![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
I'm still a newbie stud player, so take my advice with a big grain of salt.
My inclination would be to always bring it in for the minimum, without necessarily even bothering to look first. I simply don't see the advantage to be gained by bringing it in for more, as compared to being able to reraise the raiser and win more with a premium hand like pocket aces.
If you bring it in for a full bet with a marginal hand like a medium pair, you're in a spot where you may get raised (and even reraised) and the best play will be to fold. In that case, you've wasted the difference between the full bet and the minimum. If you've got AA or KK down, then play for more. If no one raises, it's not a disaster, since you still have the best starting hand. You're still in a profitable situation, just one that has a lot more volatility.
In a tournament, when you're in the later stages, I can see the advantage to bringing it in for a full bet when stealing the antes is more than worth it, given your stack size and the like.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Greg:
I like your post and the advice you give. One thing I would add is that in a ring game you should probably bring it in for a full bet once in a while to keep your opponents guessing. there is something to be said about not looking (to avoid giving away tells), but this depends on your opponents. In most places I have played, 10-20 and lower players are generally not that skilled nor observant and may never pick up on this anyway. (don't get me wrong, a few are very skilled, but I generally avoid them!).
Several months ago, I posted a hand in 10-20 stud where I had (AA)2 and tried for a limp-reraise by bringing it in for 3$ and hoping someone raised. The player on my left had a king and immediately raised, after which two players called and I reraised. There was some discussion that I could have opted to bring it in for a raise and hope the king reraised and limited the field, possibly to just him and me, after which I could make it three bets with my hidden aces and play heads up with aces against kings.
Good post Greg, I just had to play Devil's advocate a little bit and offer a possibly alternate strategy!
Dave in Cali
I was playing $15-$30 stud game with a $2 ante and a $5 low card bring in. My hole cards are the Four of Hearts and the Four of Spades. My doorcard is the Queen of Spades. Deuce of Clubs on my left brings it in. Ten of Hearts calls. Jack of Clubs, Nine of Clubs, Three of Diamonds all fold. Ace of Spades calls. Eight of Hearts on my right calls. I call with no possibility of a raise. There is $41 in the pot and 5 players.
On fourth street, player #4 with Deuce of Clubs gets the Nine of Diamonds. #5 with the Ten of Hearts gets the Three of Hearts. #6,#7, and #8 had folded. #1 with Ace of Spades gets the Deuce of Diamonds. #2 with the Eight of Hearts gets the Seven of Diamonds. I catch the Six of Spades giving me three Spades to go with my pocket Fours. #1 checks. #2 checks. I check. #4 checks. #5 bets $15. #1 folds. #2 calls. I call because I have caught a third Spade and only one Spade is gone plus my cards are still live. I am putting the bettor on a Heart flush draw. With the Ace of Spades gone, if I make a flush it won't be Ace high. #4 folds. There is $86 in the pot and three players.
On fifth street #2 gets the Seven of Clubs so he now has an open pair of Sevens. I catch the Nine of Spades giving me four Spades with three of them showing on the board. #5 catches the King of Diamonds breaking off his Heart flush draw temporarily. #2 is high so he bets $30. I consider raising because I have a four flush and a hidden pair and my cards are all very live. The problem is that I am afraid of the open pair of Sevens. I just call. #5 just calls. There is $176 in the pot.
On sixth street, #2 catches the Queen of Clubs. I catch the Jack of Spades giving me a Spade flush. #5 catches the Ace of Hearts. So #2 has 8h, 7d, 7c, Qc showing, I have Qs,6s,9s,Js showing with the 4s and 4h in the hole, and #5 has 10h,3h,Kd,Ah showing. #2 is still high board with his open Sevens and he checks. I bet $30 with my flush. #5 now raises to $60 and #2 cold-calls $60. At this point, the raiser must have Heart flush. He knows I have a Spade flush with four Spades showing and I came out betting. His raise tells me his flush is Ace high and we both know the Ace of Spades was folded. In addition, there is a third player involved who has a live open pair and who called the raise cold. If he is not already full, he could have 3 sevens and get a full house. It will cost me $30 more now and probably $30 at the river. If it were heads-up I would make crying calls all the way to the river and hope #5 was bluffing or betting on the come. But the presence of a third player makes a critical difference. I reluctantly fold. There is $326 in the pot and two players.
On seventh street, #2 checked and #5 bet $30. #2 called. #5 wins since his hole cards were the Ace of Diamonds, the Jack of Hearts, and the Queen of Diamonds for an Ace-high straight at the river beating #2 who had the Eight of Spades, the Six of Clubs, and the King of Spades for two pair Eights over Sevens.
Obviously, I made a huge mistake by folding my flush on sixth street. #5 raised on an Ace high flush draw despite looking at my four Spades. #2 stayed hoping to fill up.
Any comments?
you need to know your players better before you can fold in big pots. all that money out there and you fold just because its raised. i bet you also made some tough folds before and he picked up on it. most times you would be right in folding though. its the times that you are wrong that hurt. i guess if you were going to fold if raised you should have checked because you werent sure that a raise meant you were dead. maybe you should have raised on 5th st. the pair of sevens was not his door card so he looked like maybe eights and sevens. you had spades, a four or a queen or a nine to hit and win. also you could drive out the other hand maybe and enable you to win with 2 pair. when the pot gets big these plays pay off when they work and since you are drawing ok its not bad at all.
Jim,
I think you played the hand correctly, especially on 6th street. Your non-raise on 5 is another story, but it depends on what I give #5. If I give him a flush draw, I will just call on five, unless I give #2 just the sevens and am hoping to run a semi-bluff. If I give #2 two pair and #5 four hearts I will play it exactly as you did. When we both suit-up on 6, I will invest $30 to see if #5 has the flush. I am also allowing him to be bluffed out because most players will not make a raise w/o having a heart flush so I would have no problem folding rather than giving a free card.
After reading the other responses, here are my thoughts.
I think you should have raised on 5th. You said your cards were very live so you had a good draw. A semi-bluff raise could have driven out the straight draw. As for the open pair of sevens, I say test him out see if he really has trips. Represent that you already have the flush and make them think about continuing with their draws on 5th. One they get to 6th they will probably be river bound and not going to fold whether you raise or not.
As for the fold, I am hard pressed to say that I would have done different. It's just one of those very tough decisions that really hurts when you are wrong. I can see you remembered every detail, as is usually the case on these tough hands.
Dave in Cali
I don't think you have a very good multi-way hand on 3rd, esp. w/ the As visibly out. Raise or Fold. Paves the way for a bet on 4th, esp. w/ all the trash that came out.
#5 prob'ly would've cry called $60 on 5th, then bet when checked to on 6th. I don't see how he could've bet on 7th when checked to. Costs you $90 either way, but this way you might get a free showdown. His raise didn't need to tell you his flush was Ace high, his BOARD already was (Boy, what an absolute stone perfect catch for him). If you check-call on 6th, you can fold on 7th if #2 bets out (he HAS to bet if he fills). I dunno if #5 would bet if he flushes out and is checked to on 7th, but he definitely isn't going to bet if he doesn't. You'd be getting $386 for $30 on this call, though, with no one to act behind you, and you know he knows you know he...etc..., that he's got the Ace and your Ace is dead.
BTW I find these 7Stud hands much more entertaining and educational than Hold 'em hands. Great detail and thanks for posting it.
Jim,
You put this guy on ONE hand and that was your mistake. You played loser poker. Why bet, especially in a big pot, if you can't stand a raise? I was very surprised to read this hand from you. I gotta know the player that raised extremely well before I even consider folding this hand and then I call. Maybe a call is not CORRECT poker strategy here but it is correct poker PLAYING. There is an old saying that my father or uncle or some other old timer used to use. It goes "If you don't bet on the come the come don't come" In this case your opponent bet the come and it came without coming. Saving "bets" is very important in poker. But saving them for the right reasons is even more important. But why am I preaching to you. I've read your threads before. You know all this.
Vince.
I think you made a mistake not raising on fifth street. You must know something about player #2 - a guy who calls a raise on 6th against two obvious flushes with low 2-pair(maniac mark?). You shouldn't have had as much respect for him - you could probably easily put him on 8's over 7's but you have all sorts of outs - your flush and higher 2-pairs. If you make your flush or high 2-pair its going to very obvious, and if you don't you don't want to let someone else pick up their boat or their flush, so there's no reason to keep more people in the pot here - you want to semi-bluff and get it heads up against either the maniac or the flush draw - that's where your odds will be the best.
And I am talking about 7CS!
A game gaining in popularity in my home games is 7CS Roll Your Own where the player gets to chose what his upcards are. It strikes me as a good game -- but it has a lot of variables.
Assuming everyone choses their upcard without knowing what everybody else is going to expose, I was wondering if anybody had any pointers on what cards should be exposed. When do you show strength? When do you expose your kicker v. a paired card, etc.?
Initially, I imagine that one's starting requirments shouldn't necessarily vary from those of normal 7Cs just because of the twist.
Generally, I have been exposing one of my pair cards, so that I have the chance of getting a hidden two pair. That is, unless my pair is really high, then I would expose my kicker.
I think the specific advice given by the other posts is great. In this game, you have a chance to be much more creative because of the "roll your own" format. You have much more opportunity to make "plays". In regular 7CS you have only 5 choices: bet, call, fold, raise, check-raise. In roll your own, you can combine these with choosing what to show your opponents.
I think the best way to approach this game is to show the cards that will cause your opponents to make the most or biggest mistakes against you. When you want callers because you have a big hand, hide most of your strength. When you need people out because your hand is vulnerable, show your strength. For the most part the general guidelines for regular stud should still apply.
By the way, is the exposure of the upcards done in sequence or simultaneous or what? If you can see what cards your opponents are exposing, you may decide to change the card you expose. I have played many versions of this game and the rules differ from house to house.
Dave in Cali
Play the game often in home games. I play fairly tight and win a lot from the manics (my in-laws). There are variants. The average winning hand is a boat, and is common to have quads esp if you roll after each card is dealt. What you need is a pocket pair and or a duce or trey in the hole. I'd like a dollar for everytime one of the players is top till the last card they craps out with an in between card or changes his low.
Try Scenario software on the www. They have a downloadable shareware game that permits 7CS roll.
Jon,
if the players are mostly going to call anyway, i would tend to show the cards that would make me last to act. also dont show the cards that will kill your action when you make a big hand and they will then be drawing mostly dead.( like flush cards) the big thing is to learn the habits of your opponents and then it becomes easy to read them. watch as they hesitate and decide what to do. then figure out just what they were looking at. since there will be more concealed hands against you pairs should have less value and the need to improve them becomes even more important. you might benefit by folding more often in earlier rounds due to the big hands that will appear that you cant read and save money on. good luck.
I was going to comment about "roll your own", but apparantly we are talking about two different things (if you catch my meaning, if you get my drift).
c
O.K. I've been playing that online poker which seems to have some fishy players playing 8-16 7CS. Here is the Ante Structure.
Ante= $2 per player
Low card Bring in= $4
On 3rd Street the first Raise completes the bet to $8 and second Raise is increments of $8.
This is like playing 15-30 with a $3.75 ante and a $7.50 bring in.
To top it off the action is loose. How do I adapt, or should I just leave this game be.
Rake is Maxed at $3
Thanks, CV
This is the same structure as the 80-160 at the Bellagio except the bring in is twice as much. Thus you should fold some hands you would limp in with at 80-160. A solid, not too tight game, that makes liberal use of reraises on third st. should get the money.
David,
It occurred to me after reading your brief but wonderful response that this one particular point, ante structure, especailly as described here would make an excellant essay. Maybe it's been done before but I can't recall reading one anywhere. I've read a few half heartedly written paragraphs on this subject before but none that do it justice. It seems to me that "the fight for the ante's" is an extremely important poker concept. Thoroughly understanding what it is you are fighting for has to help your play. I know that Mason usually doesn't allow you to write essays but he should make an exception here. I also understand that you got this "fuzzy thinking" column and you spend your writing time there. But; " A solid, not to tight game, that makes liberal use of reraises on third street, should get the money"; is just too beautifully concieved advice to allow to dangle at the end of a thread response.
It is advice I believe that only advanced (high limit) players can appreciate at face value without the need for further explanation. Thus begging the need for an essay, IMO. Maybe Mason will help if you ask him nicely. He's got this thing about essays.
Vince.
Don't you guys think a $3 cut is too large and almost impossible to beat? That would be $30 in 80-160 or $15 in 40-80. At only 15 pots/hour, the rake is close to 3 big bets/hour. That would be 450/hour at 80-160. Even in California, 80-160 rakes for 8 hands is only around $200/hour. Tough rake to beat don't you think?
You need a few players to play rather badly to make this game beatable. However with this particular stucture, bad play does not necessarily just mean very loose play.
Russ, the rake is $3 per pot not $3 per hand dealt in. thats less than 100 an hour total. still its always tough to beat the rake as the game gets smaller. and it tougher to beat the players as the game gets bigger.
Ray,
Thanks for the clarification on the take (pots/hands dealt). The statement you made about beating the rake in the little games and beating the players in the bigger games certainly is the truth.
I am a relative novice, so take my advice with a grain of salt. If one of the more advanced players notes a glaring mistake, I would appreciate the correction. I hate giving wrong advice more than being wrong.
"I am dealt a high pair on third street (sometimes split). In LL since there is no ante, I usually just call on 3rd street instead of raise, and, if I were to bet since I have a 'rock' image, everyone wouild folds"
I would ask the question if everyone folds to your bet, why aren't you betting more. Keep betting until they start calling you. If no one ever calls you without decent hands, when you win one of these steals, "accidently" throw your cards face up. Even, if you can't get the rocks to call, you will get alot more action from the real weak players. Especially in low limit where people like to play anything for a $1, I don't think you can afford to give these guys a cheap card. Thus, you have to alter your image to get more callers.
As to the question of when to slow down, I have given it alot of thought, and think the answer depends more on the player you face than your cards. LL is often filled with players that can be stereotyped.
Is this a tight passive player who had an overcard as his doorcard and is letting you bet his unimproved pair, but will never fold if he can beat your board? Slow down, this player usually hates to bet a single pair.
Is this a weak player that will play any draw, then you bet every round and hope he doesn't pair.
Maniacs will only let you have the lead if they have nothing, so bet into them.
Is this a player who you believe to be a decent player, letting you bet? I am not cetain what to do here. I play my home game with Todd and I hate it when I am up against him. The only thing I can say is that he usually bets if he knows he has me beat(and he says he reads me so well I might as well show him my cards). So by calling here, he is usually saying that he doesn't know absolutely that he has me beat, but is certain that if he hits his draw, I don't have a chance in hell. Showing weakness against him is deadly, as he will certainly take the lead. So, my guess is that you keep betting, and wait for the inevitable check-raise. Todd, you baaaastaaaard.
Seriously though, I think it depends greatly on your opponent. You have to know wether it is more likely your opponent is on a draw or has a high pair, or a low pair. Since the LL games I have played in have several of the weak passive players, you will need to slow down occasionally. But I think you continue agressive play against all others.
Wayne
I agree with Wayne to most extent. Whether to call or raise depends on the cards are showing and your position. Next it would matter the make-up of the table, and since one often does not know it, I can not make that as important as the former reasons. Although that comes into play later. I know a LL player who ALWAYS raises max when he has A or K. I do not agree, but he is a consistant winner. He is a former physics professor.
I still contend the LL is a trap game, so there is no pure approved action. It is always dependent on many factors that develop as the game progresses.
I have had the similar thoughts in regards to the intial post and also to the responses. I, too, am trying to improve my game and have found the question of "aggressiveness" with big pairs early in low-limit stud somewhat perplexing. I play the budget table usually, $1-3, and sometimes $1-5. I have encountered very little difference in the games. $1-5 bets get a slightly more respect, but there is still the cadre of passive, loose players at the tables who are often difficult to read and stay around to draw out on my early lead.
I must admit Walter that I find you somewhat courageous in waiting until 4th Street to make the raise. I have slowplayed my 3rd street big pairs into defeat more often than I want to remember. I have and still do slowplay big pairs on 3rd, but my intent is to keep my tablemates off the rhythmn of my game rather than trying to trap them. Often, with the intent of traping other players with my big pair, I watch as they catch their straight, flush, full house (off two small pair) on 7th and crush my two pair, or they pair up with the pocket 5s and beat me cause I don't catch that second pair.
The considered opinions expressed in the responses to your post all have merit and have been helpful to me. It seems there is no definite formula to the question, like most of poker playing it depends on the cirucumstances.
On Sunday, at a 1-3 game, some loose/passive types and a couple of solid aggressive players I was in last position on 3rd street with 7h,Qh/Qs and raised. The player to my left called with xx/5s. Now I had been playing with him for about an hour and noticed he liked to get in the hand. He didn't start with absurd cards, but he seemed to like to draw to straigts and flushes. He was also passive, a trapper either by design or accident.
Everybody else folded and I have him heads up. 4th Street: I with 7h,Qh/Qs,10h...my opponent with xx/5s, 3c. He could be on a small straight draw (as so many of them are), but I would have been more worried if he caught a spade, so I bet another $3.
5th Street brings me a blank and him a 6s. Since I don't improve and now he may have something that I should be alert to, 4 card straight draw or 4 flush, I check.
On 6th street he catchs an 8c and I an 8h. I have seen no spades played other than on his board. I have a four flush too but saw a few hearts folded early and don't have much of a chance to catch one here, and there isn't a whole lot of chips in the pot. His board is XX/5s, 3c, 6s, 8c.
So now there are a number of scenarios I can imagine for his hand. Flush draw or straight draw maybe combined with a small pair or two. I check on 6th, even though I have the best hand at the moment.
7th Street brings me a flush, Q high. The lead is mine and I bet. At this point I have made my hand, there are no overcards on his board, he may have hit his flush with hidden big cards, but he may not have a flush at all. All in all, I think its a good bet. Alas, he raises. I call. He has a spade flush with a K inside. Voila. I knew the opponenet somewhat, I played his board, I took the odds into consideration, played aggressive from the beginning, slowed down when I thought that betting was not going to get him out or result in my winning more chips...and I lost the hand. Sometimes it goes that way. Any comments would be welcome.
As before, opinions of novice.
"5th Street brings me a blank and him a 6s. Since I don't improve and now he may have something that I should be alert to, 4 card straight draw or 4 flush, I check. "
You hold (7hQh)QThx, He shows 5s,3c,6s. You are playing a loose player(I use loose to describe a player who plays more starting hands than a tight player). But also a passive player(I use passive to describe a player who will not bet unless he has a made hand). I say this is an automatic maximum bet. My reasoning is this. If he has his hand made he will raise you, and you drop. This type of player isn't sophisticated enough to bluff raise, and wont slow play a made hand. Thus, unless he has both the straight and the flush draw, he is the underdog. You will win more than half the time against either the flush or the straight draw alone. At this point he likely has the odds to call, but you are the favorite and should make him pay for every card.
"So now there are a number of scenarios I can imagine for his hand. Flush draw or straight draw maybe combined with a small pair or two. I check on 6th, even though I have the best hand at the moment."
The reasoning above also applies here. I don't think you can ever fail to bet when ahead, unless you are the prohibitive favorite. Never give a free card to someone on a draw.
The seventh street bet is questionable. Since you thought he was more likely to be on a flush draw than the straight, you have to consider whether if he makes a flush will it beat yours. To have good value, he should have overcards to your presumptive pair. Thus, I would probably check call given the situation.
However, at this level, most players value a straight as highly as a flush and thus bet and raise on the river with it. If his suit had been dead or if you had decided that he was on a straight draw alone, I would have bet-reraise.
When this type of player makes his flush or straight, just remember that he is likely to give that money back to you in the end.
Wayne
There was a very interesting thread on another forum talking about the difference between spread limit and fixed limit. It said that the spread limit favored the better player. The reasoning was that weak players will bet low amounts allowing the good player to have good odds to draw, where the good players will bet the max, punishing weak players on bad draws. Something to remember the next time you sit at a 1-3 or 1-5 table.
Wayne
wayne said,
"The seventh street bet is questionable. Since you thought he was more likely to be on a flush draw than the straight, you have to consider whether if he makes a flush will it beat yours. To have good value, he should have overcards to your presumptive pair. Thus, I would probably check call given the situation. "
I think when you make you flush you bet it. Especially when your highest card is in the hole. His opponent may put him on two pair, or a weak flush. Probably two pair, since he checked when his opponents board started to look like a straight.
Todd
ps. i agree with the other stuff you said. You sound like you know what you are talking about. You been sneaking out on the side to play with out me?
To over simplify it, there are only two reasons to bet on the river. One, you do not have the best hand and you want to make a better hand fold. Two, you have the best hand and you want a call.
The first, you are making a play for the pot, and thus can get fairly good odds on your bet. However, the player has to be able to fold a winning hand. At low limit, you almost never see anybody folding even two pair, unless someones board shows 4 flush or 4 straight or trips or better two pair. In this case, I am sure we can agree, that his opponent will not fold a hand better than Q high flush.
The second, getting called by a lessor hand. Here, you are making a play for a bet equal to what you are risking. Thus, you must get called by a losing hand half the time you get called. And this does not count the times you get raised by a better hand and lose an extra bet. Note: not half the time you make the play, since your opponent folding wins you no money. So, our hero believes he is up against a flush draw. On the side of making a better hand, you opponent has at least the A or K he can draw(perhaps Q as well), and there is the possibility he already had one of these and just needs another of the suit.
In this situation, our hero's hand is relatively well disquised. But, if he had been playing agressive, his opponent would rarely call with less than two pair. So, the question is, Will your opponent make a hand worth calling with as often as he makes a hand that will beat yours. Add to this, the possibility of losing another bet to the raise, and I think you shouldn't bet on the river. If our hero has KQhigh flush, I think he should bet, as the number of flushes that lose to his goes up. I think the Bet Call has a negative EV in this case with the Q high flush.
Now, compare this to the check call. Your opponent checks, you likely win. Your opponent bets. Your check showed weakness and encourages a bluff(semi-bluff) by your opponent. You certainly would have odds to call.
I think the check call has the highest EV in this case.
As I said above, I think there are only two reasons to bet. 1) To have a person with a better hand fold or 2) To have a weaker hand call. If neither of these have a positive EV, you have to check. Then you have to decide if calling has a positive EV.
Wayne
ps It is easier to think about these things in the slow motion of the forum than sitting at the table.
Chuckles, you certainly dont sound like a novice anymore.
There are a couple of points to consider that do not invalidate your analysis, but I think that they are relevent.
First. Our hero played passively. It is by no means a certainty that the OPponent had a str8 on 4th, and a flush draw on the river. Our hero, by checking on 5th and 6th, gave any measly hand a shot at him, including a pair of 5's with an inside straight draw! OP only put $7 into the pot.
Second, the OP played very passively. If you were checked into with 4 flush on 5th, you would probably bet. So would I. Make the hero sweat it. Make him decide if I have 2 pair, a str8, etc. When the OP has a decision to make, he has the opportunity to make the wrong decision. If you let him in for free, then shame on you.
So we are trying to analyze the river play based at least partly on the outcome. I am arguing that it is absolutely incorrect to assume OP was on a flush draw on the river. He could have 5's, or a pocket pair, he could have 2 small pair. He could have the miracle str8. Since OP was never threatened by the hero, and since he just checked 5th and 6th, you gotta assume he is weak, or just really passive. You know that passive/calling stations are the bread and butter of low limit stud. So I would have bet into him and paid off, because I would expect the pair of 5's to still be there at the river, and OP would have called if he made any 2 pair, or better. Maybe a really bad calling station (our other friend) would call with just 5's cuz he thinks you are on a draw that didnt come, and he doesnt want to be bluffed.
I think your analysis is very strong, but I think if you look at the play of the hand, you would have bet also. If the OP played more aggresively and bet on 5th or 6th, suggesting strength, then check on the river and call, since OP is obviously going for something, and your hand is a little vulnerable. Otherwise gotta soak the calling stations.
Missed you at Lab today.
later
Todd
Not that this should be our personal arguement, but there is one thing I consider of primary importance in poker. That is KNOW YOUR OPPONENT. If you felt your opponent was on a flush draw, you should play it differently than if you felt he had a pair or two or even a straight draw. Our hero said he felt his opponent was on a flush draw. In that case I think it is a clear check call. You or I might have put our opponent on something else. We also would have played it differently.
As for how I would have played, remember that I am the guy that raised a straight against what the whole table knew was a flush. I get giddy when I get Aces up, let alone a flush. Of course I would have bet. But just because that is the play I would make in the casino, doesn't make it right.
Wayne
I'll let it rest now, if you want to get in the last word. :0)
"5th Street brings me a blank and him a 6s. Since I don't improve and now he may have something that I should be alert to, 4 card straight draw or 4 flush, I check."
Wayne sort of said this already, but you have to bet here. It is almost beyond the realm of possibility that he has a straight,this is his board [XX/5s, 3c, 6s] since his hole cards would have to be (24)5 or (47)5. The only person who calls this for a raise is the kind of maniac you want to play against. Since you said he doesnt start with absurd cards, you can safely exclude a straight. If he doesnt have a made hand, then you should definately bet into him. If he started with (5x)5 he probably has one pair, if he has two they are both < Q, so you are either a small favorite or even money to keep playing. It is also likely that he started with 2 or 3 spades, thus as wayne said you are still a favorite. If you bet and he only has 3 spades he may flee, if he has 4 spades he may raise, and you can interpret that as he saying "I either have 2 pair or I have a 4 flush"
Same for 6th street, no spade so make him pay. This is especially true since you now have a flush draw to go with your high pair.
By checking, you make it easy for him to make decisions. He doesnt have to decide what you have, and whether to continue playing. Some times the decision will be easy for him, as when he has a 4 flush, but other times he may still have the pair of 5's, with the same board. Basically you are asking him to out draw you for free. Big mistake.
When his board shows that he could have a made hand, then slow down. Until then make him pay to beat you.
Todd
Todd and Wayne
Thanks for you considered comments. Both have made good points.
Just for the record: opponent has xx/5s, 3c, 6s. If he started with 4,6,/5s he has an open ended straight draw with a pair of 6s. A 456 starting hand would not be uncommon for my opponent or the limit.
Both of you have suggested bets on 5th & 6th Street. I appreciate the suggestions and the reasons for them. Your responses encouraged a more aggressive approach to this particular hand, and I, to an extent, agree.... but I have some doubts....and this was the reason for my post really. I don't know if my doubts have any merit or what, so I seek feedback.
The initial post asked about aggressiveness and how far into the hand he should apply it. I decided to take the hand which I played recently and post it because I believed it had many of the elements the initial post wished to address and I wanted to get some opinions about the way I played the hand.
One of my struggles lately has been with getting drawn out on, seemingly most of the time (I know every beat isn't a bad one). I'm talking about starting with the best hand and getting beat, most often on the river. I have no hard data to back this observation up with, but it happens alot, and seems to be more than half the time.... and it has affected me. I don't know if it is bad luck, my playing, or the nature of a loose/passive game and players at the lowest limit, but I have become uncertain about the efficacy of being aggressiveness at this level, especially in hands like the one I posted. Previous to the present, I would have bet right down to 7th Street, making my opponent pay, but with the number of times feel I'm getting drawn out on...I wonder if its my opponent who pays or me? My opponent did make his flush on the river heads up against my starting Qs, and he didn't catch his 4th spade until 5th Street. If I did bet on 5th and 6th Street, he would have called and the only person paying would have been me. If I have the big pair on 3rd Street, I will usually raise it. I usually have success getting heads up with another player, sometimes two, I have kept pressure on and am very mindful of the board and who I am playing, as best I can, .....but it seems some Tom, Sally or Don catches their draw on 7th Street and I'm in the dumper. This is not self-pity or a beef about getting drawn out on....I am truly uncertain about the advantage of aggressiveness at this limit. I feel at this point that I'm losing 2 out of three of the hands like the one I described in my post. That is the reason i didn't bet that hand on 5th & 6th Streets. I'm tired of making a pot for somebody else. My feelings about this just may be a matter which will in time show themselves to be unfounded, just an unfortunate stretch of getting beat in these situations. But I"m curious if anybody else feels if they are not experiencing the results of aggressive betting or if anybody may have some insights into the situation which will improve my card playing.
Richard
Badger,
Thanks for your response. I find myself nodding my head in agreement at your suggestions to often show strength except in cases of flushes and sets.
However, I find myself playing with loose players who do not fold and generally hide their strength. Where I show strength I have to bet more often than not, and get consistently raised and reraised by hands of obviously unknown strength (ranging from unsuited overcards to high pairs). Does this change your assessment?
There was 8.5 big bets in the pot on the river. A bad player to my right with a big pair on board checked. I had a very small pair on board and decided not to bluff at the pot and checked. The pro behind me bet. The bad player folded and it was up to me to decide what to do. All I had was a very small pair. The pro caught me by surprise when he bet the river and I started hesitating so a raise was out of the question or so I thought.
Going into the river:
I knew he was on a draw, he knew I knew he was on a draw, both him and me knew I was on a draw and we also knew the bad player did not have anything to go with his high pair. So the question is for you smaller limit players would you fold? And you higher/bigger limit players would you call?
His hand was live.
I say fold because the Pro figured to get called by the bad player. This would be a different story heads up but I think 8.5 to 1 would be bad odds for bluffing two players this hand.
Then again I'm new to stud.
Later, CV
Low limit player here.
What is the chance that he had no pair? You said, you had a very small pair, lets guess 2s, 3s, 4s, or 5s. Your asking yourself not only did he miss draw, but that he has esentially no pair(especially if his board showed medium to high cards). I fold on this basis. The pro would feel much more confident making a play against the bad player if he knew he had you beat.
Wayne
ps I think the decision was actually made the first time around. By checking, you esentially forfeit your interest in the pot. With such a low hand you essentially have to decide wether to bet or check fold. You opted for check fold.
By checking, you told him you would fold - thus he's only trying (maybe) to bluff one hand. For the (now) 9.5 : 1 odds, I'd give him the last bet.
DJ (mostly low limit)
simple, if you think there is a more than about one in ten chance he is bluffing and you can beat the bluff call. ill go with DJ here.
I am sitting at a table and a woman raises with an Ace showing. I know this player well. She will only raise with a pair of Queens or better. I also know that her play will be to bet if high board. If her board is not high she will call if bet into, as long as she can beat your board. If checked into she will check unless improved, in that case she will bet.
What does it take to call a raise from this woman?
Can you call with a pair less than Aces, and if so, under what circumstances?
How much money must be in the pot or how many people must be in the game to call with a drawing hand(would you ever play a 3 straight)?
Wayne
This has been covered in a lot of books. It is old the 3rd street play. There are a lot of variables here. A lot depends on position, other players, your up card, other cards showing, the level of play (i.e.1-5, 15-30).
Plaaying with a straight - depends on th erank, if 2 cards are suited and the number of players and implied odds. Again covered perfectly in Sklansly et al's Green book.
Get the book today! (seriously)
7CSFAP (I don't have it in front of me) has a chapter titled "Reraising the Bigger Pair." I'd check it out. I've only read it once through, so far, so I don't have total recall of its contents.
7CSFAP states that "It is sometimes correct to reraise on third street with a big pair when a higher upcard has raised. This is especially true.....against someone whose upcard is duplicated elsewhere." So, if you know your opponent plays as discribed, at what point does it become proper to reraise with a pair of Ks. When you have seen 1 other ace? Even if I have seen two other aces, does it make it more likely that my opponent has a high pair in the hole than a split pair of aces? I have not done the math, but isn't it more likely that my opponent has (Ax)A, than (KK)A or (QQ)A, when I hold KK.
The heart of the question was really trying to get at the value of such additional considerations as a two flush or your opponents cards being dead. If a player has a pair of aces that are completely dead, aren't you still an underdog even if your Ks are completely live.
The example hands in 7CSFAP, show the value of a single dead card and a two flush, but not a cumulative total. My feeling is that you throw away any pair, but was wondering if others felt differently. Also, wondered if pot size or other opponents would make the hand any more playable.
Also, the nature of drawing hands has interested me. 7CSFAP says "...if you have a three flush and none of your suit is out, your hand is almost always playable...". However, in the example hands the 3 flush wins 31.5% of the time, less than the lower pair against Aces(33%). This suggests that heads up, you would prefer to play the lower pair compared to a live 3 flush. Yet, I could invision playing a 3 flush against this opponent in multi-way action where as stated above would not likely play a lower pair. If correct, there should be some determinant of when to play. For example, at least 3 playing with the pot offering at least 3:1 odds or something like that.
Wayne
10-20 stud. On 3rd I am rolled up with fours. Bring in is a 3 and bets 3$. Jack calls, I limp, 6 calls, King raises, Bring in folds, jack calls, I call, 6 calls, 4 way action.
4th I catch the 7h. King catches an ace, 6 pairs his door card, Jh catches 9h. Pair of sixes is high and bets 20$. All call to me, time to raise. I might be screwed already if the sixes reraise me, but the big bets are here so what am I waiting for? I raise, sixes reraises me. I am thinking I may have to fold because he now has trip sixes, but let's not jump the gun just yet... Now I am wishing I had reraised on 3rd like I probably should have! Both other players call and I call. 4 players.
5th I catch another 7 for a full boat. Other players catch blanks, or so I hope. I bet out. No free cards! Even if sixes does indeed have trip sixes, he'll just have to fill to beat me now (and PAY to try). I bet, sixes raises, both others call, I reraise, all 3 call.
6th they all catch blanks, I bet, they all call. I guess sixes hasn't filled yet.
7th I bet all but one call. Sixes actually has (22)66 on 4th and just had two pair. The jack had jacks up. Kings didn't call the last bet. I win a monster pot.
comments welcome.
Dave in cali
You should've known the 6 only had at most 2 pair - why would he call a raise from a King with only a pair of 6's? He must have held a wired pair or a flush draw. Still, calling there was probably a good play because you seemed to convince the 2 other players that your hand was weaker than it was.
from how you described the play they are all bad players. against bad players dont fold good hands, push them. with four in there and all those bets it would be wrong to fold even if you knew he had trip sixes. i hope you know that.
Ray:
thanks, and YES I know! If I somehow knew he had 666 the pot was still big enough to try and outdraw him. As it actually played, I would have made "crying calls to the end" no matter what. The pot was HUGE so I only needed a small chance of having the best hand. Besides that I have lots of outs and he may not fill. When I hit the full house on 5th I figure push it - since they are bad players, will probably call, and may NOT have me beat, but will definitely be drawing to beat me. Make 'em PAY to beat me.... And if I get raised on the river I still call anyway.
Dave in Cali
Dave,
"Bring in is a 3 and bets 3$. Jack calls, I limp, 6 calls, King raises, Bring in folds, jack calls, I call, 6 calls, 4 way action." As Ray says when someone raises into you and you are rolled up slam the whole group who cares what they think you have at this point and even if you only eliminate one person it's worth it and you have more money in there hopefully for you. You may eliminate the 6 with the pair of deuces that gave you a nightmare.
Paul
I think I would have re-raised the King's raise. I would have played the small trips as fast as I could. If the King re-raised, I might fold. Any comments?
This may be incredibly wrong, but I would never ever fold trips on third street.
The kings reraising may be a pair of kings trying to snap off a move by you. If you had the kings, you may even reraise a lower up card. I would consider letting go on 4th if the K paired. But if there is enough money in the pot, then you have to call to the river and hope to out draw. When you fill up on 5th, bet or raise every time you can.
Just my opinion
Todd
My limping in tells the King that I do not have aces. Coming over top of the King pretty much announces my trips. If the Kings re-raise and we are head to head, I suspect trip Kings esp if no king was out and those with Q have folded.
ratso,
I would just call.
Paul
Point taken. I was considering reraising on 3rd but I didn't and I was kicking myself for not doing so when 6's paired his doorcard. It's just human nature to get greedy with these premium hands and I am not immune. In all reality rolled 4's is not that premium in a multiway pot as it will get beaten more than you might expect. Thanks for the response.
Dave in Cali
all good responses. my imput is that i would not leave a game with these players if i had to play in my sleep. what did they think you had? even after you paired on board, bet and reraised
I was just at the USPC at the Taj and watched some of the big guys playing $300/$600 Omaha-8. The thing that struck me is some of the CRAP that these guys were taking to the river for a lot of cheese.
Here's an example. In one hand, it is capped before the flop and it is 4-handed. Of course, I'm thinking there must be a couple of A2-baby-baby hands and maybe a couple of suited ace or high hands to be raising and reraising.
The flop is 23T rainbow. There's a bet, a raise, a fold, and a call. The turn is a 7. There's a chack-check-bet-call-call.
The river is an 8.
A certain professional Jerj, who had check-called on the turn, now declares "I think that last card gets me the whole pot." and bets. The middle guy folds and the previous bettor just calls.
Board is 23T78 with no flushes.
The Jerj turns over A287 and says "I've got the low and two pair." I'm thinking to myself "Does he really think his low is good, is he just kidding, or is he angling?"
The other guy looks at the Jerj's hand, puzzled for a second, and then turns over his A34K (the Aces was suited) and says "I've got the nut low." They split the pot and both make a decent profit on the hand.
I watched similar antics for another 20 minutes and felt like I should go pull $50K on my credit card, sit down for awhile, and play nothing but the nuts.
Am I missing something?
Remember Ray Zee:
In small games play loose pre-flop and very tight post-flop. In big games just the contrary.
This situation came up in a 8 handed 40-80 stud game with $5 ante and $10 bring-in. The play has been extremely tight. A player to my left brought it in. Four people folded and a pro (my opinion after about 6 hours, never played against him before, I'm new to the game) called with an Ace up. The next guy folded and I was next/last with 62 6.
What do you think the right play is?
1) you think he has aces
2) you know he has aces
1. fold
2. refer to 1.
You wouldn't consider raising? You'd have position unless you improved. Perhaps against a pro it's better not to mess with it.
Tom D
I just reread the post. I forgot the two choices were thinking he had Aces, and knowing he had Aces.
Tom D
How high should I go?
I agree with Ray, Fold. However,I am curious why the "pro" did not raise with the Ace showing in that position.
Ratso -- I have little stud experience, but since I'm planning to make a project of studying it soon I'll take a shot at answering your question. You tell me if it makes sense or sounds right because it's sort of a guess.
I think *occasionally* good stud players actually slowplay a pair of aces on 3rd st. Seems I recall reading about this in an article in a poker magazine several years ago, I think it was by "Iceberg" Sitra who now writes for Poker Digest. (Of course I may have it all wrong...) I would think it might make more sense when it looks like the pot will be played short handed, as this one did. Might it just be a reasonable way of varying your play from time to time? Then the question would be do you raise on 4 or wait till 5. I don't recall what the writer said, but would guess that you raise on 4. Hmmm, maybe not. Maybe as long as you're going to slowplay it at all, you might as well wait to pull the trigger on 5? Any sense to this, or just plain goofy?
Ratso,
"The play has been extremely tight."
My theory is if he is a "pro" he might get berya to come in with exactly the type of hand he has. Maybe the pro hasn't had a hand for a while and finally gets one and everyone drops except guy next to(gnt), berya and the bring in. He has no chance of getting them to come in with a raise with that type of hand. Berya played it right if he folded because I believe the "pro" had A's or a real hand. A raise would probably eliminate gnt, Berya with hands that are questionable to play against an A and the bring in where playing possum he may hook Berya.
In conclusion I believe the pro enlarged his field for a call by calling vs a raise.
paul
That makes sense. The tight conditions would give more reason to wait a round or two before raising. Wouldn't it be better though to make this play when your ace is hidden?
.
John,
Yes of course because you've erased the fear of the A. Berya would call if he had a 5 up for sure or lower that wasn't the bring-in. Berya might even raise without the A there. Having pocket A's is very powerful when your down to a small field as in this example. He could have pocket A's with the A up it's a possibilty. That's where you have to know the players to extract maximum for the minimum. For this example I would drop as RZ stated coming out of the box. 62/6 is barely playable and HTH for me and even then debatable with a A up. A 5up probably call if 3 players as in this example.
paul
Here's the strange part. I would have played it the same way. I most likely would not have raised either for the reasons Paul and John said. Now, I figure that a pro would do the opposite of me, so thay is why the question. Maybe I am making some headway in my game. I not want to loose the other person, and probably would not raise unless I improved on 5th st.
ty
I will except that Ray knows what he is talking about with high limits, and that this hand seems like an easy fold.
However, In 1-5 I would call for the bring in. I imagine that the perfect card is a 6, and if I hit I will most likely win the pot. Having such a lame kicker would make it tough, but in 1-5, I would expect one or two to call a couple of $5 bets if I did catch a 6, which makes it pay off.
Why not pay $10 bucks to see the next card? If my math is correct, 8 antes =$40, + 2 bring ins=$20 total is 60 bucks. so you are getting 6:1 to shoot for your trips. Making trips would be 2 cards out of 42 unseen, which is pretty crappy odds.
So in this game, since it is tight, no-one will play against your 66 on the board, and you lose the implied odds necessary to call.
I guess I just answered my own question.
Thanks for the help.
Would you call if it were a loose table? Where 66 would get callers, or would you just always fold such a crappy hand?
Todd
I would call $10 in the hope of a 2 or a scare card. Either way, the Ace has to act first and if I catch a scare card, he will probably check a weak hand and bet a strong hand on 4th. I like the equity and while I don't like the hand that much, I think it is probably the best. I put the Ace on AK, or AQx, trying to limp, check the strength of the opposition and take the pot on 4th w/o having to raise into 4 handed on 3rd.
If the ace is exceptionally tight, you might even raise and get him to release. Of course, if you get reraised by that type, fold.
662 is not a call against 2 aces. if you play like this you play way too loose and cant win in any of the bigger games. sorry but thats how it is. this pot is going to be headup with any betting and you have your pair split so if you do make trips he will see them and fold. thats right pro players mostly will just fold when you pair your door card. you are trying for a long shot that if it hits you win nothing. if you make two pair on 4th street you only catch up to the aces. a much better hand would be 456 and that stinks. at least here you may catch a 6 and win on a bluff. or may make a straight draw for an even type hand. still a losing play.
How did this question become an assumption that the A has aces? I agree 4-5-6 is better in this spot, and also stinks against 2 aces but lets give the Ace (who is always going to be high, most likely) a chance to screw up the hand and give it away. It really all depends on the table image and if he will give you credit for trips if you hit the six also. I have noticed that many players, including pros, when they slow play hate to give up the hand, even against a door card. If the ace has not played a hand in a while, I would probably raise to get low card out and make ace pay or fold if he has a limping hand. If ace plays back, fine. If he has aces and continues to slow play, he will have to check 2x and I can feel out the hand and on 5 check or bet depending on any indications. Folding is not a bad play but it is far from the only play in this pot.
Russ
There is no question in my mind that he would fold 100% of the time if I paired the 6. Also he would come out betting on 4th no matter what I caught or he caught. The only exception might be if I caught a suited card such as 5 or 7 and still I would bet my money on him to come out betting. Even if he had limped in with AQx or something which is possible he still would come out betting and I would have no call.
Russ,
it says right in the original post that he has aces or you think he has aces. that is what i am talking about. if you play 662 under those conditions you wont be here soon unless you are a trust fund baby.
Ray,
I am sorry, you are correct--I misinterpreted the original post. If I thought the Ace had aces, I don't want to call $10. More interestingly, this leads to two follow-on questions: 1) If the ante was $10 and you thought/knew he had aces, would you play? In this structure you are more likely to get action if you hit a third 6.
2)If you just follow the original story but are not sure what the Ace has, how would you play? i.e. the story goes, "a relatively tight professional limps in with an Ace and I have 662 in last position."
These seem to be more interesting problems.
Russ, yes they are interesting. once you start chasing you kind of get stuck in to the end unless he gets too many scare cards. at what point do you give up and say i guess he has aces. basically you are over 2 to 1 dog with 662 if you go all the way. some of the time he gets the scare cards and you have to fold even if you were right and he didnt have aces. if he didnt look at his hole cards and raise you would only maybe be about a 6 to 5 favorite but i think an underdog because of the scare cards. to answer berya's question about how high a pair you need, the answer is if you really think he has aces give him the antes. same answer to your question of a tight pro limps in, unless he tends to give it up when he has nothing.
I actually researched it a little. What I did was I assumed he had aces and assumed I would only continue if I improved to two pair or trips on 4th. Then I ran poker probe. Two pair vs Aces. Trips I just win the antes and bring in. I also gave him credit for not having to call me on the river and me having to call him on the river. Under these circumstances I came up loosing I think somewhere between $3 and $4 per hand. Of course I don't always have to call him and he does not always have to fold, but also he sometimes would have two pair on 4th himself which I did not account and probably many other little things like that. But they probably would balance out more or less. Of course I would still be donating in this case. However that extra $40 in antes should swing it right there making -$3 to +$1 and -$4 to 0. So you probably wind up making about 50 cents everytime this situation comes up and therefore should call. Of course my simulations and calculations can be off, but most likely it OK and the call is correct with $10 ante assuming you will only continue if you improve.
You don't have to go to this much touble to see that it is close with a ten dollar ante. A little over 4% of the time you pair your doorcard and win $90. A little over 6% of the time you make hidden two pairs which is a slight favorite, maybe $60 or $70 average profit. The remaining not quite 90% you lose $10. Thus it appears to be a close fold against excellent players but a call against weaker ones , especially those that might fight your open sixes.
Notice that it is an easy call if your pair is buried, even aginst pros. Now you win $90, 6% of the time and well over $90 (at least an average of $150) 4% of the time. Still real close though when the ante is $5.
David,
You have made an excellent and elegant appraisal of an interesting situation.
Russ
Berya,
Playing at FW I had this exact hand 62/6. I said I'm going to play it to the end unless I see something crazy. The next card comes and there's 4 people playing the usual stuff in 1-5 7CS .50ante. I catch a blank 62/6x so I figure that's it but it get's checked around. Next card 62/6x2 no pairs on the board for the other players and no 2's or 6's out. Pos'n 7 xx/AsxTs bets 3. I call in Pos'n 3 and pos'n 6 calls with xx/QdxJc. Pos'n 4 drops who brought it in xx/3cxx. Next card comes out xx/QdxJcJh, xx/AsxTsx, and I get 62/6x2x. J's bet 3, call, call. River J's check, xx/AsxTsx/S bets 5. I drop catching a blank and J's call with two pair J's over. The flush won the hand, but it was close I would of dropped after 4 cards if someone had bet. I just starting laughing when I looked down. I know it's 1-5 but I just thought I would throw it out there.
paul
No, No, No, Badger! Dey playa da crapa at Omaha(a) becausa dey tink Omaha(a) is a gamea ofa luckiness. Afta alla u gotta 4 cardsa to hitta.
Vince.
I play in a very loose 4-8-12 omaha game. Looking for suggestions re: pre-flop hand selection.
Well, that's a pretty big topic. Perhaps you could narrow your question down a bit?
As a general principle, you can play somewhat looser in Omaha High than you can in Holdem. But don't take that concept too far.
A suited ace with almost any other value is usually playable.
A pair of aces is usually playable no matter what your other two cards are.
Four cards to a straight (9TJQ) is very good hand, except at the very bottom of the range (i.e. 2345).
Four cards with a gap (5789, 5679) are almost always playable, but you would prefer the gap to be on the bottom side (5789) since it gives you more nut straight draws.
Suited Kings are worth about half of what suited aces are, and your other cards need to be good to play them (i.e. KsQsJc7c is playable, but Ks9s6c5c isn't).
Beware suited cards below a King. You don't want to draw to a queen high or worse flush as a primary out, so a hand like QsJc5s4c is not playable, whereas AsKc5s4c is a decent starting hand. Having lower cards suited still adds value to the hand though, sometimes enough to change a fold into a call.
The EV spread between a lot of Omaha hands isn't very high, since you can hit the flop in so many different ways. But the variance from one hand to another is big. If you want to avoid the suckout factor and control your variance, play hands that have multiple draws so you can have redraws. Hands like 89TJ play much better than hands like 78QK, because the former hand can make straights with redraws, letting you suck out on the other guy when you both make your straight on the turn, instead of the other way around. Also, having the 78 suited helps your variance as well, even though you won't win any direct flush competitions with it. But sometimes the suitedness will give you a freeroll against someone else with the same straight, and that can be big. And even if someone else is in there with a bigger flush draw, you've got two of his outs.
But I'm rambling now. I'm on a 30 hour bender.
TWIMC,
Randomizing Your Play (ryp) I feel is very important and usually the difference for me in making a profit or not during a session. I will just talk about 7CS and how I use it to my benefit. Playing at FW at about 8am there are usually two tables going now I sign up for a seat and tell the head honcho that I would like a new table and seat #3 when one opens. The table opens and these people are all equal except I know a few of them and how they play. These people aren't moving for at least 3 hours so it gives you time to learn their traits and set up your RYP habit. I've played with at least 4 or 5 people at the table for 6-8hrs. Most sessions I start out slow going down but usually things turn around and if those people were beating up on you earlier in the day you can get them to hang around for extra bets because they still think they have the bead on you. The only difference is that you've made them play lesser hands, but your still making the same decisions but filling up instead of busting out.
I really feel strongly about this concept in a game where players are around 3 or more hours. If your jumping around from table to table looking for the perfect game then this doesn't matter. Also if people are in and out of your game it doesn't matter. It might be something you might try ask the head honcho if you could switch seats to a new game, although you may also have transfers from other games that may be in and outers.
Seat #1 and #8 usually rocks don't have to see the board that well because they usually have A's, K's, Q's and are HTH or three way when they enter.
paul
I was talking to a friend of mine (whom I hadn't seen in a few weeks) and he told me about a mutual friend (whom I haven't seen in a year or more) who comes into town (Edmonton) on the weekends to play poker. Usually at a club downtown, but sometimes casinos.
Apparently our mutual friend plays a lot of a game they call Showdown, and makes a lot of money doing so. Basically the game is no-limit 5 card stud. I was astonished that 5-stud was still played anywhere.
Is 5-stud still played out there? Is it making some kind of comeback? For those of you out there who may play it (or would play it) from time to time, what is your approach to the game?
As an aside, how common is half-and-half (holdem and omaha high)?
Eric
The game is 'Showhand'. It's 5 card stud played with a joker, and some changes in the ranking of hands. It's played table stakes, with a $300 buyin.
Tough game to beat, though, because there is a $5 ante on each hand, and the casino rakes 10% up to $25/hand.
The local poker club on 108th St. sometimes gets a showhand game.
Casino Edmonton has at least one 3-6 and 5-10 half/half game every day. 10-20 half/half is played Wed, Thurs, Fri, and Sat in the evenings.
BTW, I think the half/holdem half/Omaha high structure is great, and I much prefer it over straight holdem.
"The game is 'Showhand'. It's 5 card stud played with a joker, and some changes in the ranking of hands. It's played table stakes, with a $300 buyin."
Ahhh. The intermediate friend is from Poland, and his spoken English is occaisionally rough.
"Tough game to beat, though, because there is a $5 ante on each hand, and the casino rakes 10% up to $25/hand."
Well, the ante is no problem, being a necessity for this kind of game I figure. The rake is tough, though.
"The local poker club on 108th St. sometimes gets a showhand game."
Is that the one across from Grant MacEwan?
"BTW, I think the half/holdem half/Omaha high structure is great, and I much prefer it over straight holdem."
I don't like it much. I prefer to play one game (either is fine by me), rather than switching back and forth every half-hour. Of course I can see the appeal if one is a decent player at both games and can adjust better than the opponents. I can do that, but I don't enjoy it.
Thanks for the info, Dan.
Eric
Yeah, that's the club across from Grant MacEwan. The phone number there is (780) 426-0108. You'd do best to call them before going down, because they don't always have a game.
The half/half structure is great for many reasons. One is that the action players like it, and I like games with action players. Another is that after a half an hour of holdem, almost any Omaha hand looks great to a lot of these players so you get lots of multi-way action.
Finally, I think an Omaha high expert can make more money in Omaha against intermediate players than a Holdem expert can make against a field of intermediate holdem players. Since the games around here are fairly tough most of the time, I make a lot more money in Omaha.
I accidently posted this on the "other Games" Forum. I reproduce it here:
I have been playing some play money Omaha (high only) on Paradise Poker to try and learn the game. I have got a question re: runner-runner draws:
I am on the button with 5c6h8h9d and call (I don't know if this is a playable hand but what the hell..it's only play money) after the whole field had called. Blinds rap. We take the flop 10 handed.
Flop: As7h2c.
Small blind bets and gets 5 callers before it is my turn. Do I call?
p.s. I did call because it was play money but should I call in real games...why or why not?
If your answer is to call, would a raise be better because the texture of the board is such that no matter what card comes off on the turn, they will likely check to me on the turn and I can take the free card (of course, this assumes that I won't get 3 bet on the flop if I raise).
Thanks for any help. This Omaha puzzles me quite a bit. I have played it a couple of times with Dan Hanson and his fellow sharks in Edmonton but have always felt that I play way too tight after the flop because I perhaps don't properly take into account the value of backdoor draws.
you can figure out your chances of making the various hands just like in holdem. the downside is in this game many of your wins will be splits with someone. this hand looks really bad but the power of backdoor draws comes alive here. you are a small dog to each of the other hands but are getting paid a premium for calling. id call for sure.
I like the 5c-6h-8h-9d on the button. In fact, I'd probably raise with it. In fact, if I'd had a few hands tonight that looked as good as that, I'd probably have a better 'tude right now (we'll get to that in a moment). But I don't like that Ace on the flop, although with no raisers, you are getting great pot odds for taking one off (you do have a lot of ways to get on the draw, but in a tourney, I'm not sure I'd play it the same way).
My take on Limit High Omaha: For the first time in over two years, I played a Limit High Omaha tourney tonight (the last time I played the game was in a WSOP satellite in 1997). Boy do I suck at this game. In two hours, I played 4 hands to the river (and most who know me would probably consider me a loose-aggressive tourney player). I missed nearly every flop (hmmmm ... how can a can have 4 connected cards with no danglers and miss the flop so completely over and over). I never flopped a wrap, flopped a set 3 times, got cracked on two of them, and lost one hand when a player misread his hand but laid it down and everyone else got it right.
I consider myself a competent O-8 player, certainly not in Ray Zee's class, or Eskimo or Scotty, but I can hang in there with the rocks. Still, as you have run into, in some ways this High-Only version is a much more difficult and puzzling game. One thing I've learned is not only can you not play this as you would play O-8, but you most definitely cannot play this the same way you play Hold-em. Your playing tactics/approach have to be vastly different. The two most important aspects are starting hands and reading opponents. If you don't flop the nuts or a draw to the nuts, you are normally out of line even being in the hand. You almost never can bluff anyone, can almost never steal an ante or pressure the flop. An overpair is meaningless, bottom two pair are worthless, and top and bottom pair are just trouble. I imagine a lot of Hold-em players get seriously hurt when they pick this game up for the first time.
For what it's worth, and although it certainly didn't help me tonight, I recommend reading the Omaha book by Bob Ciaffone ("Millenium Edition), the Limit high section in McEvoy's "Tournament Poker" and also "Championship Omaha" by TJ Cloutier/McEvoy. There are some helpful quizzes and analysis in the back of Ciaffone's book as well as the "Championship" book. Now if I could only learn how to catch those hands that are recommended to be played ....
"I like the 5c-6h-8h-9d on the button. In fact, I'd probably raise with it. In fact, if I'd had a few hands tonight that looked as good as that, I'd probably have a better 'tude right now (we'll get to that in a moment)."
Straight runs are much stronger in pot-limit than in limit. They rarely connect, but in the situations they do they are very profitable, making them ideal in pot-limit and marginal in limit. When the money is deep, a hand like 8s7s6h5h can make the nuts on an earlier street and have a massive freeroll over another player who just has the straight. But in limit, you won't be able to knock out a player with a set or an ace-high flush draw. In limit it costs you much more all the times you miss the flop, and you earn far less those times you do make the nuts and redraw. I'm cautious with straight runs in limit, and I don't think I would make it two bets preflop (I would want to preserve my implied odds and not make it correct for weaker draws to call later in the hand since a straight on the flop or turn is so vulnerable in Omaha).
5689 is not the best example, because you need that seven on the flop to make a really strong hand. But a hand like 789T is definitely worth a raise in late position in a limit game. And don't underestimate the value of being suited, even with low cards like this. Situations where you can gain freerolls over your opponent are much prized, and this hand is perfect for that. There are lots of ways you can flop two pair with a straight draw, or a straight draw with lots of extra outs.
I like this hand a lot.
You chance of making any straight by the river with this hand is pretty good. If you hit a 4,5,6,8, 9 or 10 on the turn you have at least an open-ended draw. That's 20 outs on the flop. Some of those outs give you a BIG straight draw. For example, if you hit a 6 or an 8 on the turn, you have a 16-out straight draw. Some of those draws are not to the nuts, so you have to compensate for that. But you can't always assume that a runner-runner non-nut straight is going to be beaten.
These hands can be better than an open-ended straight on the flop, because you will split less often if you make your straight, while having just as good a chance of making it (or even better). Also, if you hit the big straight draw on the turn you can raise for value against the field, which you can't really do with just an open-ended straight.
Now, you have to degrade the draw because of the chance of splitting. Upgrade it a tad because of your backdoor heart draw. How much really depends on the exact context of the flop and the nature of the players you are up against. If the flop had something like two clubs and a spade and you had none of those suits, you can downgrade your outs by six on the flop. On the turn, if it puts the second card of the other suit there, you can eliminate half of your outs.
This is why I like Omaha. If you're an expert you can spot situations like this which may even be worth a raise for value on the flop, while there will be times when hands like an open-ended straight or bottom set on the flop can go straight into the muck. And there are very, very few players who have figured this out.
Ray, Earl, Dan: thanks. Sounds like a call is the proper play on the flop. As you say Dan, my hand may in fact be better than 22xx on that flop (at least, I think that you may be saying that).
Earl said something about reading hands. To me, that's the biggest reason why I don't play Omaha too well. While in Hold 'em, I feel that I can read hands and get creative at the proper times, I just have no bloody clue how to put anyone on hands in this crazy game. I just automatically assume that if someone is betting and a straight is showing...well..he's got the straight. If the turn makes 3 clubs and someone else bets...well...that guy just made a flush etc. I know that's pretty simplistic but am I really far off the mark? In other words, is it fair to say that a bet in Omaha represents the nuts or near nuts a much greater percentage of time than hold 'em? If so, where is the edge? Does it come from playing better starting cards i.e. well-coordinated hands that could offer you redraws? Does it come from properly recognizing backdoor draws and such? Does it come from making value raises at the correct times i.e. when you get your 12 or 16 way draws etc.? I may be asking you guys to write a book with these questions rather than a responsive post:).
BTW, I have read Ciaffone's book and Ray's book (I also have Cappaletti's (sp?) book but have just skimmed it). I think I understand what Bob and Ray are saying but as you know there really is no substitute for experience. I am sure that I need to play more...a lot more...to figure out the nuances of this game. I do like the game though. In fact, when I am in Edmonton and play in your half/half games, I generally look forward to the Omaha portion of the hour which is kind of strange given that the game is still pretty foggy to me.
Sure, you can *usually assume that if there's a 3-flush on the board and someone bets, he has the flush and probably the nut flush. If there's a straight on the board, he probably not only has a straight, but the nut straight. Etc.
The edge in Omaha comes from lots of places. First is pre-flop hand selection, although it's not as important as it is in holdem, since the concept of dominated hands doesn't really apply (or at least the effect is watered down greatly). The range in EV between the best and worst hands in Omaha is much narrower than it is in Holdem.
But where you make lots of money in Omaha is bad calls by other players. In a loose passive holdem game, the fish are often getting the odds they need to make the loose calls they want to make, so you don't make all that much money from them. But there is no pot size that makes it correct to call when drawing completely dead, and bad Omaha players do that ALL the time. In a loose Omaha game there is almost always a couple of players putting completely dead money in the pot. If you're smart enough to recognize those situations where you're drawing dead (or at least you're better at it than your opponents) you have a big edge.
Your average Omaha high player just isn't capable of laying down a set on the flop, or a king-high flush draw, and many are booked to the river with bottom two pair or a bottom-end straight draw. Let's say you're an average Omaha player, holding QcJs6c5s. To these guys, that looks like a pretty good hand (and it's not). Now, you get a flop like Qs8c7s, and you think you've flopped a monster with a flush draw, a straight draw, and top pair. So you call a bet on the flop, and now a 2c lands on the turn. Now you have TWO flush draws, top pair, and an open-ended straight! You're now calling all raises. In the meantime, someone else is holding a 9TJ, another player has the nut spade draw, and another one has top set. You are drawing completely dead, or dead to maybe your Queen-high flush, but it has to be a flush card that doesn't pair the board, and you have to hope that no one else was in there with the bigger flush draw. This 'monster hand' is complete garbage and should have been pitched on the flop.
Bad players are also constantly putting themselves in situations where they have the nuts, but with no backup and a ton of redraws against them. That's one reason why they whine so much about suckouts. If I come into a pot with KQJT, and the flop is 789, I may be up against JT45, who's in a world of trouble but will still raise, re-raise, and cap it on the flop and turn. So if I'm in a pot with the nuts against another opponent with the nuts, it's usually me that has the redraws against him. Big EV.
You make money off the intermediate Omaha players because they don't raise good hands for value enough, either before the flop or after, and they make folds that are too tight, giving up the equity in the pot that is rightly theirs. Your typical tight holdem player might chuck that 5689 hand on the flop, thinking that it missed him. Or he'll fold his second-nut straight because he doesn't realize that in THIS context it's good.
Then there are the expert plays that can be wildly profitable. There are lots of opportunities to represent big hands and knock competitors out of the pot. Omaha pots are usually large, so these plays have big EV.
An example: You make a straight on the turn against two other opponents. You check, intending to check-raise the maniac. He bets, now the guy behind him raises. Instead of re-raising, you can sometimes smooth-call, representing a draw like a set or a flush draw. The board changes on the river, bringing in a flush or board pair. Now you bet out, the maniac calls, and the guy who tied you for the straight folds. The maniac can't beat your straight, and you haul the whole pot. Because so many players have the mindset that whatever hand is possible must be out there, you can sometimes steal very large pots.
"You make money off the intermediate Omaha players because they don't raise good hands for value enough, either before the flop or after,"
What hands should raise for value preflop in loose-passive limit Omaha games?
And why don't we see this game more often?
The range of raising hands is pretty large in Omaha. Hands that have multiple nut draws, big cards, lots of connected cards, etc. Most people don't raise nearly enough, especially in late position.
I think the main reason why Omaha high hasn't taken off is because the rocks hate it, and they are often the bread-and-butter players for the casino. We have that problem here in Edmonton. The tough, tight holdem players are always lobbying to get Omaha yanked out of the game. The action players love it. But the tight players are there day in, day out. They start the games. So the casino caters to them. With a little more foresight, they might see that it's the action players that keep the games alive in the long run, because games that are full of tough agressive players often don't last because the fish get busted out.
Two years ago, or so, I posted a couple of hands and was soundly criticized for my play on the river. In fact, except for considerate responses from Tom Haley and Ray Zee, it was unanimous that I was too much of a nit to play poker and should stay home with the women and children. Undeterred however, I have continued playing, and last Saturday, playing 5-10 stud at the Trop in AC, I was involved in a hand similar to those I had posted before.
My question, as it did two years ago, has to do with the action on the river, so I'll try to describe the early rounds briefly without omitting any pertinent details.
I had only been in the game for a few minutes and didn't know any of the players involved in this hand. The table seemed a little on the loose-passive side.
I was in last position and called with (10c, 2d) 10h (live), after three players limped in, leaving five of us vying for the pot.
I hit a blank on fourth street, the man on my right, showing an Ace, checked, I checked, the Bring-in checked, the Lady, showing (?, ?) Jc 5c, bet, the Old Man, showing (?, ?) 9d 4d, called, the Man On My Right called, I called, and the Bring-in called.
Fifth street: the Man On My Right (?, ?) As 3h 2h checked; I checked (10c, 2d) 10h 7d 2c; Bring-in checked, Lady (?, ?) Jc 5c 7c bet; Old Man (?, ?) 9d 4d 6d called; Man On My Right called, I called, Bring-in folded.
Sixth street: Me: (10c, 2d) 10h 7d 2c 10s (I filled): Lady: (?, ?) Jc 5c 7c 8c; Old Man (?, ?) 9d 4d 6d Ks; Man On My Right (?, ?) As 3h 2h Qc...........I bet out, spurning the check-raise attempt in spite of Lady's four clubs (comments?). Lady, looking confused, called, Old man called, and Man On My Right folded. BTW, Old Man's Ks was the only King I had seen.
River: Me: No change, I bet. Lady, pausing and making a face, folded, and Old Man (?, ?) 9d 4d 6d Ks RAISED!
What should I have done?
Tom D
On 6th street I would have gone for the check-raise. You're in a perfect spot, the lady is to your immediate left with 2 people in between. She has been betting 4th and 5th street representing clubs. When someone, especially someone who has been betting earlier streets, makes 4 of the same suites on board it's been my experience that they almost always continue betting. I think you missed a perfect check-raising opportunity here.
On the river, it depends on the player. If he is a very solid player I would just call. He saw you betting your paired Ten door-card into a open 4-flush so he has to be worried about Ten's full yet he is willing to come over the top. If he is a maniac or a bad player in general who isn't aware at all and only plays his cards I would re-raise and call if re-re-raised.
You know it is really not that easy to tell you what you should have done because none of us were there. I don't think you loose much either way here. I think if you want to play it safe then call if not, raise. What did he start with? Would he not raise with pocket kings? Is he a good player who knows what he is doing a little? My guess is he either made a flush or had two pair 9's and 4's or 9's and 6's and filled up.
Anyway I think you should raise, but if you just called I don't see anything wrong with that (you were there I wasn't).
P.S Do you think he cares that you paired your ten? Also you probably could have checked on 6 here and gotten a couple of extra bets since the lady seems weak and would bet her flush which she probably made on 5.
In any game above 3-6 you have a crying call at best. You bet an open pair of tens into a four flush. It is a cut and dried painted forehead problem. I am surprised at anyone who would think differently.
David,
Are you certain this is such a crying call? Many players just play their own hands and when they make one, raise no matter what. Also the 10's showed no strength before 6th so a flush/small full might raise. Is a reraise and then fold to another raise really out of the question, at any limit? I am not saying that is the only play only it does not appear to me as obvious as you make it, especially given the prior probabilities of the four flush's open cards.
I would probably not have played the 10's with a duce even though they were live. I agree with Sklansky. Maybe you get it in that weak 5-10. You are dead meat in 20-40.
I'm not that wild about the call on 4th, to be honest. There's 9 bucks in the pot. A probable four-flush (maybe w/a three-str, too) bets; another likely four-flush calls; a guy w/ an Ace up overcalls; you're getting 21-5 on the call(rake figured in); and someone's still to act behind you. You've got a medium pair w/ a couple of rags, not even any runner-runner-runner draws. You've gotta be a huge dog to win the pot at this point.
In fact, you shouldn't have even limped on 3rd. 10-2-10 rainbow against an Ace, Hook, and two other yahoos? Not a multi-way hand. Assuming you called the raise and he had you, that $1 cost you another $45.
Of course, Ol' Man might be a moron (or caught the Ad and misread your board) and you make $95. You've gotta call in a 5-10 game getting 13.5-1 against a grayhair (maybe w/ poor eyesight?) you don't know, but I still say you were a big dog on 3rd and 4th.
Soon after I posted my question, I had a series of computer problems, and couldn't respond to your posts. Sorry.
The Old Man only had a flush, and I won, of course. My purpose for posting the hand was because a couple of people asked me why I hadn't raised. I was dumbfounded (it happens a lot), so I thought I would poll the 2+2 people. Thanks.
While I made an extra bet because the Old Man didn't know what he was doing, I find it difficult to play with this type of player (level 0: only considers their own hands and cannot process information from the play of a hand).
Check-raising on 6th street. I considered it, but I have all but discarded check-raising, at the 5-10 level, for purposes of getting more money into the pot. I have to be very very sure there is going to be a bet. Since I wasn't sure the Lady had a flush and was concerned she would take the opportunity to check behind my paired door card, and since I hesitated, briefly, thinking about check-raising, I just bet. My fear was that I would give my three opponents a free draw on 6th and an easy muck on the river.
Not playing the hand in the first place. I can't take serious issue. In my defense, I limped in for $2 on third street with no chance of being raised. On 4th street, I checked and called after three players came in. If anyone had shown any speed, I was ready to dump my little hand. I might have played the same way in a 20-40, but I don't think it likely the other players would have let me tag along (what was the guy on my right doing with his Ace?) Maybe he was on a draw, but I'd have been out of there if he had popped it.
Thanks, and again I apologize for the delay.
Tom D
"That's not the main point though. The group of hands well above average is much larger in Omaha than in Holdem. Holdem has only four or five hands that are really head and shoulders above the rest. The Omaha equivalent group of hands of AQo, JJ, TT, AJs is much much larger."
One major difference is that premium Omaha hands gain in value as additional hands call, while many strong holdem hands lose relative strength in large fields (of reasonable hands) due to the Horse Race concept. In Omaha, since you're drawing to the nuts, you want as much of a crowd as possible. Heads-up, Omaha matchups tend to be closer than most holdem matchups. Even an overpair is not that strong heads-up in Omaha when the opponent has a connected hand whose outs aren't dominated.
I can agree with that, and as a result I do a lot more raising out of the blinds in Omaha than I do in Holdem.
Okay, what you say is true, but those are the absolute extreme examples. In the range of hands that people are likely to play the gap is narrower. More to the point, the punishment you take for calling with weak hands is usually not as severe. For instance, calling a raise by AA in holdem when you hold AJ is devastating. In Omaha it's rare that one hand is completely dominated by another like that.
You write, "Asad9s7h versus KsQh7s6c is a 2-1 favorite before the flop ..." How do you make these calculations with an Omaha hand -or- what source can you point me to for the explanation? Thanks for the good insight you've given us all on this @#$% game.
Are these correct:
5-10 .50 ante 1 bring-in 10-20 1 ante 3 bring-in 15-30 2 ante 5 bring-in 20-40 3 ante 5 bring-in 30-60 5 ante 10 bring-in 40-80 10 ante 10 bring-in 50-100 10 ante 15 bring-in 75-150 15 ante 25 bring-in?
What are the rakes/time charges? oops, guess maybe I shoulda posted this on "Other Topics"...
"Overpairs, pairs of any sort are a weak Omaha holding. Pairs don't dominate in Omaha. That's a Holdem concept."
Pairs don't dominate, ace-high flush draws do. There's a big difference between AcAs2d2h vs. 8d7c6d5c, as opposed to AcAd8c7d vs. 8d7c6d5c. Heads-up, a lot of your wins against a high pair come from making two pair. Other than real trash like trips and quads, most hands have decent two pair potential, and so don't do that badly heads-up even against premium hands. (AdAcJdTc vs. Ks9h5d2c is probably not much worse than 2-1, and the odds are probably closer to 3-2 for a hand with live flush and straight draws.) In multiway pots, hands that have nut potential (high pairs, suited aces, and straight runs) will do far better than hands that don't.
"Dan's making this up as he goes along"
-an intern, when I was teaching people in the office how to play Omaha
"Omaha hands much more *often* dominate other hands when it is important, post-flop. Asad9s7h versus KsQh7s6c is a 2-1 favorite before the flop, but is an even bigger one $-wise post-flop because of how their strengths match-up. The disparity between these two hands is bigger than 2-1 in actual money play."
This is the key. Hands that can be played strongly and where you can more accurately evaluate the situation will have much greater value than their showdown results. Middle pairs and king-high flush draws win showdowns, but have very little *playing* value. A hand like KcQd7c7d probably has decent showdown value against most fields, but I doubt it would ever be profitable to play. (Like A9o in loose-passive holdem.) I would much rather have 7s6h5s4h. (Which is similar to 44 in loose-passive holdem.)
"Dan's making this up as he goes along."
-an intern, when I was teaching people in the office how to play Omaha
Thanks. I've been using the free hand analyzer for hold-em and stud, but it doesn't include Omaha.
I was talking about pre-flop. I agree with you completely that there are a lot of ways in which you can be dominated by another hand after the flop. I alluded to that in my other message when talking about where the EV in Omaha comes from.
One concept I have trouble with is when to raise with the second best hand, especially when it's possible I might have the best hand.
For example, consider a 15-30 game where on fifth street I have trips against a possible flush, and there is one other player in the hand. There is about $80 in the pot. The player on my left has (? ?) Qh 10h 10c and checks. The player on my right has (? ?) 4s Ks 10s and bets out. I have (6c 7s) 8d 7c 7d.
I put the player on my left on a heart draw, but there are several other hands he might have. The player on my right could have a flush, but might have only four spades.
Is this a spot where I should raise, hoping to make the player on my left fold? Or should I just call?
Nick,
I would raise. The ptl will probably fold unless he has an Ah. Now if he drops and flush will probably just call maybe stating that he doesn't have it yet. Now if he reraises you back then I would just call and you found out he more than likely has the flush. IMO the raise is worth the money and if you catch and win the rule is you have to take the money.
paul
Badger,
What would you suggest to a person whose never played Omaha high-low do to get started? Beginner book? Starting limit at one of the LA casinos? Whatever you suggest.
Any help appreciated, Don
I've only been playing poker for about 7 months, and I started out with Texas Holdem.However I would like to learn to play any form of poker well. I have read Ray Zee's book on high-Low-Split Poker, and since played in one game of 7CS8.
The game I have available to me is spread limit 1-5, with no ante. I played for about 5 hours and had huge swings in my bank roll the entire game. Is this normal for 7CS8? Also are there any strategy changes I should make do to the lower limit, and no ante?
Thx for any help
you wouldn't take a card off three to a low straight flush that caught an offsuit K on 4th? even just the straight or the flush with the low and i would take a brick. i there's no antes, but people called some bets on 3rd. i want wouldn't give up a good chance to scoop.
scott
when you play tight with loose friends and win the money soon the friends will resent you. there is no way around it. if you want to maintain a decent relationship you will have to play much looser(in their minds only) call more on third street as thats where they notice it. always bring special treats to the game that works(poker players are gluttons). push some straight and flush draws very hard. they will see that as betting on the come. you will see it as getting an overlay on your draw. even bet on 6th street with a draw against a bunch of people. its a break even or less bet that wont cost much and they will see it as a gift. or if you dont care about the heat, play tight and win all you can and soon not be welcome.
Ray,
The tone of my original post was much more of "I've got this tight table image, how can I best take advantage of it." You're response was much more of "You've got this tight table image among loose friends, here's how not to lose your friends and continue to be welcome." Thanks for the reminding me of the other perspective -- that these guys are friends first, poker players second. I have thought about not wanting to be a "poor sport" in their eyes, yet I also want to balance it with playing "good" poker. I like the compromise you suggest -- call more often on 3rd, and pursue the draws more than I otherwise would. Thanks.
Talk loose and friendly. Play tight and deadly. "Social occasions are warfare conceiled".
jon i have run into this exact same situation. listen to ray zee. the tight agressive play is great in the card rooms. in a home game with friends it pays to loosen up as ray suggests. i always go to fourth street now in our home game, no matter what i hold. good thing because i don't think i would still have a home game to go to.
I have a PL 7 stud game available to me on the weekends. Ante is $2, bring in is also $2. Any advice on how to play this variant or on any books about PL stud?
Should this game be more or less profitable than $10-$20 stud with $1 ante $3 bring in? I imagine more, but I have zero experience with it.
Thanks in advance for any help.
if the game is at all agressive or loose it will play so much bigger than 10,20. you need to do alot of thinking about it or you will get creamed. some general tips wont be enough to help more than a little. if you understand potlimit then you will do ok.
Poker is played for money. If you consistently win money from people that are your friends you will soon have ex-friends. Unless they are special friends that understand why you win thir money. Z gave you advice that would change the way you play to show your friends that you are one of them. That won't work. I will repeat it that if you consistently win money from friends you will soon have ex-friends. If you want to keep these friends as friends explain to them the reason that you win. Explain to them that you have been studying stratigic and tactical poker concepts. Explain to them why this gives you an edge in your poker sessions. Then play your best game against them. You do them no service by keeping them as friends by chaning your style of play and you do yourself even less of a service for changing styles to suit someone else. I could go on but that's probably more than what you wanted to hear.
Vince.
I dont agree that changing your style of play to make your friends happy is the right move. First of all, all 7 or 8 guys in a game cant all be considered friends. Probably one or two are true friends and the others you just know from poker and wouldnt even be invited to your wedding were you to have one.
Secondly, regardless of how you play, the consistent losers in the game are still going to lose every week and will quit eventually because they are tired of losing or tapped out.
So basically playing looser or not winning as much will not benefit the consistent losers and keep your "friends" happy, it will just put more cash in the pockets of the guys who finish right behind you in the money.
As for how to take advantage of your image, it seems that you can get away with some bluffing and stealing, at least as much that is possible in a home game. Either way, get as much money as you can now, cause the game will break at some point eventually whether you see more cards and play looser or not.
Gambler
Here, everybody that plays DID come to my wedding. I tried to do what Vince has suggested, but to no avail. It is a strange situation. Everybody is playing for "fun" (its a chump-change game -- the only way I will play with friends; plus we are all fresh out of school). Yet it is a competitive game, and we all track our winnings and take full advantage of bragging rights. I think most of the guys understand that I am playing sound poker, but they see it as stifling their fun. I think their emphasis is more on the social aspects, too.
The other complicating factor is that I am the driving force behind getting the game together every month. I don't want people to get the impression that I am herding the lambs into the slaughter. But I have no other games to play, and I enjoy playing with my friends and for low stakes.
I think I will try to educate my friends, and then loosen up if that doesn't work (at least for a while).
You, my friend, have the right attitude. You will not lose any "FRIENDS" over a poker game. If for some reason you lose a so called "friend" for something that occurs during a poker game you will have to wonder whether they were a true "friend". I have high standards when giving my "friendship" to another. There must be "high" cause for me to disavow that friendship. Losing at poker is a silly reason for losing a much more important thing than money. A FRIEND. The force be with you!
Vince
BTW - The force thing , I don't know, must have been in a Star Wars mood. I'm not religious so I didn't want to say God Speed so...
Ihave a similar situation in my game. I am the driving force in bringing it together, and the only long term winner. IN order to keep everyone happy, I play just about every hand on 3rd in stud, and pay to see the flop in omaha and holdem. The only hand I fold are the 72o and (2T)5 rainbow in stud. Since there is very little raising on the first round you are getting almost infinite odds to call and see the flop/next card. This is what I do. You advantage over your opponents will be in having the discipline to let go of you medium hands (8T) 5T that dont play. You friends will not focus on you folding all the time, and they will assume you are "playing" just like they are.
Also, I give a lot of S+M theory and advice at the table to my friends, IF they ask questions. I believe I can play better than them even if they know as much theory, so it slows down the rate that I get their money, but they also feel better about the game. Plus, as said somewhere else. It doesnt matter how much you know, only whether you play correctly.
Todd
Badger,
I played my first ever session of 7CS8 or better at FW on Sunday. It was expensive. From my obsevation and reflection, your advice is right on tthe money. One thing though I believe that all but one (exceptional) of the players at my table played poorly. 7CS8 or better offers many opportunities to the knowlegeable poker player to win big. The problem as I see it, with my very limited experience, is the tedium you aptly describe. Those interested more in instant gratification than grinding best stick to Holdem. Not that Holdem's not a grind it's just a much faster grind.
Vince.
That game is usually not playable at Foxwoods, due to the idiotic no-ante spread-limit structure that makes the game a total rockfest. The Trop in Atlantic City spreads the game with normal stud ante structures at 5-10, 10-20, and 15-30, and the game is thriving there.
Even more than Omaha-8, you really need some loose players to make this worth playing. If a large fraction of the hands are heads-up between a high pair and a decent low, there's virtually no profit in the game. Unless there's multiway action on most hands, go play something else.
When there are bad players, this can be the most profitable game at the lowest variance. I think the variance in stud-8 can be lower than Omaha-8 for an expert in a loose game (Iceman hides from Badger) - in Omaha-8 you raise preflop with a large fraction of the hands you play, while in stud-8 you usually don't have to commit much money until your hand is better defined. In stud-8, there are more frequent freeroll opportunities against bad players. While in Omaha-8 it's easier to get a more exact appraisal of the situation, it generally isn't hard to make the right decision on later streets in a loose stud-8 game. And the partial information helps a lot in terms of knocking players out/keeping them in.
I agree that most Omaha players in your typical 3-6/6-12 game currently being spread in LA are "truly dreadul" but why is it that you never find, or rarely find, top Omaha players sitting in these games?
It seems to me that you can pick up $500-600 in a 6-12 session much easier than you can sitting in a 20-40 Hold Em game or even a 20-40 Omaha game (of which there are basically none now in LA, except during tournament time). Yet these games are never filled with people you would put at the top of a "Best Omaha Players" list. Why dont these players sit in these games and take adavantage of the dreadful play? Or maybe they do and i am just missing it.
Gambler
<