that you don't have to throw it away if you miss the gutshot on 4th. If you catch the 5 or 10, you are still very much alive as long as you have 4 or more players calling a single bet.
One caveat: The play of this hand properly is much more complicated than a usual straight or flush draw. In addition to balancing all the above factors, you are more vulnerable to making a second-best hand to another draw than if you were playing a better-structured hand.
what he said.
I think it's extremely silly for you to be arguing with your friends, under the criteria you listed this is a positive expectation play. Why defend your reputation, let them think it's a bad call, you'll make more money off them in the long run. I personally would have claimed that I hit a gutshot on the end, even though I never play them. Question to you want their respect or their money? The greater the difference between how people think you play and how you actually play, the more money you make. It doesn't matter if they think you are tight or loose.
While I like the play, I believe that, given it's origin, the better play would have been to stand up and yell YAHTZEE while showing down the hand.
.
I am not crazy about the play, but I see your point. The situation was a good one, and you seemed to have good control and position. A good player can do this kind of move. Stud is a game of live cards vs. holdem which is a game of high cards. I think your play here was pretty good, but only because you evaluated theboard and players correctly. If you were up against 2-two pair draws or a flush or 2, you could have been ripped. Nice play overall
When you have proper position and many limpers a gapped straight can be a decent play. In your case I would have been a little concerned that it was only 10 high with so many others in the pot.
I suspect you won't get as many differing opinions as you expect.
Your call on 3rd street is OK since you can't be raised at that point, and a weak hand like that can become profitable if you play well on later streets. Like for instance knowing when to get off the hand if higher straights and flushes have come in. I don't like your call on 4th. I don't think you have a profitable situation anymore. To make your 3rd street call correct you better play well on later streets. And catching a single overcard is not a ticket to play on. If you do that you're better off not playing hands like this to begin with. You really need to catch a better card to continue.
I agree the Ace is really a trouble card here. Except maybe for the top or near the top players.
15-30 game. I have 2-4-6 (6 up) with 2 spades. Raised by a face card, called by me, raised by a wheel card, reraised by another wheel card. I can see 3 spades and one of my straight cards. Should I play?
You should almost always play. However, we need more important info to make the best decision.
1) How many of your straight cards (3/5) are dead
2) How many big low cards are dead (7/8)
3) Are there any aces out?
This information will usually tell you whether you should call 3rd st, and if you call whether you can take any more heat on 4th.
The most important question that needs to be answered is 2.
If you have *no* dead low cards, then it is you who should be raising.
- Andrew
Ditto Andrew. What wheel cards were out? If all were live for your hand then you play. If 1 or more 3,5,7,8 out re-think. Keep playing hard!
All high low split games are games where one can only show success over the long haul by scooping pots often. That is to win the high/low with a straight like a little wheel or a low flush. Playing high pairs from the get-go without a chance for a low is almost a ticket to disaster (IMO). Hi/lo is an entity where raising and capping is the rule rather than the exception. Better read and practice a lot before you venture here. Chasing lows when there is a straight chance is worthwhile. I find the game terribly boring and repetitive.
I was playing a little hilo stud 8-or-better earlier, which is not my best game, but the table was pretty loose and a couple of players were just terrible. This hand came up and I had no idea how to play it.
On third street, the 2d brings it in (bring in is half a full small bet, ante is moderately highish). Player to his left raises with Qc showing. This player is very loose and aggressive, and would raise any hand he would enter with. The Qh and Ts fold to me.I have (JhJc)6h. Left to act after me is only the Qs.
With three queens showing, I have a hard time putting the raiser on a pair of queens. He could have any pair in the hole, a flush draw, maybe even AKQ etc.
So the real question is how do I play it here on third street?
I may put up more of the hand later, but I want to talk about this first. I have a low card up, so calling looks fairly natural here. Reraising seems ok, to knock out the bring in if nothing else. But I do have to worry that the raiser could actually have a pair of queens, or even kings or aces in the hole. On the other hand, folding seems out of the question.
Any comments would be great, David
n/t
Well, if he's going for high the two other queens out hurt his chances for two pair, trips, and a full house. You, on the other hand, have a (I assume) completely live hand pair-wise, as well as a two-flush, and you are sort of disguised as a low.
I agree with you that folding is out of the question considering the situation. So since you said that this guy played loose and that the ante is moderately highish, I would go ahead and reraise, and unless he makes something scary go to the river. No matter what he has for high you aren't that big an underdog, especially if your reraise gets it head up and you get all that dead money in. Plus you'll have position.
You probably won't be able to bluff him out, but he probably figures you for low and so he'll bet into you the whole way unless he thinks you made your low. If you catch another pair later on you can certainly raise for value, or bet if he checks, since he thinks he can escape for high.
Regards, sucker
Hard to say. I don't think that folding is out of the question at all. If he really would raise with any old pair or a three flush, you might re-raise to get it heads-up. If the bring-in folds, and he probably will, it's basically going to be a high-only hand. If the queen re-raises, I'd probably call him down. Your hand is live, and his isn't. Of course, I'm mostly a high-only player, and lately not a very successful one, so take that for what it's worth.
A fold would be OK or a loose call. I don't think I would raise as the risk of being re-raised seems high. I would belive the Q has a high pair, or the case queen, so you may be drawing dead. If I didn't improve on the next card I would fold to a bet.
If he is behind, he is certainly not drawing dead. His Jacks are live, his kicker is live, and his hearts are pretty live. If you're folding to a bet on fourth street, then you should fold on third.
The first rule I ever learned in 8 or better is that anything less than Aces (pair wise) can be trouble. I read that even pocket K's should be folded on 3rd if an ace or 2 are in the hand.
However, the circumstances here are very favorable. I don't think I'd raise as the only benefit would be to get heads up, and you risk the chance that he does have a Q, kings or aces and re-raises, then you have trouble. I'd smooth call and look to improve by 5th. If not dump when the bet gets bigger. Definately, I'd call on 4th. You have a chance for a big hand here as a J would seem like a brick on a later street but would be the nuts. Hearts look like a probability too. With all your outs, disquise ability, and the fact that you may already be the best, I wouldn't fold this hand yet. But dump on 5th if you don't improve. Be wary of any K or A he may hit as you could then be drawing dead even if you hit a J.
Keep playing hard!
...but I'm feeling good about this situation. A loose, aggressive player raising a dead Q in a 6-handed game, while you have a live pocket pair disguised a slow. Sounds like you're playing at Paradise from the structure - I've been playing a lot of the stud/8 there recently.
My biggest fear is pocket K's or A's, but if I had to put him on a hand, I'd say a flush draw is the most likely. He may have the case Q too, albeit totally dead. I'd fire ahead and reraise; if he reraises I'd worry about the bigger pair, but still call - remember, you have more outs than he does (such a player may be raising a smaller pocket pair as well).
Since you're disguised as low, he may try and muscle you off the pot later. I'd be aggressive on 4th as well, with a bet or raise, unless he catches something scary like a club, A or K. If he bites back, I'd suspect a big pair and act accordingly. I'd definitely be calling him down if I caught 2 pair by 5th. If he started with a bigger pair and wins, then so be it. If he isn't showing me 3 clubs or a couple of overcards by 5th, and my hand has either improved or is still very live, I'm staying.
The combination of player characteristics, the likelihood of him holding a drawing hand, and how live the cards are means I'm staying to see how this hand develops. I'm not considering folding on 3rd at all, like some of other posters.
....maybe that's why I've developed a a high variance game, but it suits me. Folding on 3rd, although not my choice at all, may not be any great disaster. but I think it would be a missed chip collecting opportunity against this kind of opponent.
Don't play this hand. JJ is at best a marginal starting hand in Stud8. With a raiser in front of you with a Queen up (even with two Qs already out) you are quite likely a dog right there even for just high. And you have zero shot at low. Good starting hands in Stud8 are hands with two way potential or hands that are vitually guaranteed for half the pot. You are neither. FOLD!
1-5 5 card draw 3 card limit, 7 handed, 5 hands all night not shown down(bluff no good), Under the Gun with AxAQJ9d. 1 ante, I bet 3, Player on left raise to 6(loose--but takes something to make raise), fold to best player at the table, raise 5 to 11. fold to me. 8 to me, 27 in pot. Do I fold/call/raise? If you say raise or call, which cards do I keep?
If the second raiser is a good player, he probably needs at least aces-up to make that raise. Given that you have two aces, he probably has at least trips. You probably can't win by making aces-up, and you're not getting implied odds to make three aces, so the only thing to consider is whether it's worth drawing to the flush. It's a little more than 4:1 against your making the flush, and the current pot odds are a little more than 3:1. If you think someone will pay off your check-raise if you get there, you can probably go for it. Of course, you may get your flush and the other guy may fill, which would be expensive. Also, the first raiser may re-raise before the draw, which would kinda wreck your odds. Folding in this spot wouldn't be a terrible idea.
This is just the opinion of an extremely small-time stud player who hasn't played high-only draw in ages.
Depends on the players. Pot giving 3:1 (forget what you already put in). If you think it takes trips to win, you draw 3 then it is an 8:1 shot to get trip aces. If you think Aces up is OK and draw 2, it is about 7.5:1. If you think the pot will give you 8:1 or better after everyone is in after the drawm, then call and take 3 cards. I would probably fold before the draw.
I grew up playing this, no limit, at Artichoke Joes and still love the game! Seldom play it anymore, so take my advice with a grain of salt.
I'd call the 8 and draw one to the flush. You're getting almost actual odds to go for it. Implied odds make this the correct play as if you hit you'll probably have the nuts. I'd read those players as 2 pair and trips resectively, at best. Someone could be holding your other 2 aces.
How'd it come out? Keep playing hard!
I did not see the flush draw. Of course I would draw 1 card for 8 bucks. It is close, but if you figure you can win with a high flush (and it looks pretty good), do it. Implied odds of about 5 or 6 to one for a 4:1 draw is OK. Sorry I missed the suited cards. I do not see a reraise, but depending on who draws what, then a raise or check raise if you think you can get called. Seldom can you get better than 5:1 in a Draw gane because of the lack of betting intervals.
First off I'm not sure if I even spelled the name of the game correctly, and that leads me to my question for all of you Ohmaha players. What kinds of hand are considered storng hands because the game is so crazy that it seems like a pair of deuces have just as strong a chance winning as aces. Despite my bickering I enjoyed my first Ohmaha experience last night (probably because my deuces accually did beat those aces) and would like to learn more about how to explain it so if you could tell me any literature on the game, tips, or comments I would greatly appreciate it, Thank you
"I enjoyed my first Ohmaha experience last night"
Omaha straight high or Omaha high/low split with an 8 qualifier?
"What kinds of hand are considered storng hands"
Assuming Omaha high/low split, nut hands on the river, at least in loose-low-level L.A. games.
"would like to learn more about how to explain it so if you could tell me any literature on the game, tips, or comments I would greatly appreciate it"
Assuming Omaha high/low split, (1) Buy Ray Zee's book. (2) Play only hands that have a good chance to scoop. (3) Fold after the flop if you don't either have the nuts or have a good draw to the nuts. (4) Don't chase with second nut hands.
Buzz
Buzz, don't you ever get tired of repeating the same advice? hehe... you really should post a FAQ for beginning O/8. I remember asking about it months ago and you helped me.
I really think this would be a good idea. Just some quick little advice that Two Plus Two could post somewhere, it doesn't matter who writes it (although I nominate you or Zee) and then put a disclaimer on it saying buy Ray Zee's book, because we both know that is the best advice that can be given right?
If every player at a full table stayed with every hand to the end, about how many hands out of 100 would be the nuts?
I have no idea how to begin to figure, maybe some of that turbo soft ware does figure. --just curious thanx
I figure you played Omaha high.
First thing to remember: Good starting hands are playable in relation to the table. The best hold'em starting hand is A-A, at Omaha games is A-A-K-K double suited (One Ace suited with one King, other Ace suited with second King). Frequent holding? Never seen it. If you play in a loose table the best starting hands are cards who can develop in straight and flush hands. I.e.: A-K-Q-J with A suited with one of the other cards. Don't fall in the trap playing a medium-big pair, flopping a set (trips) and call all the way (it's very hard the board will pair!!). Take advantage on those players who are married to their sets. They will lose and they'll bring you the money.
Second: Omaha is a game of NUT HANDS but of NUT DRAWS also! Here's an example where I have seen a huge bankroll went broke: No preflop raises, 6 callers, flop: K-10-5. K and 10 of spades. A guy bet pot, 3 callers. Turn: 7 of spades. Another player in the hand bet the maximum amount (pot), the guy who originally bet on the flop called (he had K-K-9-A, K-9 of spades). River blank. In your opinion, what the 4th card bettor could have? That is, is it worth to call a high bet with three of a kind (set not trips) and the second nut flush? No, you'll go broke and this is one of many traps Omaha always represent.
Please look at the other post for the correct spelling. (BTW it's Ohmama)
There's a saying "deuces never looses" meaning that yes a pair of deuces are a powerhouse.
One hand even more powerfull is the 222x hand. It ensures that when the 2 flops (ie is one of the 3 cards the dealer put down) then no-one else has a 2.
As we all know this is a excellent position to be in.
For hints you should email Steve Badger directly. Also, you can read the holdem books and then just imagine that you have 2 other cards to play.
Continued Good Luck at the tables
Note: I was just kidding. I'm stating this just so if you didn't realise it you won't lose even more than you might already be losing.
Cardplayer magazine has an article by Barry Shulman that would be excellent reading for any begginner Omaha 8 player.
http://www.cardplayer.com/barry_03_05_1999.html
1-5 stud, you have an ace up with a pair of eights buried. A ten raises the bring-in to 3, you are in late position. What's your move (aces and eights are live)? I have heard in low limit games, raises aren't respected so you should only bet big pairs. Are semi-bluffs worth it in low limit stud? Any other advice appreciated.
Reraise. The T might fold right away. If not, he might fold on 5th street if he hasn't caught another pair. Even if he never folds, you have lots of outs to beat him.
In low limit, you are more likely to get called to the river, but you can stop betting and even fold if you don't improve. I would bet until 5th, then back off if you don't improve. I wouldn't fold unless he pairs his doorcard or shows an open pair, or bets the river and you still have only the 8's.
3BB,
Jeff 3BB is right raise it to $8.
Paul
I tend to agree that you probably should not raise here. The problem is, I just finished reading SCSFAP and the advice works great in my home game (pot limit stud, hold em, and omaha) for much smaller stakes (but with more knowledgeable players that will actually think). It rarely translates to the casino however. I am about to go for a weekend of 1-5 stud at Turning Stone...is the best advice to sit and muck till I get a big pair? What can I play on 3rd?
Why reraise? You expect your opponent to call all bets to the river. You will need to show the best hand on the river to win. Your opponent probably has a better starting hand. Your opponent has position over you.
I don't like this hand in a no ante game against a single opponent. You won't get paid off when you make aces up. You probably won’t get paid off when you make a winning two pair. Trip eights are nice, but they don't hit often enough. I fold in this situation against most opponents.
I would fold. They will know when you have ace up and they raised so they might have a ace in hole. In low limit this hand lose more than wins. fold No bluffing in low limit Ron hope you get the 3rd 8 but the odds are appx 20 to 1
The 10 sees your ace and raises anyway. If you think he has better than your 8's and you call, you are making a mistake (i.e. the fundamental theorm of poker). If you suspect a bluff or semi-bluff like a drawing hand then you should raise and see what he does. Remember, you have only 5 cards that can help you and your opponent may have 2 of them. If you get an Ace (6% chance) you can win it right there, but you are not getting the odds, and you will be out of position until your opponent really shows he has you. An 8 is nice too if he is not rolled up (1:425). Your pocket pair is nice, but there is no ante and you might be drawuing to the 2nd best hand anyway. I would release it. Don't fall in love with the ace
Yep, to reraise is the worst play. In low-limit they'll chase you all the time. You have almost nothing against a bigger pair. Even if you catch the 8 (the best scenario) you are in trouble. The better way to win at low-limit stud tables is chasing with DRAWING HANDS, such as A or K flush draws or (but with a lot of caution) straight draws. No way to reraise with a possible lower pair, this is the real great mistake I ever seen at 7 stud (and higher limits too)
Marco
Here's the problem, if he did it once he will do it again. You really want to discourage this rude behavior by anyone except yourself.
You have good odds on taking the pot right here.
I think the only reason one with an Ace showing would re-raise would be to "say" he has Aces or trips. If the A get called, he is in big trouble. Why risk 3 bets and get stuck in a pot that contains about 35% of your money. If it is table image you want, you'll get it if you do not get Aces up or better and that might not win. Your image will be that of a pinhead. If you think the raiser is betting on the come with 3 of a suit or a possible st flush, then go ahead and raise; otherwise fold.
Here are good rules to follow for LL stud.
For a calling hands:
Your mission is to win the pot at the river with the best hand, getting there as cheaply as possible.
For the nut's:
Make 'em bleed, and cry out in pain starting at fourth street.
A pair of 8' and an Ace is not the nut's. It's not even a calling hand in this situation - imho.
If you're going to play this hand, which most probably would I'd raise again to get heads up. It's true that many players in low limit don't respect a raise but few will call a double raise without the best of holdings. Once you raise, you will also be the aggressor here which can't hurt. He may even fold his 10's to you soon since you're indicating aces. Keep playing hard!
"1-5 stud, you have an ace up with a pair of eights buried. A ten raises the bring-in to 3, you are in late position. What's your move (aces and eights are live)? I have heard in low limit games, raises aren't respected so you should only bet big pairs. Are semi-bluffs worth it in low limit stud? Any other advice appreciated."
Here's where you left out a bunch of info that would be helpful. Did anyone call the T raise before it gets to you?? How many people are behind you and what do they have up?? It depends (Badger still lives) on who called and who is behind you with what. There is no real answer to this question because too much info is left out. That's my answer.
Paul
What you do depends in part on the opposition and what you know about how they play, what other cards are out (are any Ts out?), etc. But as someone else mentioned, if the T raised into the A, then he may have a big pocket pair. If he does, then you are going uphill.
If he is betting a big three flush, then you would like to get it heads up. Whether or not you can get it heads up with a raise depends upon the particular game you are in, but usually you have difficulty doing that in 1-5.
I don't believe that I would raise in this spot. Best play is to just throw it away and wait for a better investment. Second best play is to just call and see what fourth street brings. If you catch an Ace or an eight, you can play; if you don't, and he bets 4th street, I would fold because you are most likely going uphill.
I read many good answers in this post. Most part of players agree that a raise is the worst play. Yes, a raise is good if this raise allows to play the hand heads-up. But the bottom line probably is the above answer who dictates that you have to play until the river cheaply and push up with your bigger pair (at least bigger than other upcards)
Assuming zero ante and no other caller, let him steal air. Played some 1-5 at the Trop AC this summer and the unspoken agreement was that if anybody brought it in for a raise, let them steal the air and tease them about not toking the dealer. (how's that for a neg EV play) What I observed was that when anybody raised for less than 5 on 3rd street they were trying to slowplay something big. Fold it. not enough dead money in the pot for anything fancy.
The three most important questions are.
1) Is there an ante 2) Are there any other players in the pot? 3) How many people act after you and what are the up cards?
If there is an ante, no other players are in the pot and only 1 or 2 players behind you raise if there are any other upcards higher than an 8 behind you. This is because any live pair with a live overcard kicker plays well against a single opp. but is in serious trouble against 2 opps. who hold higher pairs than your 8. Folding here if the situation is similar to how I've described above (no callers with you in late position) is a weak play and will cost you a ton of dough over the long run because this situation comes up quite a bit. As to how to play the rest of the hand. Check and fold 4th st. if anyone else calls with a higher upcard than an 8. Also be prepared to let it go if any 8 or A falls somewhere else. If a lower card behind you calls on third st. you have to use your best judgement but I'd be more inclined to either check raise or check and fold 4th st. depending on what he catches. If you are able to get it heads I'd bet 4th and 5th, check and call 6th (unless you have a strong indication that a bet will win it for you). Check and fold (or showdown) 7th if I miss and check raise if I hit. There is also a pretty good argument to bet all way to the river (esp. if you plan to call anyway) so you don't get pigion holed with regard to your betting patterns (ever notice how some people only bet 6th st if the have caught a second pair).
And it's very good the TomDooley' analysys
Semi bluffs are definitely not worthwhile inlow limit. You must remember that a semibluff is a good play only where there is a chance your opponent might fold or if a scare card can win you the pot. This is almost never true in 1-5.
With your hand I would likely limp in if I could but would fold for a raise unless a reraise would get it heads up. This hand is a total crapshoot in lowlimit and I think you must play iot well to be profitable.
Pat
Like, I just started playing at this totally cool Omaha 8 or better game, and I'm dealt like an ace with a five and some other cards on my first hand! Can you believe it? I think there are like 5 people who call my blind bet, and the dealer turns over a two, a three, and a four! Like isn't that totally awesome? I have like a straight as well as a low.
I did a little dance in my seat, and kissed the totally handsome guy next to me, and very sedately I thought bet again, but this time I got to look at my cards. I think everyone folded except this one like really nice man at the other end of the table. Anyway, the next 2 cards were like a 7 and then like another 4, and I kept betting, and he called, and then he raised me at the end! Far out! I mean, like what am I supposed to do?
I called and I was really lucky because I like still got half the pot!. Omaha is a totally terrific game. His hand was a two, a four, a nine, and a king, and they were all hearts! I thought this was pretty cool, but this old grouch on the other side said I should have like check raised on the flop, whatever that is, but my really handsome friend said not, and said if I posted? (is that the right word) the story here, like, he would explain why. You could just call me, my OH NO, MY CAKE IS BURNING!
No way, this cool young chick does any baking. She's at the Internet Cafe Bar typing this.
She might have something in the oven but it's not a cake.
Don't worry babe, you're already better than the old grouch who raised you with a flush and no low (to speak of) when the board was paired.
One helpful hint. Occasionally when you do the seat dance you should clench your fist and shout "YES YES YES". This is aimed at the more astute players who may have been watching your breasts and may have missed your bottom wiggling.
Like, be nice, guys.
The Internet Cafe by me is totally awesome, but I was home baking the cake for my boyfriend, and he was really mean about it, and I scrapped off most of the burned places too.
The nice old man at the end of the table had 4 hearts, but there none in the middle, so like all he had was a full house.
I guess my only heart is on my sleeve. I need a new boyfriend, where are you Mr. Handsome?
I guess heartbroken Cindy is going to have an early demise because I hit the post button too quickly, but there is a serious question burried here.
The K942 hearts is one of the more miserable hands I've seen get a miracle card on the river (he really was just drawing to his 2 small pair), and it's "totally awesome" that he is willing to play into a wheel flop, but isn't there some way to make them fold before they hit?
Fred, so you like to go both ways. I mean High and Low of course.
If he's in there with te garbage then you must accept the other side. Sometimes he will draw out on you.
If he's smart enough to fold here then he's probably not there in the first place!
Actually, the more I think about this hand, the more I believe he was a holdem refugee.
He was playing for 1 heart to hit the board for the 2nd nut flush!
.
Holdem was chosen as the world championship game in 1971 in spite of the fact that 7cs was about 100 times popular. There is only one reason for that: 7cs isn't a good no-limit game and therefore wasn't eligible. In other words, if 7cs was a good NL game then holdem would never have been chosen.
What is strange in retrospect is why no one thought to answer the question, why is 7cs such an excellent game while being no good for NL? The answer is that it is one round too long and has one too many hole-cards for no-limit betting. (It can of course be played at NL, it just isn't very good for it.) If you fix those problems by dealing the fourth and fifth cards together and the last card face up, then 7cs becomes a very good NL game. (ie, spread the game in a 3-2-1-1 pattern instead of 3-1-1-1-(1).
If that game (which is called mississippi) had been in play back in 1971 it would have been the first choice for the WSOP deciding game because it is in effect the NL championship form of 7cs, and as I say, 7cs was about 100 times as popular as holdem.
While it is too late for mississippi to become the WC game, it none the less represents the only real chance for 7cs players to get into the ever-growing NL tournament action and I would recommend that anyone interested in a great game with a big future should take a look at it.
The reason NL hold-em was chosen as the championship game is because most of the original competitors (Slim, Brunson, Moss) and the proprietor (Benny Binion) were from Texas -- where NL hold-em was big. If you've ever been to Sweetwater, Midland or Abilene, you'll understand why -- NL hold-em might be the only excitement you could find in town.
You really think ESPN or Discovery is gonna advertise the "Mississippi 7-card Stud World Championship"? I'd be willing to wager that NL hold-em will ALWAYS be the final event in major tournaments.
Let's not forget that one of the most important reasons holdem is prefferred over 7 stud, in my opinion, is that it can be played for a longer period of time, ie: less mentally taxing. Remembering up cards for the duration of a 2 day event is very taxing. Holdem can be played longer, therefore preferred by T players.
I assume you meant for a 4-day event. The common card aspect also makes it easier on the dealers.
.. and the flop is more 'exciting', as well, to the folks at home. Probably reminds them of a slot machine.
'ssippi sounds like a fun game; river down hold'em is, too. Ya'll spread it, I'll play it; 'long as they ain't no jackpot rake.
Earl, no I'm not saying M7 will become the WC game, just that it probably would have been picked if it had been available.
Even if the Texans had their way in 1971, a competing tournament which used mississippi instead of holdem would have attracted far more entrants because any 7cs player who has played neither game would prefer to play mississippi if given the choice.
They had 7 entrants in 1971; 13 entrants in 1972. Everyone paid the $10,000, no satellites or supers. I don't believe they even had another event until some years later, so "more entrants" or a competing game wasn't an issue. In those early years, all the competitors were "insiders" who pretty much ran the tournament when and as they pleased. I don't believe that the WSOP included multiple events until Eric Drache became the organizer.
i dont remember exact years but multiple events started quickly. the first world series was in 1970 i think as i was there, but not playing much and i always regret that i didnt get in the famous picture they took. i was just a kid player then but played high stakes sometimes. id go down from the stardust to play 5 stud with them when benny was in the game. he spiced it up alot. he would buy in 10 g's and blow it in a few hours or less. it was mostly $5 ante no limit, low card brought it in i think for either 10 or 25. i always won as id play tight and shove it in and no one wanted to lose to me as they knew they wouldnt get it back. so when i got a scare card the pot was mine. the first and maybe 2nd world series the buyin was 10,000 but binion put up half of all the contestants money so it really was 5,000 buyin and the rest was for show. the real first world series was at the holiday casino in reno the year before but that story will be in my never to be revealed stories about the poker world of the past.
1970 was the year they voted on the world champion, so I think when David refers to 1971, he's speaking of when the game was played to decide who would be champion.
You might think about sharing some of those stories -- heck, someone needs to write a book about the history of the WSOP before all the early history falls into obscurity.
Ray:
I would rather your remain a pocker instructor as oppose turning into a poker historian. This way you make a greater impact on bringing alond the young and upcoming poker generations.
You are much too young to become preoccupaied with history.
Marry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Ivan
If 7stud is more taxing that is more reason for it to be the WC game. Not the other way around... don't you think?
Thanks for the responses: to address a couple of points, I have to agree with Earl that holdem has a lock on the WC role and that won't change. In the absence of an NL form of 7cs holdem was a brilliant choice, but in the context of the situation of 1971, when few people played holdem and everyone played 7cs it makes sense to suggest that the NL form of the dominant game would have had first dibs on the job, even if several of the people involved in the WSOP were holdem fans: there were other people present who had never played the game. In the first year (1970) there was no clear choice of a deciding game, with the players voting on who was best, so the decision was far from an obvious one.
BillM mentions the three-card flop as a major attraction, which it is, but the two-card non-communal flop to three starting cards is pretty exciting too, and gives you far more chance of improving your hand (with the sole exception that making trips is harder.)
(BTW, river-card-down holdem would not be a good NL game because trips straights and flushes could never be the nuts.)
I have to agree with suspicious in suggesting that the greater complexity etc of 7cs/mississippi makes it a greater test of skill.
It seems you didn't note that 7 stud is popular because is played in every casino, in every cardroom, in every home game (or almost). No-limit hold'em is rarely played in cash games. I think NL hold'em is a typical tournament game where 7-stud with his slowness and complexity is not good for a tourney. Expert of NL hold'em are all (or almost) tournament players. I love very much 7-stud, I hate hold'em, but I believe 7stud would be a bingo game whether played in no-limit way (even with the mississippi variant).
I seldom play Omaha 8, however there are a few tourneys around and I know I need some specific help with starting hands.
Someone once told me that there is a pretty simple system where you assign a point value to say a A-2 and then add more points if it's suited etc.
Does anyone know where I might be able to get that or does someone have it that wouldn't mind e-mailing me a copy?
Thanks in advance, Casey
I, too, am new at O/8 but excited about giving it a run.
I know this is a basic question, but I'm curious what kind of hand warrants a raise in early position. I assume it would be AA23 with two total suits represented (i.e. two shots at the nut flush). That might be the best, but what else might you raise in early position with? Two high pairs? A2 suited and KK? etc ....
Thanks in advance.
Leapus
Lots of hands can be raised. One opinion is that you shouldn't raise at all preflop. It's just too much of a drawing game.
With the hand you describe I might raise in late poition in order to build a nice pot. I likely just call in early position.
Read the High/Low book by Ray Zee.
I agree with Betthedraw. Seldom a raise is a good play. A-2 is nothing as you could be easily counterfeited. My best advice for you is reading Ray Zee book and, with slight preference (in my opinion), 7-stud championship by Max Stern and Tom McEvoy.
Marco
In low limit omha/8 you never want to raise in early pos. with a good hand if it will limit the field.
You want to raise in late pos. to build the pot not to get people to fold.
I can't find my post re: this subject, does anyone know where I can find the table that rates opening hands mathmatically ? Like you assign a certain amount of points to A2 and then add a few for a 3 and more if the ace is suited and so on... Thanks, Casey
Do you mean:
http://erh.homestead.com/omaha.html
?
I want to know your opinion (I like your answers about 7-stud, they are very useful for everyone) and test your reading hands.
Game: 7-stud, $10-$20, ante $2, bring-in $5; 8 players, average skill, almost the end of the game (unfortunetely we play in a no 24 hour open room :-(
I'm dealt (As-Ad)4d in last position; bring-in is an exposed 2, a 10 completes the bet, a Queen call, all fold, I raise for a bet of $20. ALL call.
Fourth card: 2-2 exposed for the bring in, a J suited with the 10 showing, a 3 off for the Queen, I catch a 4 (now I have 4-4 exposed). I bet, 2-2 (bring-in) raise, 10 fold, Queens reraise. I call and also call the player who have 2-2 showing.
5th card: blank, blank, blank. I check (fearing a rolled up trips of Queens), 2-2 checks, Queen checks.
6th card: 7 for me, 7 for 2-2 showing, 8 for the Queen. I bet, 2-2 fold, Queen raises, I call.
River: a blank for me. I check (I've the high hand showing) Queen bet, I call. I lost the hand.
In your opinion, what could be the Queen showing' hole cards? (I haven't lost vs flush).
Please, to make your answers worth name only 2 possible starting hands of the player who has the Queen exposed.
Thanks to all ($100 to the right answer :-))
Marco
Obvious guess is trip Queens. Do not expect the JT has a queen as he folded. the 7 pairs the door card after a raise so the Q must have trip 7's beat or AA, 77 beat. Only AA QQ or trip Queens would be my guess. Anything better is pure guessing.
8QQ and he filled up on the river.
More thoughts: he bet strongly after 5th, but the check on 5th is puzzling. I think he might still have bet the 2 Q's.
My second guess: 88Q, and the 8 on 6th gave him a set.
at showdown he says straaaiiight ...... followed by Weppaaaaaaa!!! and you make a mental note: likes to go for straights, must play a different variation of this game called poker (MEET IN BATHROOM LATER).
My guess is pocket three that were afraid of you having three fours. I'm guess he filled up on the river.
Mike
He had the 9,10 in the hole and caught the J on the river for a gutshot. OMIGOD, it's a miracle!!!!!! Send my $100 to your local Make A Wish Foundation will ya!!
Let me also add some fuel to the fire. In all liklyhood the guy is probably a very good player (although he may be a tad too aggressive) who played the hand very well.
Yeah, good answers as I expected. Yeah, he could have fill up or dead with rolled up trips of Queens. Or he could have a straight, but but....
As always Mike guessed!!!!!!!!
He has 3-3 in the hole and after the hand finished he sayed me: I feared a rolled up trips (of 4s)
Thanks to all, next time
Marco
Marco,
Any ideas on what caused the op with the Q to raise you on 6th? He was afraid of trip 4s on 5th but not on 6th for some reason?? He just couldn't restrain himself a second time from betting trips??
Thanks for the post, Con
P.S. My guess to your quiz (unpublished) was 88 in the hole. Maybe I was being too simple-minded by assuming that each of the op's actions were consistent. I reasoned:
4th street raise (in light of the check on 5th): a semi-bluff and/or a successful attempt to get a free card.
5th street check: a free card
6th street raise: he got trip 8s
I'm developing a new (?) idea in 7-stud, I want to say you your opinions.
4th card. Let's say I'm dealt (Ah-4h)3h or (A-J)10.
After the bring-in, one player with a (i.e) Queen showing raises, 1 player with a 9 exposed call, I call.
I catch an Ace, other players catch no threatining cards. I'm first to act, I check, Queen bet, other player calls, I raise.
That is: It's a good way to go risking a freecard, checking with the possible nuts? It's good to give evidency that my raise means a pair (or higher) of Aces? It's a good play to take a freecard when I attempt the same play when I catch an Ace but I have no pair of Aces (in this situation I don't bet if I have no Aces after the raiser checks?) Same problem (but with lower efficency) can be applied to Kings or other higher pair vs doorcard raiser
Comments very appreciated
Two aces with a three flush on 4th is extremely strong. Even if the caller with the nine is on a draw and makes a 4th straight or flush card on 4th, your hand is a strong favorite. So the question is will they call your raise. If this is a structured game, you have 4 small bets plus antes in the pot, I'd tend to slow play one round and then bet 5th. If it's a low limit spread limit where you could have 4 full bets already and likely calls, it's a profitable bet. I think you want action here and so it depends on your read of the players.
DJ
How do I calculate the odds in a 1 to 5, 7 cards stud game, when anybody can bet from 1 to 5 on any street? New to the game, thank you.
This is too difficult a question to answer with a simple post. Two books I would recommend to get you started are Roy West's book on 7-stud and another book entitled "Thursday Night Poker" (don't remember the author). The Thursday Night book has a good section on calculating card probabilities, EV, pot odds, etc.
I find two pair in the first 4 cards, with no pair showing, to be a very strong hand. Any two pair. Is this correct?
2 pair is very strong in the 1st 4 cards especially with no pairs showing. Obviously, the higher the one pair is the better. Two will win at the showdown against 1 other player 80% of the time. As the opponents increase, the valus of 2 pair goes down significantly. Against 2 opponents, you'll probably need Queens up or better. Against 3, Trips are probably the average hand.
The moral of the story is to raise to drive out as many players as you can as early as you can. Slowplaying 2 pair is the path to destruction
I played this hand the other day in a 5-10 game. I was low with a 7 showing, and I had a pair of 3's in the hole. Everybody call the minimun $2 and no raises. On 4th I get another seven. I am high so I bet the max. $ 10. I get 2 callers, I put one on a straight draw, the other on a flush draw. 5th street they get blank, IMO, I bet $10. On 6th St the same thing, I bet $ 10. River, I check, (wrong?), I win, they were both drawing. One of them got a pair of nine's at the end. I bet this strong because I was representing Trip seven ( I hope ), and I was praying for a 3 or a seven, witch I didn't get. So I was happy to see my two pair held up. Thank you for your response. John.
Well played, you charged them the most you could to draw out on you. Your check on the end is correct as well IMO. If someone had bet on the end you MUST call them remember.
You played correctly. The check on the end might be arguable, but I find checking the end with 3 players good because you had 2 pair and had one of the others hit, it would have cost you 2 bets. I certainly would have called with a closed pair for the minimum. It would have been nice to have an overcard. I have been in this seituation many times and have asked players who are more experienced, and thay would do as you did.
In the 5-10 games I play in you usually will get a call on the end even if the opponent is beaten. I dont know where you play,but if it is the AC games, you may have been able to bet and get a caller on the end. If you get raised you can certainly fold.
Pat
If I was low /in a limp in pot/ and make two small pair on 4th street, open pair or not, I am likely to check unless I am sure my opponent(s) wont bet. They usualy will. I will usualy raise it right there if there is any chance of eliminating anybody.
GET OUT OF MY POT
- Joe in Connecticut
Well done John, but in this case you were mainly capitalising on the mistakes of your opponents. IMHO, playing draws against a pair on the table 4th street is suicide except if we're talking about a very loose game with many in the pots and a high flush draw (for several reasons; in a loose stud game, a pair on the board isn't so frightening with regards to an early trip while the other in the pot are giving you excellent odds playing their hopeless garbage).
The man on a straight draw (if your assumpsions were right) is playing poor. Even if he makes his straight, there is still almost even odds on the flush draw completing a better hand and you have about 5:1 on making the full house, although even better if you're representing trips.
Lars
If you are playing O/8 in a kill game and you scoop a pot and have to kill it, how much does the kill "cost"?
To make the sums easy, say I am playing 75-150 with a kill to 100-200. I scoop a pot and have to post 100 for the kill. Paying 100 for a blind hand is obviously a losing proposition, but _how_much_ does it cost me? 25? 50? 75?
Also, assume I'm not posting the 100 in the blinds.
I guess it probably depends on position and so on, but what do people think in general terms? I am curious partly because in a very marginal pot where I might have a chance to scoop, I often think I should put a cost on the kill in order to work out whether to call a bet or a raise. I am also curious because I do not know how to work it out properly.
Any thoughts?
"To make the sums easy, say I am playing 75-150 with a kill to 100-200. I scoop a pot and have to post 100 for the kill. Paying 100 for a blind hand is obviously a losing proposition, but _how_much_ does it cost me? 25? 50? 75? "
Wow! Do they play "kills" in those high limit games?
In $3-$6 Omaha high/low with a kill, if you scoop a pot greater than a stated amount (which varies from casino to casino), you post $6. If you play almost all of the hands you are dealt anyway, the kill doesn't cost you anything.
However, if you only voluntarily play about one hand out of seven, then the kill costs you 6*(6/7), or about five bucks, unless it is your turn to post the blind anyhow. In that case it costs you 3*(6/7) or $2.57.
Buzz
I'm not sure this is right - a kill costs you the amount you have to post minus the equity you have in the pot. I don't think it has much to do with how many hands you play except, as you astutely observe, where you play every hand regardless!
I think I could phrase my question another way: how much is a hand where you have posted e.g. 100 blind _worth_ where the small and big blinds are e.g. 50 and 75?
And they have kills even in big games. I played 200-400 with a kill to 300-600 on the last day of a (winning) trip to the WSOP (just to have a pop at it since there were some players I did not much rate in the game) and it was one of the most exciting poker experiences I have ever had. O/8 is a _totally_ different game where people only play good hands, and where a lot of pots are heads up or 3-handed.
BTW, Ray Zee's book probably made me a couple of thousand just in those few hours.
I don`t see how U could play that kind of limits and not know the rules.
If U sweap a pot U have to post the big bet for the next hand, if U are one of the blinds that takes care of the blind for U.
Kanscoyote - Ohnonotagain knows the rules. This thread, as I understand it, is not about the rules.
It's about the actual loss (to the kill blind poster) associated with posting kill blinds. Once you put money in the pot, it's not your money anymore (although you now have "pot equity" as long as you have not folded). Until (and unless) you win the pot, the money you have posted for a kill blind is your loss.
Although I represented my estimate of the actual loss to be 6/7 of the kill post, in truth it's hard to figure because, once you have posted the kill blind, even though you may be playing a hand having a low probability of winning, sometimes those hands do win.
Buzz
Ohnonotagain - We play at quite different levels. The game you have described is very different from mine. The games in which I play are loosish games where you really want to have the nuts on the river because, since an average of six or seven players (out of nine) pay to see the flop, even when there is a raise, the winning hands are usually the nuts. Unlike your games, blind stealing has little to do with winning strategy in these lower limit loosish games. However, if you tend to surrender your blind to a raise, then it is likely that someone will raise your blind.
Thus blind defense is also an important aspect of winning strategy in the games in which I play.
Who wants to post a blind? (Wouldn’t you rather let everyone else post and just play when you had a hand you liked?) Who wants to have a blind raised when holding a poor hand?
In these loosish games (where you want the nuts on the river), you don't want to play hands that have a poor chance of fitting the flop. Let’s define “fitting the flop” to mean having a good chance to end up with the nuts on the river.
The particular hands I play depends on circumstances and table position, but, unless I have a positional advantage or a positional disadvantage, or am posting the big blind, I tend to want to play about one hand out of seven in Omaha high/low. Relative to my opponents in the games in which I play, that is considered tight play. I try to disguise my tight play, and part of that disguise involves blind defense.
Thus we both are concerned about defending our blinds, albeit probably not exactly for the same reason.
I don’t think of the chips as money. They are just chips to play with. Even so, I try to win, although more for my own ego and for my image in the eyes of my wife than for the money. When I go home and my wife wants to know how I did, I’m certainly not going to lie to her. The money doesn’t matter to me, but it does to her. Thus even though you and I play for greatly different stakes, and perhaps for different reasons, posting blinds is of concern to both of us.
When I win a kill pot in Omaha high/low, I have to post a kill blind for the next hand, a hand I probably wouldn't play (if I didn't have to post a kill blind), since I tend to want to only play about one hand out of seven. How I actually deal with my dilemma when an opponent raises my kill post is immaterial to this discussion.
Let’s suppose, for the purpose of this discussion, that someone raises my kill blind, and that I fold if I don’t like my hand and play if I do. Actually that is not the way I would probably play because of various considerations, but that is how I would play against a machine that didn’t notice of how I played. On the average, I will like the hand I am dealt one time out of seven. Thus six times out of seven, I will surrender my kill blind.
One time out of seven it wouldn’t matter, since I would voluntarily play the hand. However, if I gave up the kill blind six times out of seven, then it woud cost me, on the average, 6/7 of whatever the kill post is, to post the kill blind, because once I folded I would forfeit my pot equity.
It wouldn’t matter if I was playing for higher stakes, if I still wanted to play, on the average, one hand out of seven. Posting the kill blind would still cost me, on the average, 6/7 of whatever the kill post is, to post the kill blind. If I wanted to play even fewer hands, then it might cost even more, except that with fewer opponents, I would have a greater share of the pot equity.
By the way, in my humble opinion, low stakes Omaha high/low is the purest mathematical poker game and the poker game involving the least “poker skill” that is dealt in casinos.
Just my opinion.
Buzz
I'm not quite sure what you mean by "poker skill". Obviously, if luck were the only factor, we wouldn't play it.
The "mathematical" elements you refer to may just be an indication that you need a different skill set for Omaha, than say holdem, not that there isn't one.
Fred - Maybe it’s just semantics, but I’m differentiating between “skill” and “knowledge,” because they represent very different concepts to me.
By "poker skill" I mean the ability to sense/realize what sort of hand an opponent has, and then to outplay your opponent. Good poker players have their antennae out, sensing when to make a move (and when not to make one). Aspects of “poker skill” would include sensing when and how to bluff or not to bluff, and intimidating your opponents while keeping them from intimidating you - those sorts of concepts.
I think recognizing, preflop, which Omaha high/low hands have a chance of being the nuts on the river is “knowledge” rather than poker skill. Similarly, I also think recognizing when you have a hand worthy of a draw in Omaha high/low is “knowledge.”
In a low limit Omaha high/low game where you usually need the nuts on the river, you want to play hands, both pre-flop and post-flop, that have a good chance of being the nuts on the river. You need to know which hands have a good chance of making the nuts. That's “knowledge,” not “skill,” to my way of thinking.
If you are able to do the required mathematical calculations in your head while playing Omaha high/low, then you are using a skill I do not, alas, posess. I don't do mathematical odds calculations in my head during an Omaha high/low game because I'm not smart enough to do them fast enough. Instead, I rely on calculations made ahead of time and then remembered, in anticipation of situations that might occur in a game. I think of mathematical odds that are remembered (rather than calculated during a hand) as "knowledge" rather than “mathematical skill.”
I would agree using knowledge as appropriate to gain the maximum benefit from a hand requires skill - but not much seems required in low limit Omaha high/low, where you probably do best if you draw for the nuts and then bet the nuts if you get them.
Just my opinion
Buzz
Greetings,
This may be old news, but I was looking at McEvoy's Stud quiz on the poker pages. I disaggree w/a few things. I added some comments why I disaggreed. All comments are appreciated.
Here is one :
A jack brings it in for a raise. You have split queens with a 9 kicker and you re-raise. A player that you don't know because he just sat down now raises again with an ace for his
door-card. You see no aces out. What is your
play?
I thought one should call here he says to fold, McEvoy said nothing about the ante structure but this seems very similar to a situation mentioned in STud for advanced players where they recommend to reraise a probable larger pair if this will get it heads up. (I believe they assume a 15/30 game w/$ 2 ante). Wouldn't the money in the pot dictate a call (at least)? Tell me if I am off, and if so why.
Here's another: A solid player in early position raised with a queen up. A king folded before you and you have buried jacks with an ace showing. What is
your play?
He says to fold. I thought one could call or even reraise. (Some tight players may fold on 3rd which one should like!) And I have a hidden pair and an overcard, and should I hit the J it will be payday! (He doesn't mention if there is a two flush or not, I would think if it was live this would definitely not be a fold.)
One more:
You raise on thrid street with a queen showing and get raised by a solid player who has a 4 showing. You have split queens with a 7 kicker.
What is your play?
Again he says to fold. I suspect it is heads up again. One can put the player on K's or A's but we know when he hits two pair and when we do and can play accordingly!? No!?
Let me know if my comments are way off. I suspect in general Im going to far w/some stud hands but in these situations I thought folding in the above situations was definitely not correct. I suspect more information is really neccessary to give more accurate answer as McEvoy doesn't mention that much the cards that were out, we don't know much about the players, or the structure...
What is it going to take for you guys to finally realize what you are dealing with when it comes to Tom McEvoy? Suspicious is of course correct on all counts, and I would think that most of the people on these forums know it. (I wonder if Mark Napolitano will ever realize it as well?)
Please explain since I do not know much about McAvoy except I thought he was primarilly a tournament player and much of his play is directed to that style of play which may be too conservative in a ring game where the chips are not limited?
Would it be correct to call with these hands in a small-ante low-limit game (e.g., 2-4, 3-6, or 4-8 games with $1.00 remaining in the pot after the collection and a $1.00 forced bring-in)?
What is the best reading material to learn how to play LOW STAKES Omaha at the casino? I bought 7 Stud for Advanced Players and found the advice extremely helpful in beating my small stakes pot limit home game, but that some of the advice did not apply to the lower limits (which is all I can afford with my current student status). Where can I best learn to play Omaha at the 3-6 level? Any tips or insights you can offer about the game itself would also be greatly appreciated (I really need something to do while I am waiting for a hold em seat!!)
PS. I know how to play Omaha for high (it is a regular feature of my home game); what adjustments do I need to make, espescially pre-flop?
High-Low Split Poker, Seven Card Stud and Omaha Eight or Better for Advanced Players by Ray Zee
I second that. An unbelievably good book which for your purposes is even better because it is split into basic and advanced sections. If you learn what is in this book you should be able to win from the outset. You have to make some adjustments for small games because the book mostly assumes that you have intelligent opponents who will fold bad hands and in small games a lot of people just seem to stay to the end whatever they've got.
Post your e mail address and I'll send you something I think you'll like...CJC
Thx in advance for the info =)
CJC Please e-mail me whatever you have on Omaha also. Thanks.
CJC Please e-mail me whatever you have on Omaha also. Thanks.
I would also suggest the Omaha book by McEvoy (sp?).
I'm sure that there will be some mixed feelings about that suggestion, Chad......LOL
The stuff I have is on it's you guys ....CJC
6/12 w/kill, but no kill this hand. Game is somewhat loose, a couple solid player, couple semi-maniacs, rest passive.
Pre-flop: I'm in BB w/ 2 3 3 4 and get a free play. Five other players, including SB.
Flop: A J 7 rainbow.
SB checks. I bet my nut low draw. One fold, rest call.
Turn: 3 of spades, which gives me the current nut low and bottom set. Two spades now on board.
SB, a solid player, bets into me. I consider raising, but just call. Middle position player, a loose aggressive loudmouth, raises. Rest fold to SB who calls, and I call.
Why I didn't raise the turn: I have the current nut low, but no low redraws. Also, I have bottom set for high, which may or may not be leading. When the solid SB bet into me after I bet the flop, I suspected he either also had the nut low, and/or a high that beats mine. Also, the women on my left was a terrible calling station who would often call one (but probably not two bets) on the turn when drawing dead. Unfortunately, she folded on this hand. I decided it was best to just call to try to keep the loose players behind me in and see what the river brought. Mistake?
River: 9 spades
SB bets, I call, loudmouth raises, SB re-raises, I call, loudmouth calls.
SB has nut flush and no low. He had top two pair on the turn.
I have nut low.
Loudmouth has 2-4-8-8 for nut low and a smaller spade flush.
So I get 1/4, loudmouth 1/4, and SB half.
Loudmouth immediately starts berating my play. "You had the nut low and a set of 3s on the turn and you didn't raise? I don't know what the hell you were doing but I was trying to scoop!" I say, "Thank you for the criticism", which just elicits more smack from loudmouth. He repeatedly points out that he was the only one that had a 2-way hand. I didn't say anything else to him.
The $50,000 question: Should I have raised and/or reraised the turn. I think the initial raise is close, but I do not claim to be an Omaha expert.
Thanks, Caddy
You should definitely raise on the turn and try and play heads up against the initial bettor who you may well have beat in both directions (in turns out you did as he is an underdog (4-1 maybe less) to hit the flush, and he could even hit the flush and lose (if the board pairs simultaneously).
You shouldn't think that the initial has the nut low and a high, what high could someone have to beat in high and nut low at the same time? There are a few but they are higly unlikely. Don't be so pessimistic!
IN Omaha hi lo you are looking for hands that scoops but this doesn't happen very often. But when do you dget these hands you should protect them. It is bettor to scoop a medium pot than split or get quartered in a big one.
Granted it is unlikely this loudmouth would have folded but there is a chance. You should raise in situations like this, sometimes you might get someone w/the same low (and no high draw to fold), and you get longshot high draws to pay the max to draw to their hands.
In a game like this, with players like this, with the hands they had, no one would have passed had you raised, and in fact you would have lost a lttle more.
However, you surely should have raised the turn since you had nut low and probably the best high, so it was time to put more money in the pot! Also, maybe you could have got rid of some players with low redraws to give yourself a chance of getting part of low with A2347 even if counterfeited by the river
Note how badly loudmouth played - called before the flop with 2488 and started raising when he was very probably quartered and had only a very weak draw for high.
Why are you betting the flop with a draw to a low and no high? Are you trying to drive out the 24 lows who will pay you off later? Are you playing for runner runner wheel cards for a scoop? Are you representing a set in a steal attempt? I don't think you are going to buy the pot on this flop with a calling station behind you.
Raise the turn, now you have genuine scooping possiblies, perhaps even if you don't improve. It's unlikely in the game that you describe that you will fold the spade draws, but at least make them pay. You might have chased loudmounth, for example, if his hand was 6788 with 2 medium spades (I bet he would play it). Incidentally, when you put more money in the pot on the flop, it just makes it easier for him to call the turn.
You got unlucky on the river, but you win big time with this hand long term. The combined outs against you are 7 spades, 2 eights, 2 aces, and 2 jacks. You know 16 cards, 36 left. You have 19 outs to get 3/4 of the pot, and 4 outs (4 fives) to get half with loudmouth. If you can read their cards, cap the turn!
Last night at a 15-30 stud table I found myself head to head with #1 female money winner in the world. She had been at the table about one hour and was already $500 down. I had been there for about 4 hours and was $300 down. I found her play to be overly ambitious considering the cards she was holding in light of the aggressive betters at the table. At 3rd street she had a 9h showing, and the rest of the board is showing duplicated face cards and aces. I've got a 10 showing and pocket J.
The bring-in started one seat before her, and she called, as did every other player until me. These were aggressive players for the most part, and a call to me signaled weakness, as they were typically raising with split pairs of Q, K, or A.
I had been getting a horrible run of cards all night, and had been consistantly folding on 3rd. I decided with my jacks live and my history of meak play, coupled with their history of aggressive play, I should put in a raise.
With the exception of WSOP woman, all folded. Needless to say, I was quite surprised as I expected at least a couple more calls from the big cards. At fourth street I picked up my 3rd J while she added a 10s.
I bet - she called. At this point, I have her for trip 9's, and possibly, a high pocket pair. I am thinking with all of the big cards out, it is not only unlikely for her to have a big pair, but also unlikely that she will make trips with them.
I get blanks for the rest of this hand while she picks up a 7c on 5th street. At that point I started thinking - straight? Did she start 9-10-J ? or 8-9-10? I had three jacks, so I'm a better, and she called until the end.
On the river, she puts in a raise and I call to find that she started with 7c-8c-9h, drew the 10 on fourth street, and got the 4th and LAST jack on the river to make her straight!
Is this a bad beat? Was I just outplayed? When she raised I suspected 9's full, but never a straight. I thought I was getting the best of it until her raise on the river. This hand was enough to almost put me on tilt at that point and I didn't play much longer. This is one of the most aggrevating hands I've played in a while. Any input?
x
I think she had poor position to be playing her 3 str8t, and calling your raise with aggressive players behind her was another bad move IMO. But after she had a 4 str8t on 4th st her play improves conciderable. Don't forget she was drawing to four 6's as well with her open-ender and only see's one dead J out there.
Still, I don't see how she belongs in the pot on her first 3 cards but she is a champ and I'm not. Maybe I play too tight.
I like how you played YOUR hand and don't let the drawouts put you on tilt, as that's poker.
I don't know the exact math but it seems you were the favorite here as she has to hit to beat you and you had as many outs to improve your hand (and beat a str8t)as she did to make her str8t.
The hand is routine, you were a big favorite and she drew out. I don't understand your logic in the hand, and I see this all the time. You thought she was weak because she raised a lot of hands. Then, because she called your bet on fourth street you put her on rolled up nines? That's insane. Why, cause she called you fourth street bet? Any decent player who calls third street raise will call a fourth street bet provided no door cards are paired. She's not God, and probably not even a good stud player. I hear these stories about World Series champs, and most of them sucks. You know what I think when she calls my fourth street bet with three jacks, "DONATOR"
How was she supposed to know he had three J's when two of them are in the pocket?
Her play seems fine to me unless I missed something. From her viewpoint, her hand seems very live on third street, and on fourth street she makes an opened ended straight draw. Unless your board develops into something scary, she's suppose to go to the river.
My point was this: Is it a strong play to begin with 7-8-9 unsuited, calling into a raise with big cards and aggressive players behind you? Everything I've ever read suggests it's a play with negative expectations, and not something that I expected from a WSOP champ. I understand she was live, and that at fourth street her outlook begins to look rosy, but it's the 3rd street call that bothers me. It just doesn't seem like the pot odds were even remotely in her favor.
..but Annie Duke's never won a WSOP event. She's probably the best of the braceletless. She finished 2nd in the $2500 Stud event in '96.
Her 3rd St. limp is a touch marginal(with you showing a T, and knowing one of the high cards will probably raise), but she was probably bored waiting for the $400-800 HORSE game to start.
I don't see how you could have ever put her on a high pocket pair or being rolled up. What did you think she had when she raised on 7th?
Perhaps I was mistaken - the player in question was Barbara Enright. I thought she was the all time female money leader.
In any event, the reason I had her on a high pocket pair or trip 9's early was because of her calling my raise with aggressive players left to act (who had all just limped in). I figured her "big surprise" and reason for calling was that despite the fact a couple kings and aces were out, she had managed to grab a high pocket pair which would have had people drawing dead. The alternative was that she had trip 9's already.
Naturally, the 7th street raise had me on the ropes and I knew I was in trouble. Because I still had her for trip 9's, I suspected full house and the outside possibility of a 10 high straight (since I had 3 jacks). I just wasn't thinking straight until the end, because I didn't think such a player would start the way she did. 20/20 hindsight. It was probably a bad call on my part, but I had to see it to believe it by that point.
My main issue with this whole hand is her play at third street. I realize by fourth she feels she's looking good for an open ended straight. She sees 7 live cards (though in reality there are only 5 at best because of my Jack holdings).
The fact that she started 7c-8c-9h with a raise and plenty of high card aggressive bettors left to act just surprised me. I could understand calling that hand with just the bring-in if she was last to act, but it seems like a poor decision given the conditions of the table. I'm open to opinions. Someone commented "routine hand" earlier - and from 4th street on I pretty much agree. Long term however, I don't see how this is a winning play for her. Maybe I'm just too tight-minded on this one........
Harry,
Annie passed Babs on the money list last year.
You're right, the 'UTG' limp w/9-8-7 offsuit and all high cards behind(inc. a T) is a long term loser.
Babs certainly played this hand more passively than any tournament hand... :)
I think checking on 7th is your best play; I just don't see how she could play trip 9's so passively; and she likely bets two pair as you're representing a big pair.
Bill
Harry,
Just a typo on your part, I'm sure, but you said she started with 7c,8c,9h, and then you said that she caught the 7c on 5th street. Can you clarify?
Since there were so many duplicated high cards out, and since you had been pretty meek up until this point, maybe she thought that you thought it was a good time for a steal.
If she put you on a possible steal and she has 7,8,9 two-suited, only one ten out, only one or two of her suit out - well, I'd take a card off too. She got lucky and caught the ten - so now she is in at least until 5th street because she only sees one jack, and no(?) sixes.
She figures you for a pocket pair only since you board hasn't paired. At 5th street, since your board hasn't paired, she decides to go all the way to the river and try to make the straight. Did she also have a flush draw?
This is one possible scenario - but one that makes sense to me.
Depending on the type of game, ie: 4-5 callers on 3rd regularly, she didn't make a terrible play here. She probably expected, as you did, several other callers to your raise. When she hits the 10 on 4th she's there 'till the river, as you probably would be. If she's very good she may read you for 3 J's on 5th, but she can still draw out on you if you don't improve.
Let's get to the root of the problem so you can move on. You were stuck $300 in a game you felt you should be ahead. You played well and made trips on 5th but didn't fill, a situation that comes up more often than not! There are more cards in the deck that miss your full house than make it. A good player, makes a marginal, but not exceptionally bad play and beats you.
Your upset, as we all get, at not winning when you thought you had a great hand. Shit happens... get over it. Think of it as aces that don't improve and lose to two pair. Happens all the time.
You'll be a better player in the long run if you learn to let these hands go when they happen. Pat yourself on the back for playing well and move on. If you keep playing well, you can't lose in the long run.
Keep playing hard!
I must really disagree w/what Buzz says, you don't want to let weak spade draws, gut shots, a cheap shot to beat you. If you raise alot of players will fold the non nut spade draw. Which will save you 1/2 the pot if you succeed in doing this. In any event these guys are big underdogs to you here. ALso it seems if you keep things cheap someone often turns over the nut straight on the river who would have out had you raised. I don't think the over calls you gian by these weak players are worth the risk of losing 1/2 the pot.
The game is fast and loose..
4c in the three seat brings it in for $5 9c calls the bring in bet Qd calls the bring in bet out hero looks down and see's (AsAd)Kd and raises to $15 6s folds Td calls the raise 7s folds everybody calls around to the Qd who reraises to $30 our hero jams it to $45 the 9c now gets out but everybody else calls around to the Qd who caps the bet for $60.. everybody calls
On 4th street the boards are
4c5d, Qd9h, (AsAd)KdJc, and Td2s
Our hero bets out for $15 and everybody calls
on 5th street the boards are
4c5dAh, Qd9h9d, (AsAd)KdJcTc, and Td2sKh
the pair of nines bets $30 and our hero raises it to $60
The Td thinks the best of it and gets out of the pot (whew!) but the force calls the $60 cold. The queens up calls as well.
on 6th street the boards are
4c5dAhJQc, Qd9h9d3c, (AsAd)KdJcTcQh
queens up checks, our hero has broadway in a huge pot and bets $30, both plays call
on the river the queens up checks, our hero bets $30, the force raises it to $60 and the maybe not queens up cold calls
the pot is now about $750, $30 to call. Our hero throws in the $30 hoping to hell nobody has him.
---
The questions:
Does our hero deserve this form of abuse?
Hasnt he played his hand perfectly?
Is this the reason many players wont play in fast loose games?
- Joe in Connecticut
"Does our hero deserve this form of abuse?"
What do you mean? (probably not)
"Hasnt he played his hand perfectly?"
What did the 4 have?
"Is this the reason many players wont play in fast loose games?"
No. Most don't play good enough.
-Berya in New York
1. The choice to play poker warrants this abuse! We've all been there before.
2. Our hero played Ok. Only critique is the apparent crying call on the river. The 4c cold called a raise more than once and raised on the river into an obvious straight. It seems that the straight is clearly beaten unless the 4c is able to bluffraise two other players (unlikely), or is a terrible player. Also, I might have tried a checkraise on fourth hoping to check around to the Q.
3. Was this a fast loose game? Cant tell from here.
Pat
"Does our hero deserve this form of abuse? "
Sack up. Don't whine like those O8 players.
"Hasnt he played his hand perfectly? "
I like his play. I especially like the 5th street raise. While it's very likely he is behind at this point, the pot is very big and he needs to knock out some players. It didn't work as well as hoped, but it was still a good play. As for the river, it is indeed a crying call, however as you said it's $30 and the pot is $750. You don't have to like it, but you gotta call.
I must admit I'm stumped as to what the raiser has, but I would guess the apparent Queen's up actually made a flush. He's looking right at your straight so the way I see it the only hands he can call two bets cold with are a full house and a flush (maybe trip 9's), but with a full house he would have made it three bets. It is possible he does have queens up. If this is the case, be thankful this player is in your game.
I think our here is top hand till the river, when the Q,9,9,3 gets his boat. I think he played it correctly. If the Queens fall early Qd might have folded. I do see why the Qd re-raises against the Kd. Risky, but ballsey and it paid off. Our here just got hammered. Do not think he could have done anything better. My guess is the winner had(T,J) or (Q,T) or (Q,9) or (Q,J) suited with a Q up or something with good implied odds. The 9 brings him 2 pair. The 2nd 9 gets him the boat or he gets the Q on the river for the boat.
The Force has a hard and to read. A34 clubs, flush on the river?
I can't figure out why Q's up is in the pot, if he can't raise.
And we O8 players don't whine, at least not until the river.
The forced bet must have started with 2,3,4 of clubs. How else could he take the heat on 3rd street, unless of course, he was rolled up. He caught a 5 on 4th street giving him a straight draw (assuming he had 2,3,4); no 6's or A's out, so he was committed to the river unless open trips come on the board. The Qc on 6th gave him a flush draw, and that must be the hand that he hit on the end - he couldn't raise with a small straight against hero's board.
The queens up is obvious. His hand is virtually dead on 6th street. His call on the end is a crying call for sure. If he made 9's full he would re-raise because he knows the force will pay him off even if you don't.
Your call on the end is mandatory. The pot is huge and you don't want to risk losing it for just one more bet.
You played the hand well, but were drawn out on. I've seen it a lot in a $10-20 game, but it's a little unusual in a $15-30 game. Still, I like to play against these types of players because they will give you their money in the long run.
We were typing at the same time Bruce and I have to agree with your analysis as far as both hands go since it's damn near the same as mine. I'm leaning towards him being rolled up, although it goes against the fast and loose description of the game. It's got to boil down to that or the 2-3-4 suited.
Maybe I'm giving too much credit to the force but he would have had to have rolled up 4's and hit his boat on the river. The only other thing he could have possibly had was 3 clubs going in with a 2-3 was drawing to the flush made a small straight and then hit the flush on the river.
The other guy is much harder to put on a hand without having any idea how he plays. I guess that's true for both players but with the strength that the force showed, at the end, makes me think he was just slowplaying his set.
OK well here goes a stab at the other guy. He starts with QX-Q and then makes the two pair,raises with them, never improves and just becomes a calling station.
Actually it sounds like a pretty good game, I guess I'll be able to better understand after the punchline.
I'll tell ya one thing that I know for sure and that's that the Q never had a choice but to bet all the way or fold and played terribly at the end regardless of what he had.
I agree that the force could be slowplaying rolled up trips, and it just depends on what type of player he is.
If he is a solid player, then he obviously has to be playing trips. He may be worried that hero is rolled up as well, but it is more likely that he is just slow playing.
If he is a loose player, he could have either the rolled up hand or the 2,3,4 clubs. However, if he is loose, then he most likely would be in there raising with the roll-ups. It is hard to say without knowing more about the player.
Joe,
So, what was the showdown in this hand?
Hi
I`d like to know if it is worth playng a game, where the casino take 10$ for each 200$ in the pot (we are in Europe). Plus they expect to be tipped of circa 3% if you win the pot. The rules are like this: ante 5$, 10$-50$ spread limit, bring in 10$, normally a loose game with few good players and many bad players.
How much money can you earn if you are an expert (Winrate/hour) ?
How much money can you earn if you are a decent player but not an expert (winrate/hour) ?
Is it worth playing at all ?
I appreciate any help
maybe a few of the very best will win and all the rest will lose alot decent only will get you broke.. all the players should try to get a decent cap on what they take out. they make so much, that if they feel they may lose the game if they dont comply it may happen. otherwise unless you are one of the few get a second job. maybe with a much smaller ante it could be more profitable. plus protest the absurb tipping policy that undoubtably gets back to the managements pockets. ive played in europe and some of the places are disgusting. some are ok.
"maybe a few of the very best will win and all the rest will lose alot decent only will get you broke.."
I cant help but notice how similar this structure is to a $1-$5 spread limit game here in america. The only two differences are the rake (which has no cap, apparently..) and the expected toke.
As far as the rake goes.. If there was a $40 cap on the rake, it would be equiv to a $1-$5 game with a 5% rake and a $4 cap.
As we all know, most places in america have a 10% rake with a $4 cap in the $1-$5 games.. and many people beat those games consistently!
As far as the expected toke.. thats simply ridiculous.
A heads-up pot with a max bet (no raises) on each street would yield a $500+ pot.
I am unclear if this establishment would rake $20 or $30 on a $500 pot. But in EITHER case its better than the $1-$5 rake at any of the local casinos here for a $50 pot which would be a $4 rake every time.
On rake factors alone I think you are wrong, Ray Zee.
Joe in Connecticut
Joe,
if im wrong that only a few can win at those rakes id be very surprised. i dont believe im wrong. also at the i-5 you compare this game with i suspect the players would be worse as the limits are much smaller. but besides that the ante in your 1-5, is it 50 cents with a $1 bring in. then the game is like the one talked about. i dont think very many could beat that game with a 5% uncapped rake or even with a capped one which is high. let alone another 3% for tips. if you can you are certainly wasting your talents playing that small.
This is actually a hand of Mississippi, the 7 stud variant that David Z keeps posting about, but everything happened on third street so it won't matter.
I have
(Ks7s)Kh
my opponent has
(8d6c)8d
To keep it simple, we got all-in on third street.
After my opponent caught an 8 on the river to win the pot, he made an offhand comment that his hand wasn't really that far behind mine anyway. Is this true? I know that a small pair against a big pair in stud on 3rd street is not such a big dog as in hold'em, but I thought it was still a big enough dog that you don't want to be in that position if you can help it.
Basically, I'd really like to know how aggressively I should play a giant pair on third street against an opponent who I know needs to catch.
natedogg
There are some notes in stud for advanced players on somethings on this. I believe something like 5 5 6 w/ a straight flush kicker, is only 45-55 underdog against an overpair if one of his pair cards and one of his kickers are out.
But I suspect one doesn't want to get all in w/this (small pair against known over pair) as in many cases if all cards are live i think its about 2-1 underdog.
"I have
(Ks7s)Kh
my opponent has
(8d6c)8d...After my opponent caught an 8 on the river to win the pot, he made an offhand comment that his hand wasn't really that far behind mine anyway. Is this true? "
It's closer to being true if there are 5- 8's in the deck.
I'm assuming you meant (8d6c)8c. If so, the 8's are roughly a 2-1 dog.
He's a 1.65-1 dog, depending on folded doorcards.
FWIW KK is 4-1 over 88 preflop in Hold'em.
"he made an offhand comment that his hand wasn't really that far behind mine anyway"
Was this the exact comment or was the comment that his play wasnt that big of a loser?
There is a difference.. depending how the play went down on 3rd street..
The two 8's may well have played his hand perfectly and will expect to make money in the long run playing it that way... just not if he is against a pair of kings every time.
from his perspective:
He might have the best hand.
He might outdraw a better hand.
He might get a better hand to fold.
He might induce action later in the night which has very high expectation for him.
But no.. he isnt a slight dog.. hes a big dog. If he had an overcard to the K's.. like As8s(8c) he would be a slight dog. Maybe this is what he is refering to without realizing the importance of the overcard.
You played right. You got heads up with a big pair. Heads up is important with a large pair. But shit happens. AAx v. QQx (all live) is a 4-1 favorite per 7CSFAP. KKx v. 88x is probably close to 4-1. Also you opponent catching your K on a later street hurts him more than it hurts you. With hands like this make you opponent pay for each card. In the long run (even in a 4hr session) you'll come out way ahead.
If you will play that hand 1000 times with KK vs 88 (and lower kicker related to your KIngs...that is an Ace) you will be a millionare guy!
Good luck, Marco
Calculate the probability the A of the that suit is out. Then the probability that if that player has an A that he has antoher card of that suit. And then multiply. (Note this also depends on how many of the suit you have.)
In a 10 player game (assuming you have Ks xs and no other spades). The probability an As is out is 36/48. Now the second probability is 1-((38/47)(37/46)(36/45)). (1-P(he doesn't have another of that suit)).
Joe I think we can handle it !
after competely dominating one smaller weekly game for over 4 years and also getting banned from another because they finally figured out where their money was going I quite naturally have been wanting to play for higher stakes and test myself against better players.(these were both .50-1.00 games, hey don't laugh we all have to start somewhere)
Since I don't live in a casino town and the closest casino action is over 3 hours away it's tough to find a game but I have found two other higher limit home games. Both of these games are completely hi-lo games which I was new to and at first I got spanked and spanked hard. The one game was a 10.00 limit game and extremely tough. I had no business being in this game as not only was I not accustomed to the larger betting limits but I DID NOT KNOW the correct strategies to play these games. I quickly realized that while I wasn't a sucker per se ( there were some worse players than me)but I was out of my league and removed myself from the game. (But about 1400 dollars too late :o(
Well without boring you with my life story I'd like to add that I ordered Ray's Hi-Lo book and fixed alot off leaks and have won back ALL my money in a 5.00 limit hi-lo game and feel like I am (almost) ready to take on that 10 dollar game again.
The problem and point of this post (finally!) is that I'm starting to get some grief from some of the players in the game for my tight play, which is of course, accented by the fact that often these games are short-handed 4-5 handed because the bad players have busted out again. Last night for example I tried to give a little more action on some of my borderline hands and violated the "paint rule" a few times and played some hands I clearly wouldn't even play with your money and still was perceived as too tight yet I lost 400 dollars! Now I didn't lose ALL this money to bad play as I had some very good starting hands cracked on the last card and that didn't help things but that's the way it goes.
My tight image in the past has allowed my some GREAT bluffing opportuniies against the good players but of course the weak ones don't have a clue.
I don't think I'm in danger of getting barred but what can I say to the players when accused of tight play that 1) will not get them to change their bad play, and 2)how can I give the illusion of loose play without getting involved in pots I clearly should not be playing?
Try some ante steals. They only need to work about 40% of the time to have a positive EV. It will keep your opponents guessing and they'll pay off later. (At least that's the way it is supposed to work in 7CS-hi)
Then you'll have just play tight and stack the chips. Until they stop giving you action when you are in, there is no need to change your style.
You've kept us in suspense long enough.
Hi Marco,
I´m a regular in Vienna. If you´d like to meet me to have some pokertalk, just mail me.
Regards
M.A.
I have Theory of Poker which is awesome and I have read alot of Frank Wallaces stuff which is available over the internet for free. The John Fox book I haven't been able to locate yet but am looking forward to reading it when I do. My poker library is up to 14 books now but of course trial by fire (experience) is only gained in the trenches with real money.
My original post was obviously impossible to answer in a short answer and thanks to you and Bill D. for your good replies.
Another book I have learned alot from is "POKER-How to win at the great American game" by David A.Daniel. He has a great chapter on image as well.
I think the bottom line is that my post was born out of frustration of one bad session and I promise it won't happen again :o)
I agree that Zorro's advice is great; it's sounds like he's been there. Tipping the dealer/houseman and waitress/game girl will go a long way to help your image. You can also help people ante when they are short or don't have white chips.
BillD's advice to go ahead and stack chips is good also. You'll book plenty of losing sessions despite how well you play.
You might try finding or starting more games. That way you can dilute you tight image over time, and you have back -ups ready if you do get tossed from a game.
Try getting them to play hold 'em. It can be played loose, especially short handed.
Mike Caro's section in super system is also worth reading...
Two things I've seen done but am not recommending:
Muck your extra-bad hands face up and bitch about never getting any cards. I've never seen this fool anybody, and it just pisses the better players off.
Show down your bluffs. You said that you had steal opportunities against the tighter players. Showing down steals might give you a 'gambling' image. I suggest not doing this unless it is part of an overall strategy.
Good luck
Other Poker Games
December 2000 Digest is provided by Two Plus Two Publishing and ConJelCo