![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
I was just talking with a couple of friends who I have been playing poker with for the last couple of months (since I have been reading up and participating on this forum). I've been playing tight, not as tight as I probably should, but clearly tighter than everybody else at the table. They seem to think every game is 7CS No Peek (hyper-loose, no starting requirements, lots of bluffing). My success has been very good.
Both friends shook their heads in disgust at the way I've been playing. I was accused of only playing "can't lose" hands. I expected this. I get looks of incredulousness when I fold on 3rd St. One friend knows that he plays with more skill than I because he uses "card selection" (whatever that means) and bluffing. He's been the biggest loser so far.
Anyway, I've got the image, over multiple sessions, as the tightest player at the table. In the past, ante steals and bluffs have been completely ineffective (I've watched the others attempt) because they only reduce those in the pot from 5 or 6 to 3 or 4. Heads up is a very rare proposition. However, given my image I think I should test the waters with greater frequency. When I stay in, I get comments like, "Oh, he's gotta have something big." Or when I take a pot "Jon never stays in unless he's got a full house." These comments are made seriously.
In addition to attempting more steals and bluffs, I don't want to get to a situation where I can't find callers for my drawing hands.
Comments?
Jon, I agree with everybody but R.Z. whom I admire for his work (which also gives a small perverse satisfaction...). Don't adapt your game to make your friends happy. They know the rules and will certainly not make any concession if they knew better about poker theory.
I believe you can share what you have learned through this forum or books with your friends. I am sure that they will be interested to know how and why you play better than them. Buy them DS's or MM's books with your next winnings. You'll then have real friends with whom you can openly discuss poker theory. Believe me, that's great. On top of spending quality time w/ your friends, you 'll improve your game.
Anyway, good luck, even though it is not about luck..
i wasnt saying it is a normal folding hand. but the hand is only average against a bunch of opponents all of which have some kind of a playing hand. you will be out of position most times in the hand and will have playing disadvantages. certainly if your kicker is bad and one of those is out as well you must give thought to folding. in low limit its hard to get it headup, but sure if you can then the raise is a must. happy hollidays
Should this hand still be mucked against a bunch of opponents who will play most of the hands they are dealt?
Crazier Pinapple Hold'em? Lunatic Pinapple Hold'em?
My completely-unsubstantiated-by-knowledge-or-experience thought would be to follow Omaha high rules, modifying playable hands based on what your discards will be...
... because this is pretty much how Omaha plays, in effect, if you stick with good hands (without the backdoor options that might occur from runner-runner). The flop tends to knock out cards you'll be able to use, except for the strongest 6-way hands, so in effect you'll only be playing a 2-card hand after the flop hits...
Mix in a little video poker theory (discarding penalty cards) and you probably have a start???
For non-frenchies who never heard about aviation, I believe Aviation came from Aviation Club de France on Champs-Elysees where this game is played. I've never really liked the game but had thought about it a little to limit my loss when Aviation is called.
I don't think playing it with Omaha high rules is appropriate. You end up with a HE hand so you don't need to have all 4 of your cards working together. You can check an unraised flop with only 3 cards working together.
It is usually wrong to discard a high pair card in order to draw for flushes and straights since you'll probably end up short-handed (either after the flop or the turn). The point is that I've seen this game played pot-limit only, thus your implied odds are even worse for flush-straight draws.
I would raise pre-flop with AAJs or better, KKQs or better from any position, and would certainly fold anything less than AAxy in early position. Generally speaking, I would see the flop with smaller requirements than Omaha high starting hands but with (much) stronger requirements than any HE combination starting hands (to avoid facing 2 pairs on the flop with my high pair).
Chouch, I stand (sit?) corrected. I agree, this becomes 3 card Omaha (since the flop is the important part, when you move from 3-card to HE hand.
However, the Omaha Hi concept of all cards working together still applies, although more limited. As always in HE, hi pairs are good, but not as strong as they normally are.
Since more cards are out, more risk.. plus, more chance people can fill on the flop and attack your AA with their 2 pairs... as you clearly stated in your reply.
Easy E, I should have nuanced my reply. You're right, omaha hi rules still apply, but to a smaller extent. My main point is to avoid drawing hands unless flop is real good. Still, having more than 3 players after flop is rare (because the game is unknown and tourists just fold preflop) and pot-raise will almost kill your implied odds. So having connectors and suited cards is less important than in O hi, knowing that you're disciplined enough not to chase draw hands in that game.
My conclusion is that aviation doesn't pay often (maybe only when you have AA and pot raise preflop to collect the blinds), slows down the game because of the discards, thus hurts your hourly profits and should be avoided. On the other hand, people calling that game might be good fish in other games.
I'll be in Paris next week and certainly at the Aviation Club de France. Wanna join?
Browsed 7CSFAP a little and once again came across this advice. With two overcards behind you it is better to just call and see what happens.
What is the reasoning/math - math/reasoning behind this.
As an example: bring-in, 2 or 3 fold, you have split tens with something like a 7 kicker, there is a J and Q behind you.
I would almost routinely raise here and see what develops. I don't like calling here. I don't like calling when first to enter period.
Can you please elaborate.
I don't think you are reading the book correctly. Here is what we say on page 43.
"When you have the two nines (no matter what your kicker), one reason to consider raising with two overcards behind you is if they both fold you might get to charge a bad player with a smaller pair. Of course, this assumes that there are additional players behind the overcards.
But suppose you have
5c 5d 3d in this same situation. If you are going to play, you should only call, and folding is probably the correct option because getting the big cards out does you little good if a hand like two sixes stays in.
If there are three or four cards behind you higher than your pair, usually fold. Consider calling only with a high kicker or if your kicker is a straight flush card that's very live on both straights and flushes. (Or if you are in a game with a very high ante.)"
Perhaps you can give the exact reference and I'll try to address it.
Maybe a call then reraise to achieve headsup status or a call and fold if you think headsup is unachievalbe would be advisable in this scenario, but to raise and play muti-way is almost suicidal and to raise and fold is an unnecessary waiste of a bet. In stud no one play is correct for all situations but if you start with a call in this scenario 80% of the time you are playing closer to correct then to raise must of the time.IMO
"In stud no one play is correct for all situations but if you start with a call in this scenario 80% of the time you are playing closer to correct then to raise must of the time."
Drone,
This response is not meant to be harshly critical just a point for discussion. It is true that no one play is correct for all situations. However if you say that a call is correct %80 percent of the time you set the strategy for situations like this. You are saying that when you have a pair of T,s with a weak kicker and two overcards behind you that a call is correct except in a few situations. That, IMO, is just not right. In fact the correct play in the majority of situations like this is a fold. The exeptions will usually lead to a raise. A call is the third best choice here. I must make it clear that I am referring to mid limit stud. The limit David and Mason write about in 7CSFAP. In high limit stud, with a high ante, a raise may be the number one choice, but I'm only guessing there because I don't play high limit. In low limit stud with a lot of expected callers a call may be the best play.
With mid limit in mind you want to be in the lead when you enter a pot that figures to go heads-up. If you raise here and get reraised, or just called by an overcard, you are likely to be heads-up but behind. With a weak kicker this is a potentially disasterous situation. The worse thing that can happen, David and Mason explian this extremely well, is that you make two pair that are under pairs to you opponents high card (likely pair). A horrible situation in which to find yourself.
Vince.
Vince
"I don't think you are reading the book correctly"
Yes I believe you are right. I might have gotten this idea from an earlier version or some other source. In any case it seems to me that there is a good number of players who try to employ this strategy. (or so it seems to me)
Same scenario. Low card brings it in... two or three folds, and you are first to raise with a pair of tens.
There is a J and a Q left to act after you. One of them reraises and it comes back to you heads up.
Now..the BIG question...When do you give it up and when do you call?
Most would agree that with an A or K kicker, live and hidden in the hole, you have enough to call to fifth street and maybe to the river.
7SFAP seems to recommend calling as well with a straight flush card as kicker..like say 9sTs/Tc...although if the raiser has a Jack showing and has a probable pair of Jacks it hurts your straight chances and I'm NOT going to get into the merits of the two-flush again...you all know my feelings on this topic! ;-)
Seriously, I'd love to hear from some experts on this decision. What would be an easy fold?...and easy call?
How about a reraise.. ???
We all now the "nightmare" here to make Ten's up and lose to Jack's up.
Please make you answer specific to the stakes... I am thinking of 20/40. At 30/60 or 80/160 is there more to consider?
I hope to hear from Ray Z and others on this one
Good Luck
Jim Mogal
the main problem with folding is that good players see you fold after raising on third street and they will raise you back without the overpair. now you find yourself raising into overcards and then being outplayed. as the antes get higher in relation to the bets you natually call more. in smaller games or spread limit games it becomes an easy fold because of the small starting pot. i love a player on my right that wants to win the antes or protect his hand but isnt willing to go to the river and play a big pot.
Ray,
Surely you're not saying that you will NEVER fold in this situation in a higher stakes game (say 80/160)
In spite of the fact that "good" players will see you fold when the J reraises...isn't it still correct to fold if you "know" that the player who raises you in this situation will not raise unless he can beat a pair of tens?...especially if you do not have a good kicker?
Obviously, knowing your player is of paramount importance in this case. If it's a player who I've seen make this reraise with a three flush or some other hand that cannot beat a pair of tens it becomes an easy call..and I'll "take a stand"
Good Luck
Jim Mogal
I think I can get away with folding some of the time in my game. I also think that with my image in my game a call is definetely not as good as a raise. But I wonder if in a higher limit game with much better players it will swing for me. You said you like a player to your right who likes the antes but is unwilling to play a big pot and go to the end. I uderstand a player of your caliber Ray likes every player on his right but what if you knew that this particular player will play a big pot and will go to the end would that make you think twice?
Well actually I don't mean "you you you". I just mean a solid 75-150 player.
I don't consider myself an expert but I will offer a response. If you elect to raise and are reraise and you have a live 2 card straight flush then you would call the reraise on third street. Ray makes a good point about others taking a shot at you if you fold here but if you don't show your hands they could not be certain that you were not raising with a weaker hand so although I agree with Ray it is not the primary reason for calling. Let's look at 20-40 Stud. $3 ante 5 bring in. $29 in the pot when it gets to you and you raise. Now a $49 pot. Your opponent with a J reraises. $89 pot. You are now getting ~4.5 to 1 to take a card off with a live hand. No need to look at the number of cards that can help your hand. The pot odds are high enough to take a card off in this situation. I said no need to count your "good cards" because you may not be able to determine precisely what will help you and what will hurt you with this type of hand. The best thing to do is to take a card off and then play the hand as it develops. Of course I call in this situation but don't like my hand. For 30-60, probably the same answer. I don't play 80 - 160 but I imagine the correct third street play is to call or reraise with foding a distant third. Reraise may even be preferrable.
Vince.
Vince.
Vince,
I have one small quibble with your 4.5 to 1 pot odds.
How often will a player call the reraise on third street and then fold on fourth street.
Probably less than 5% of the time..when something really bad happens like your opponent pairing his doorcard.
My point therefore is that when you call the $20 raise you are "virtually" committed to another $20 on fourth street so its not really 4.5 to 1, its closer to 2 to 1.
Many stud players will make this calculation that they are getting 4.5 to 1 odds when in reality they are not.
Good Luck
Jim
My 4.5 to 1 reflects the odds you are getting to show some form of improvement on 4th street. Once you get to fourth street another estimate is needed. That said, your point about fourth street is well taken and certainly a factor in the decision process. Have a great Millenium.
vince.
A "great Millenium" I'm not sure...I'd be grateful for another half century.
Regards
Jim
Pessimist!
Vince.
Not 2-1 if you go to 4th. 109-40.
I didn't say 2 to 1, I said it was CLOSER to 2 to 1 than the 4.5 to 1 which is often quoted.
Jim Mogal
This happens a lot in the 10-20 games. I feel the play is determined by the knowledge of the other players. The knowledge of these players is even more important than the odds at 3rd street.>BR>
In a tight game, I will raise almost always with T's and a big kicker(> what is showing). Most players I play with know that so, I will often (depending on position and up card) raise with T's and a low kicker. Most times I win the antes or get head up with a straight or flush draw with a high card, otherwise why would he draw to a straight or flush head up? I consider it about a 15% hand. If I pair my door card, they will most likely fold. If I get trips I am in the driver's seat. If I get nothing, I might get a check. I win a lot of antes that way. That's nice because the rake on antes is virtually zero.
I raise because I want people out. I raise because if I get called, I'll probably loose. If called, I make my decision based on (1) who called (2) the cards out (3) my guess of what people stayed with. There is no absolute except if there are 4 people to speak and 2 higher cards, I will always fold.
If you get caught steaking antes, the good players will crush you. Change tables when that happens.
In a loose game I will folds about 90% of the time
Does anyone has any comments on these programs? Which is better?
AceSpade asked me to review their programs, and sent me free review copies of the Holdem and Omahi Hi programs. So I was predisposed to giving them a good review.
Unfortunately, I couldn't. The software is slow, the user interface is bad, there are very few features (very little customization, no simulation modes, etc). But most importantly, the advice the program gives is horrible, and the players play very badly. They try to imply accuracy by giving you actual EV results for folding, calling, and raising, but this is a gimmick, because a little math quickly showed me that their numbers are completely bogus.
I refrained from publishing a formal review because after I sent my comments to the company they promised to re-write parts of the software. But I haven't heard anything more about that.
Until a new version comes out, my advice is to stay far away from their Holdem and Omahi-high programs. I have not seen the seven card stud product.
Thanks Chris, I expect that "live" poker is the best way. I have played some Holdem on line and it sucks most of the time. Everyone stays. Everyone is broke. I simply have not tried Paradise Poker, and frankly do not want to go on line with "their" software. If a company lets me play without downloading their stuff to my machine, then I'll try.
Probably easier to drive to AC (60 miles) and play, but for now the Turbo is OK. I suppose you can configure it to play tougher and see if the advisor changes. Mabye I'll document some problems and approach Wilson Software with suggestions, but probably I'll just do nothing as usual.
I have all the turbo programs and I think they are invaluable tools. The thing is that you must understand the limitations of their use.
Turbo 7CS is a great way to get experience and play stud before risking real $$. It does have its limitations though. The players on the computer are not really that good. I suggest setting the computer to randomly bring in (and seat) new opponents so you do not unconsciously "learn to beat the computer". Also, do not pay attention to how individual profiles play. Treat each hand as a "theoretical situation" for you to analyze, but keep in mind that some skills are only learned in live games (such as reading people and tells). Consider that in live games the same situation might be played differently against different opponents. use the programs to get good at calculating pot odds vs. your chances of improving or of having the best hand, and making such decisions quickly. This way you will spend less mental energy "calculating" while at the table and more mental energy watching the players.
Chris I think is right about TTHE being a better overall program, but both are still well worth the effort to practice on.
The advisors (on all wilson's programs) are just flat out wrong SOME of the time. If you can clearly identify the times when they are wrong, then you are gaining the skills necessary to evaluate such situations when they come up in real games.
The bottom line is that the programs are fun to play and useful for learning, but you must understand their limitations and use them properly.
Dave in Cali
" Your example would look like this A3678 is 87,631. A4578 is 87,541. Thus 87,631 is the lower of the two numbers making it the lower hand."
Acid Forum Returns
87631>87541>87321>76543>76542>76541>65432>65431>65321>64321>54321
Paul
I confess. Been doing too much citric acid to fight colds, etc. 87,541 really is the lower number.
Florida Sunshine Acid will get you every time.
paul
Folding may be the correct play 56% of the time, but you are only saving a couple of bets when you are right, and forfeiting an entire pot when you are wrong.
Touche`. We are playing poker to win the highest possible amount of money not the highest number of pot. Leave that to the tourtists and the amateurs.
That would be true in pot-limit, but is it still true in a very loose limit game?
If both games are loose-passive, I would think your positional advantage would be greater in limit holdem than in limit Omaha High. When several players see the flop, players out of position in Omaha High have much more information on where they stand than players out of position in holdem. Having the button preflop in holdem allows you to escape domination or manipulate the pot size; the advantage of the button preflop in Omaha High is smaller.
Positional advantage is only useful if you're actually in the hand. And Omaha High gives you a much better chance of actually being in the hand, since there are many more playable hands before the flop.
I'm completely with Badger on this one.
Sox, You may not care for my inexperienced opinion (compared to DS and RZ), having never played without qualifier in real (read: casino,not home) games, but... why let THAT stop me?
As I understand/see it (in my very limited experience), the big difference is that with S/8 the strong low hands aren't as strong (as they were without the qualifier rule) for several reasons:
1) A fair amount of hands will be counterfeited- you don't get the guarantee of the low with the freeroll high anymore as you used to with non-qualifier. 2) You're up against more people (compared to old S/8, from what I understand) who feel they DON'T have to play the "play only for low" rule... and don't get punished for it as easily (See also Ray Z's comments in 7S8FAP) 3) High-only hands can put a more pressure early and on 4th than non-qualifier setups, especially since they have some decent possibilities to scoop and don't have to worry about 9 and 10 lows splitting half. Thus THEIR aggression against your 4th st. brick is not punished as much as it used to be.
Thus endeth the barely-experienced opinion of a low-limit player. I await the improvement/fleshing out and/or chastisement of my simpleness from the Big Guns of 2+2 (and others)...
Non-qualifier is a game to fleece suckers. With a two-way low hand, you have a complete freeroll against a high pair or Razz hand. The qualifier makes the high hands much stronger, and puts a balance in the game. You often (not always) have to go to the river with your two-way low draws, or with the high hand you're playing against a low draw. If the game is played well, the high hand applies a lot of pressure on third and fourth, forcing lows to put in a lot of money before their hands are really defined, and raising the variance considerably.
Look for a post from Izmut F. a few months ago about this comparison (original on rpg- i moved it over here with Izmut's okay). He bought the AceSpade program and basically buried it with his evaluation.... which was an unbiasd evaluation, from the reading of it. Izmut compared Turbo HE vs. AceSpades HE, as I remember...
This occurred after someone was spamming the heck out of rpg and 2+2 about AceSpades, which pissed both of us off because they weren't saying anything significant or offering real proof.
Having now purchased almost all of available Wilson products (factor that into your bias evaluation), I'm a big fan of Bob's stuff. Upgrades are cheaper, also, compared to AceSpades' posted prices.
My recommendation (never having seen anything but AceSpades' website) based mainly on Izmut's eval is go with Turbo.
I am using Turbo a lot. I have adjusted the players and made some "typical tables". The advisor is actually better than I thought. I think that the program makes one think about playing. It has pointed out some errors and traps that I sometimes fall into. Considering the cost of our computers, our line charges and other computer relatse stuff, the $90 for Wilson 7CS is worth a shot. At the very least it's fun and entertaining with no crashes. It loads on the hard drive. Not copy protected (Have one on my machine at work and at home). The Wilson people deserve a buy. (unsolicited, don't know the wilson company, and I am rather critical of most software)
Looks like this forum doesn't keep messages that far back so I'll just take your word for it. I found "Sozobon Seven Card Stud" on the Internet and am going to try it out. It is free. Any comments aout it?
yes Jim i stand corrected its really two bets if you get raised back. now to correct you. it was a jack and a queen behind you. big difference. i hope all that carribean sun hasnt done too much damage.
Sorry Ray..that was a typo on my part..I meant to say J AND Q ...I would still raise here with a pair of 10's.... If I'm first in I am still favorite to have the best hand.
Greetings from the year 2000
Jim
Six players are in for four bets with no 2-flush on board. If the opponents are at all rational, you are likely facing 98 and a straight wrap in addition to some low draws. I agree with you that "extra outs" are important, and that many players don't give sufficient consideration to their value. But in this specific hand, I would attach very little value to that pair of eights. An eight doesn't give you exceptional equity here, and you might be losing to 98 or to a straight or flush on the river. (If the board was K84 rainbow, that's something else, or if fewer people took the flop.)
In a recent Omaha/8 session, I won but not based on the following hand. In the Big Blind I held KKTJ and got in without a raise (a mistake?) with three others. The flop came KAA. I bet to feel out the field and got two callers. I figured each of these held an Ace, but probably not with the K. What I didn't realize at the time is that if one caller held Axyz and the other Abcd, then there are 18 OUTS that can beat me. Thus, with two cards to come I was a full 2/1 underdog, even correcting for the slight chance of the fourth K.
The last two cards were blanks, 9 and 7. I bet the turn and river, got one caller who beat me with Aces full of sevens. I guess I was not raised because he may have feared I held AK or A9.
Question: as the supposed 2/1 underdog, do I check the flop and give them free cards, or bet and face the eventual consequences.
Maurice - I like your bet on the flop. Once you get two callers after the flop, it looks like you have two opponents with aces. Good (but frightening) information.
I don't think you should bet the turn. Wouldn't anyone without an ace have folded after the flop? Well, maybe someone had 2,3,4,5, but, if so, they will probably fold to any bet made after the turn and are no threat. You may not be quite a 2 to 1 underdog, but you are an underdog for sure. (If your opponents have another common ranked card besides the aces there are 14 outs against you).
However, after you bet on the turn and get two callers, now, if there was any doubt at all in your mind after the flop, it's certain that each caller has an ace.
Therefore, you definitely shouldn't bet the river. Your bet is neither a bluff, nor a semi-bluff, nor a value bet. What are you trying to accomplish by betting on the river? Would you call if raised on the river?
After your fine bet on the flop, you got good information. But then you didn't use that information. What you did was like having a hypothesis, doing an experiment to test the hypothesis, and then not relying on the results of the experiment when making your conclusion.
Or perhaps you hadn't thought about this particular scenarilo beforehand. Perhaps you didn't realize until afterwards that when there is a pair on the flop, more than one full house is common in a full game. If you don't have (1) a pair higher than the pair on the board and matching another card on the board, or (2) a card matching the highest card on the board plus a card the same rank as the pair on the board, then you probably shouldn't lead.
However, I must admit that I have done the same thing, as if caught up in a momentary trance.
Buzz
You are not quite 2-1 since they may duplicate cards. How you should play this hand depends to a large degree on whether they are capale of raising without a full house, what they will call with on the end if you bet, and what they will bet on fourth st. if you check. Basically this is an extremely complicated situation. On the other side of the coin, against most players, the strategy of betting until you are raised and then folding if you are, will usually be close to optimum.
Does anyone know of a decent lowball program that could help me preprare to take on live lowball games in LA? I am a strong holdem player but I have almost no lowball experience.
If you are running a Mac, the iPoker shareware has a lowball game. I don't know if it would serve your purpose. It's modifiable, but you have to mess with it a little to get the set-up you want.
Thanks, but I have a PC.
TWIMC,
Playing 5-10 .50ante 2bringin. #3 brings it in 4,5,7 drops. #8 calls, I raise #1, #2 calls, #3,#6 drop, and 7 calls. I'm in #1 seat with Qh2c/Qd, #2 passive tight (PT)has xx/Ac, #3 xx/4d tight, #4 xx/6c drops, #5 xx/9h drops, #6 xx/8s drops after raise, #7 xx/9d drops, #8 xx/7h loose aggressive (LA).
Three way 1,2,8. I get a Qh2c/Qd2s, 2 gets xx/AcTd, 8 gets xx/7h7d. 8 bets out, I think for a second and decide to raise. 2 drops and 8 calls. Fifth street He checks on 5 and I bet. Qh2c/Qd2sJc, xx/7h7d5c. Sixth street Qh2c/Qd2sJcJh, xx/7h7d5c3s. I bet he drops.
Thinking after this might not be a bad ploy to use sparingly in the right situation. Especially if you want to get head-up and you have a passive tight behind you. Even if door 7's has trips at least you know right away when he raises you back, in this situation I would call, but with just Q's I think I would also call.
Paul
i tend to do rather poorly when playing against an opponent who pairs his door card. especially with one pair. probably worse with two pair as i may go farther and lose more. i guess i might have played on with queens up but i think id play the crying call game here.
I would have thought this is a raise or fold situation (even more so if you only have one big pair). If you raise and are reraised, a fold would be in order. If the 77's call as in this case, I would bet again and fold if check-raised. It seems this strategy would be less costly than making crying calls to the river.
I think something like this comes up alot in low limit, and I think it revolves the read of the 7's. Normally, in a higher limit or NL game, I would drop assuming he probably has trips (no 7's showing, he called my apparent queens). Your raise combined with his call and his lack of a check raise would tell me I (you) had the best hand. If he raises you back, do you call?
I am a low-limit 7CS player. My opponents will often semi-bluff when they pair their doorcard, but will not follow-through with a reraise unless they have trips. (They would often wait until 5th street to raise with trips.) Therefore, I would fold if they three-bet me on 4th street...unless my out cards were live and I was feeling desperate!
TWIMC,
Thanks for your answers. I normally wouldn't raise into the 7's, but I felt if I called PT would of called also. LA was betting freely for about 2 hours winning some pots on the last card catch system (LCCS). If LA reraised me I think I would of called, since we would be heads-up. If PT called my raise and LA raised then I'm definitely out. If PT called my raise and LA called then it's a dogfight to the end. My theory was to take charge of the hand if PT dropped and LA called. It happened in this case and I'll be sure to post the next time it backfires.
Thanks Again Paul
Paul: It's a good play against certain opponents. However, against the maniac or tricky/good player who can/will reraise without trips, Ray Zee's crying call method is the best.
In this particular situation, you raised for information, and if you are re-raised you should muck. If you are not going to use the information you paid for then call it down instead of raising.
Fred
Is Ray Zee's crying call strategy (against a good/tricky opponent) significantly better than folding on 4th street? Would it still be superior if one of your four out cards was dead?
IMHO it would still be right to make the call if two or three or even all four of your cards are dead!
There are enough chances that Queens up is the best hand to justify calling to the river.
By the way I wouldn't feel as strongly about Jacks up or less...but Aces, Kings or Queens up deserves to be handled in the way Ray Z recommended regardless of whether the pair cards are live or dead.
Good Luck,
Jim Mogal
MJS:
It is my experience that a good player will bet his paired doorcard regardless of what he has in the hole. Just enough to keep you guessing
Fred
My feelings too if he is in early position and has not shown weakness. If he does, and everyone folds except 1 player, he have some interesting decision to make that will effect future hands. Play to the river? Fold if other player pairs?
Why not come down to AC in March and give a talk at the At-Large seminar. Might be nice to hear something new.
What you might try is a conference call. I've thought about it, but can never find anyone who is the same speed as I so when I took a lesson from David it was Private. I made sure I got it on tape though.
When you think about it, you really don't need to have a good Poker teacher in sight. You just talk and go over your weak spots.
I also took phone lessons for No-Limit and Tournament play from Bob Ciaffone, which were very good also.
What about Mason and Ray? I’ve been very impressed with the information Ray has been giving about Stud recently. Hopefully, this guy at least puts some more of his knowledge down on paper before a Bear eats him!
I take it that Mason is just too busy?
Later, CV
I think Ray's info is straight and to the point, somewhat of a pragmatist. Ray seem more like a high limit guy, probably out of my range. Dave is the theorist and "what if guy". Mason looks like the #2 math dude and writer. All 3 make up a good group. Frankly, I had in mind a seminar attended by a lot of people like a scientific meeting style. Probably never happen because of too many egos (not necessarily those of the participants as much as the organizers)
For Omaha H/L, is this probably the best book I should get? I have about 50 to 100 hours in the game. Thanks.
Yes. And he hates me.
paul
thx Pf ilu
How much is an autographed copy? heheh.
BobA928674 was the last s/he to have his book signed by Z. If you want to become a statistic as UKW boba928674 be my guest. The phrase below may help you decide because this is your last place of residence before surgery that you will remember.
"The first place on earth that your new life will begin will be when the light first hits you as it passes through the half-moon slot in Ray Zee's Outhouse."
Good Luck MM
paul
Ray's book is good and you'll probably want to get Bob Ciaffone's Omaha Hold'em book as a suppliment. If you order it directly from Bob he will autograph it.
Michael,
ray zzzzzz's book is great and a must have. However, it is orientated for the tougher high limit games. For low limit Shane Smith's book will help you get ahead of 95% of the field. I do believe Mason helped correct some mistakes in the earlier edition and now it is at least a fair book (right up there with the Lee Jones Holdem book - oops!).
P.S. To ray zee: Why did you combine this book with the stud split book? You could have had two different books and sold them for almost as much but more for both. Then you wouldn't have to live in a cave and could afford child support for Brenda what's her name baby.
Ok Thanks. By the way, I've read Lee Jones Book....OOPS! And also Theory of Poker by Mr.Slopansky. It really helped me learn how to badger my opponents.
Well I ordered the dang thing today. Man that hurts, as tight as I am. Do you offer the same $400 money back guarantee as another fellow I know?
MM,
"Man that hurts, as tight as I am." The operation will cure that too.
fep
To put an end to this dreadful thread, (which I started), I liked Theory of Poker, and I'm sure I will enjoy the Omaha H/L book also.
just leave your address and my friend kazinski will write you.
I played about 6-8 hours of 7cs hilo friday night. The game is 1-5 spread with no ante. I played extremely tight, probably to tight I think I prob played a total of 8/10 hands the entire night. I have a question regarding a couple.
first Q?-- I was dealt rolled up 6's, one other player had come in after the bring in. I raised the max $5, and both players folded. I showed my hand to an frien before I threw it in, and he strongly suggested that I should have slow played this hand. Is he right? I'm used to HE, and tend to always bet trips fast, is this something I should change?
Second one seems easier. I had a made low on 6th street, another plaer has 2s3h4s5d showing, the high hand bets he calls, and I fold my low. On 7th street the guy with the apparent low folded his hand when it was checked to him. Did I do the correct thing by folding?
thx for the help
since there was no ante you may want to let someone in with 3 sixes. if you are only going to play one hand an hour against such bad players you are costing yourself money (profit). the second one is easier. you probably should have gone out sooner facing the wheel cards with just a low hand. if your low was a seven or better you may want to call on 6th if the player was one that could have most anything in the hole. by 6th street there was a bunch of bets out there and it would be hard for me to fold for one more with no indication i was beat.
I read with interest your post regarding selecting Omaha High in a dealer's choice because of the greater value of position in that game. I was wondering if you would recommend that I should make the same choice given the following information about me and the game:
Typically 5-7 players, very loose, tends to run in streaks between passive and aggressive (probably more aggressive). Stakes typically 5-10.
My discipline level: High
My math skills: High
My memory skills: Average
My people skills: Average - I'm good at not giving out tells (I'm neither an "actor" nor a "lamb"), but I'm weak at picking up other people's tells.
In casino play, I played (4-8) holdem almost exclusively for about 2 years and was moderately profitable. In mid 1998, I read an article by Shulman which convinced me that O/8 best suited my skills. That decision proved correct as my winning rate in 5-10 O/8 is somewhat higher than in holdem. I have MUCH more FULL table experience than the rest of the players in O/8 and Holdem, but minimal casino experience in Omaha High.
The following is my advantages relative to the other players for each game in this Dealer's Choice game. "Knowledge" refers to my having read much more books/magazines than my opponents (and my access to forums such as these). "Experience" refers exclusively to short-handed play.
Omaha/8 ---- Knowledge Adv.: Large;;; Experience Adv.: Small
Omaha High ---- Knowledge Adv.: Moderate;;;; Experience Adv.: None
Holdem ---- Knowledge Adv.: Large;;;; Experience Adv.: Moderate
I don't know if this is relevant, but I'm also a tournament chess player - not quite as good as Harrington, but close.
Thanking you in advance for the advice.
If I could choose absolutely any game, it would be pot limit Omaha High.
I've been searching for a bankroll in So.Cal, for some months now. My bankroll is too small for the middle limit games, but the lower limit games are unbeatable due to the drop.
However, I think I might have hit on something by playing Omaha eight or better at the 6-12 level and below: Not only are fewer hands dealt, and thus, less money goes down the chute to the house, but you have better control over your bankroll because it is so hard to pick up four coordinated cards, and it is so obvious (in these games) that you are beat when you are beat and drawing dead when you are drawing dead. I have played O-8 in the casinos only a dozen or so times, and thus am certainly no expert, but I have only lost twice out of that dozen.
Is this the only beatable game in So. Cal that is spread below $10-20 and thus has a drop? Does it make sense that it might be, or am I just getting lucky?
(By the way, I think this game may be the most boring game spread in any house...but there are so many action players in this game that while it is very simple, there is no shortage of cash available for the taking.)
Chris,
I think 6/12 holdem is beatable for about $18 per hour and the 9/18 for a bit more so long as you play very well in loose games (which you must work at to stay in) but your SD will be very high.
With a small bankroll, Omaha H/L is the nuts. There are many who can beat it at the 3/6 kill level for $15 per hour or so and the SD is very low. BTW, always look for the loosest game. Each loose player just adds to your EV in an almost linear fashion. And your swings hardly go up at all (unless it is crazy pre flop).
Regards,
Rick
I had exactly the same experience and have been playing 6/12 O/8 for about a year with steady success. There is something about the very structure of O/8 that begs many players to play poorly. I attribute this to the fact that many O/8 players have recently came over from Hold Em and thus look at a four card O/8 hand as six Hold Em hands. This is a serious flaw but nevertheless a common one. Most players are also way too loose after then flop. I have no idea how long this wonderful sitation will continue, however.
In order to stay on course, particularly after losing sessions (which I DO have), I consult my copies of Zee's dissertation which I keep at my livingroom chair and at my bedside.
Yes, this used to be quite popular at 4-8 in Gary, Indiana when the jackpot was big. There were 3 games going and some 10-20 too. Very poor play. Sadly, I think the whole thing is dying, there's never more than 1 4-8 game, and no 10-20 anymore. This is with a $5 rake + $1 jackpot drop + tip at the 4-8.
Has this happened elsewhere? I saw that the biggest games in Joliet and Aurora were H/L split, is this still true?
"....playing Omaha eight or better at the 6-12 level and below: Not only are fewer hands dealt, and thus, less money goes down the chute to the house, but you have better control over...." HANG ON a sec! Given the drop in a low-limit game hurts your finances BUT, if you're a good player, you want to see as many hands per hour as possible ....which raises your hourly potential and cuts down on the snooze factor.
I'm still a bit suspicious about a)0/8 smaller variance than holdem. And whether it really has a bigger EV if you play correctly.
I sued to play a lot of low limit 0/8 and all but gave it up as I started doing much better in Holdem and Since o8 is so slow it seemed Id never make up for a bad hand for a long time.... It seems you win more often in 0/8 but alot of the time you win a split pot. It is often very hard to scoop or 3/4 an opponent(s) and this is where the money is at...
I think the game going slower hurts your "EV" if you are a good player, you want the game to be fast as you shoudl be theoretically be winning more money per hand thus more hands is more EV.
NOt only is Omaha slow bc everyone has 4 instead of 2 card but no one eever seems to remember what the y have. the flop comes play a has to think for a minute and realize what he has. Maybe Im tainted but this cam be infuriating when youve waited forever for a poetential scoop turn the nut flush w/ an uncounterfietable low draw and the board pairs and you lose mega!
Then everyone is playing so slowly you realize ho w much longer you have to wait for another hand you can play...
I was wondering if people who play both games have stats to compare HE to O/8 or even stud...
A few questions regarding the lower limit (3/6-6/12) Omaha games being spread in California:
1)How much should a player make to be considered successful? one big bet per hour on the average? more?
2)What would one guess the biggest money maker in these games is earning? Badger said he knows of a guy who has been beating a Commerce game for $50 an hour for over two years. Is that basically the most one can hope to take out of that game?. And would that basically make you the top money earner without question?
By the way, it is true that 2/3 of the players in these games are horrendous. If you have patience and can mentally handle taking your share of bad beats, you have a big shot at success.
But that leads me to one last question: How is Omaha/8, if played right, any less boring or dull than playing hold 'em or 7 Stud/8 if played right? To me, none of them are a laugh riot.
ask yourself why you play...for laugh riots or money.
Thank you both for your input. Of course, I understand your choice of Pot Limit Omaha High because position is far more important in Pot Limit & No Limit as opposed to Limit. It would not really be practical for me to choose this in my game because of the modest financial resources of most of the players involved i.e. I might win big that night, but at the cost of killing the game.
This discussion of "positionality" of a game prompts me to ask the following question. I have seen in several sources the statement that O/8 is not as positional as Holdem. I have no reason to disagree with that statement. However, in one source I saw the statement that Limit Omaha High is not as positional as Limit Holdem. Do you agree with that?
Incidentally, the reason I don't name the particular source is that I get the impression that there is a certain amount of politics in the Poker world and it is not my intent to start any wars.
Regards, AX
If the Omaha High game is completely loose-passive while the holdem game is moderate, holdem will be more positional. Where I play, this is the case.
Even if the holdem game is very loose also, one advantage in position in holdem is that it gives you much more information than your opponents. In Omaha High, even in early position you know where you stand relative to having/drawing to/redrawing to the nuts. In holdem, where flopped hand and target river hand strengths vary greatly, the action in front of you gives you information on where you stand relative to the field. Early position players in holdem have much less ability to play their hands effectively.
There are more playable hands in Omaha High than holdem, and so you still might call Omaha High even though it has a slightly lower positional advantage (since the chance is so much higher that you might actually get to enter the hand and make use of that advantage).
I was searching for a place to play 7CS on-line and the only place where one can play for real money is in Costa Rica. Is it illegal to have an on-line poker room in the USA? Does anyone know what the legal requirements are?
Oh, I think I'd play at a Costa Rica site. Why not just go to a Mac machine in the Bowery in New York, turn your back, pull down your pants and take let everyone know you are taking out a lot of money.
I did not quite understood you irony. Are you implying that because they are a long way from here a. they will not pay you your winnings b. the game will not be fair c. someone might see your cards?
Would trust an on-line poker room operated in the US more?
Don't let the rat man scare you, John. I play at Paradise Poker and Planet Poker and have only positive things to say (because I am winning). If I was losing then they are no good foreign thieves and swindlers.
The rat man. I like that. Think I'll change my name to that. Go ahead play poker on the internet because someone you do not know says he is winning. How do you know I've been to Costa Rica? Because I said I was? Do you know me? Maybe I was only in Guatamala.
Fellas, you can play on internet poker sites in terriera del fuego or Othotsk, Russia for all I care, and I hope you all win, really.
Unfortunately, Planet poker has only Texas and I prefer 7CS. Only Paradise Poker has it. Connection is not that bad. I am just surprised that noone else offers it with so many online casinos.
The Sky is falling!These sites are completely honest. It is untihinkable that programmers would intentionlly design faults into their systems to increase the take of the insiders. Just as Las Vegas was totally honest always. Organized crime has nothing to do with gambling, never has and never will.
#1 the law would not protect you in case of fraud
#2 I've been to Costa Rica-love it for vacation but would not want it for internet poker. Our internet connections suck. Imagine the connections in Costa Rica. #3 I don't trust ANY internet poker
I've been playing poker in the cardrooms in Arizona for over a year now, playing basically every game they spread. I've started to play in the mix game here. Among the games they usually spread are hold'em, omaha hi and omaha8, any any (which is stud hi/lo without a qualifier), and crazy pineapple hi/lo.
I have always been quick at picking up any poker game and learning the basic strategies, i.e., how to win at it. But crazy pineapple just blows me away.
Does anyone here play this game? Personally i see it as a complete crapshoot, an equalizing game if you will. From what i can tell, if you are heads up, you should always call with every low hand if there's a low out since it is almost impossible to scoop both hi and low.
What are some general strategies that people have developed for this game?
An A is a very powerful card. "Don't leave home without one." The last time I played 3-6 with a kill I won $2200 in ten hours. I have never played again. I agree with Badger %100. I would also include holdem hi-lo on this list.
Do not play high unless you have at least 2 pair on the flop. Low doesn't come as oftenas Omaha(fewerCards) good starters can both ways. Big pairs go down in value unless you strip before the flop.
4 handed stud, with the following players:
Player A, loose and aggressive, fairly good player, but tilts easily and goes crazy, likes to gamble.
Player B, solid pro, tight and somewhat aggressive, but fairly unimaginative.
Player C, me.
Player D, very loose, passive, a big loser in this particular game at the time.
3rd street is as follows, A: (??)Kh, B: (??)6c, me: (AhAd)9c, D: (??) 9s.
B brings it in, I raise, D calls, A folds, B reraises, i rereraise, D calls, B calls.
At this point i put B on a pocket pair higher than 9's, as this is the only hand I've seen him play this way.
4th street: B: (??)6c4c, me: (AhAd)9c6s, D:(??)9s2d.
I bet, both call.
5th street: B: (??)6c4cQc, me: (AhAd)9c6s4h, D:(??)9sd2dJd.
B bets, I call, D calls.
6th street: B:(??)6c4cQcAs, me:(AhAd)9c6s4h3h, D:(??)9s2dJd5c.
B bets, I raise, D folds, B calls.
At this point I'm sure i'm in the lead. The only hand i was afraid of out of B was QQ in the hole, and obviously he would have reraised with that.
7th street: I catch Qd, no improvement.
B bets out, I fold.
What would any of you have done differently?
By George, I would have called him on the river. Your Aces, as you said are probably best. QQ in the hole is bad, but since you hit a Q on the river, QQ is less likely for him now. With the odds you are getting from the pot, I would think that a call is warranted.
Player B, solid pro, tight and somewhat aggressive, but fairly unimaginative.
Player C, me.
Player D, very loose, passive, a big loser in this particular game at the time.
I think you should look at how B played the hand and see how well he played and then replay your hand but let him dictate the betting. You might take on his style of play for this type of game.
Paul
"Player B, solid pro, tight and somewhat aggressive, but fairly unimaginative"
You show: (xx)9c6s4h3h
You put this solid pro on a pair higher than 9's and then you reraise. What do you think that he put you on? You raise again on 6th street. Yeah you might have him beat but do you think he does not know what you have especially when you are showing what you are showing. What are you representing?
A lot of fairly unimaginative pros will try to pick your pocket here. But you might know better, I highly doubt it though.
I think unless you NEVER fold anything on the river you almost have to call him.
My guess is that you saved money. He looks like a flush on the river to me. Only 2 clubs out. He is not afraid of your possible straight. He was getting very close to correct odds to call with 4 clubs up to the river. The pro might have put you on aces unimproved. He could have busted if he figured you would fold with a bet from him.
Overall, I would have called and expected to loose (a crying call). I would have said, "see that's what happens with pocket aces--aces suck".
I would like to see his cards first since he made the first agressive move. He has to show first.
The exact hand i put him on when he bet was a pocket pair with a 4-flush. He is a fairly straightforward player and i don't believe he had it in him to bluff right there. And i'm hardly known for laying hands down at the river, especially in stud.
I actually try this same bluff occasionally, betting into someone on the river who would bet one pair the whole way and then fold it unimproved on the river, and it works often enough to be a good play. I've never seen this particular player do it before though.
You were getting 14 to 1 on your call. Can a pro resist 1:14 in a great bluffing spot against most? I don't know.
I would have raised on fifth street if I was pretty sure that he started with a pair and therefore now has(at most) a pair and a four flush ..(very small chance of three queens)
I would raise here because I think AA is still the best and I don't want the third player in the pot to continue with a draw or a small pair.
If I get reraised...I now know I was wrong in my initial read...and depending on the player I can give up here.
Good Post...what were the stakes by the way?
Jim Mogal
75-150
Another stud hand against player A from the previous post.
3rd street: me(AhTc)Ts, opp: (??)Ks
I bring in, he raises, i call. He raises the bring in 100% of the time heads up. I considered reraising.
4th street: me(AhTc)TsTd, him(??)KsJh.
I bet the max, he raises, i call.
5th street: me(AhTc)TsTdQs, him: (??) KsJhJc.
He bets, i call.
6th street: me(AhTc)TsTdQsQd, him: (??)KsJhJc4d.
I bet, he calls. At this point i put him on either kings up or trip jacks, the latter being more likely.
7th street: I catch 3d.
I check, he bets, i call.
The main question i had here is how to play the river.
if i thought he would now bet kings up or better which is usually the right bet here if the two pair checks i would check raise. most bad players would only bet if they filled up so you may want to check and call or fold. i would have played the hand much faster with two more bets early on.
I too would have played the hand faster with raise on 4th and 5th. By 7th street, I would not get too cute and probably check and call. I would not fold even if he bet, and I would not raise.
I was torched last week by quad 7's against Kings full (with 5's) on 5 cards. He got the last 7 on 6th street and did not have a full house, so he was chasing trip kings with trip 7's.
I thought about raising on 5th, but i decided to wait till 6th assuming he didn't catch a scary card. Do you think a raise on 5th is better here?
I couldn't raise on 4th because I bet...
re read your own post. you could raise on four and five. thats what id do. dont back off big hands unless you have good reason to believe you are beaten.
Ray,
What about third street? If the guy with the K showing will raise with ANYTHING heads up isn't it a good idea to make it three bets right away with AT/T ?
Again , Nice post by George, but it would help to know the stakes you were playing.
Regards
Jim Mogal
sure Jim if he will raise with anything id pop him back with att but to guarantee you play properly you must also pop him back with many other weak hands that you might not rather. it may be better to call since he wont have a perfect read on your hand and since he has the over card you can get run out if he catches big ones later on. also by reraising he will check to you and you wont be able to get a double bet in later when you really got him.
Ray,
You mention in your post that one reason for NOT reraising with AT/T against a K who will "raise with anything" is (in your words) "... also by reraising he will check to you and you wont be able to get a double bet in later when you really got him"
My point is that if he is weak and not really super agressive...he may not even lead into me on fifth street anyway...so I won't get a chance to raise him!...and if he DOES continue to lead...I may not want to raise since a pair of tens may no longer be the best.
If I think he will raise on anything with a King showing on third street, I think my best chance to get a raise in is right there on third street where his ego might prevent him from giving up on a steal effort that has gone bad.
I realize that this decision is very situational and depends on the stakes of the game (which was never stated in the original post) and on your knowledge of your opponents.
Regards
Jim Mogal
Jim,
Another stud hand against player A from the previous post.
3rd street: me(AhTc)Ts, opp: (??)Ks
I bring in, he raises, i call. He raises the bring in 100% of the time heads up. I considered reraising.
4th street: me(AhTc)TsTd, him(??)KsJh.
I bet the max, he raises, i call.
5th street: me(AhTc)TsTdQs, him: (??) KsJhJc.
He bets, i call.
6th street: me(AhTc)TsTdQsQd, him: (??)KsJhJc4d.
I bet, he calls. At this point i put him on either kings up or trip jacks, the latter being more likely.
7th street: I catch 3d.
I check, he bets, i call.
The main question i had here is how to play the river.
3rd street is as follows, A: (??)Kh, B: (??)6c, me: (AhAd)9c, D: (??) 9s.
B brings it in, I raise, D calls, A folds, B reraises, i rereraise, D calls, B calls.
A does fold if pushed. Jim you may have been able to drive him out, but as Ray states let's go to fourth street, this guy isn't going anywhere, so we'll wait and see. Reraising on 4th having trips makes more sense than reraising a K on third with T's. George didn't reraise here, so from this point on the hand is not the hand I would of played or Ray or quite a few players on this forum for that matter. When you don't reraise in this pos'n you subject yourself to the pair of jacks. That's alright if he paid extra to get them, but it's not alright if you let him.
paul not ray
When I am low, I usually decide before looking at my hand whether i'll reraise him if i play the hand. so it would be difficult for him to get a read on me. I found that this works well in disguising my hands since basically my calling and reraising standards on 3rd street are exactly the same.
I don't reraise him very often though, because he likes to overplay his hands, and I find that sitting back and letting him bet my hands is better than me raising him with a good hand and having him fold his bluff.
George
After reading this post and the one called "A 7 stud hand" I think you need to be more aggressive on the river.
If the guy raises 100% of the time, you can't put him on a hand. Just hammer him at every opportinity. Especially after you made the trips.
As for the pocket aces in the other post, I agree with everybody else. A check-call here is a must.
It's worth one bet just for your peace of mind. In other words, if it bothered you enough to post to the forum, you should have called.
Fred.
He had trip jacks that he caught on 5th street. I feel that the correct play would have been for me to checkraise the river, knowing that he'd bet if he could at all beat my queens up on board.
I'm going to help the games dry up.
Looked at some old records, and I'm averaging about twenty five dollars per hour in these games (but only after fifty five hours).
And sometimes I know I made a bad play...
I intend to get better.
There is almost no sense in even watching the hands you're not in after the first half hour, because in less than that time, you can get a pretty good sense of who plays poorly and why, who slow plays the second nuts to get you to bet the third, etc....
This also makes it dull.
Speaking of the guy who has been winning an average of $50 an hour for two years at 6-12, you said you attribute that to "extreme luck."
Can someone really beat Omaha for two years for that kind of money mainly due to luck?? And especially for the amount of time he logs at Commerce. (You said he always sits in seat 3, so I assume we're talking about the same person. three-letter name, glasses, bit of an east coast accent, lives in south OC now??)
And if he can win that much mainly due to luck, what would a top player do to that game??? Which leads me to this question: Why are you no longer playing in that game?? Allergic to easy money?? With all due respect, if this guy is beating the game, you would have to murder it.
However, you did say he was the devil, and that's pretty much the nuts.
is crazy pineapple the game where you play holdem with 3 cards and discard 1 after the flop? Is it usually played hi-lo?
Could you elaborate on why there is such a high "random luck aspect in crazy Pineapple.
thanks
Todd
My roomie came home last night from an Omaha/8 4-8 game, and we were discussing some of the key hands from the session. One hand in which my friend was not involved caught his attention, and he asked me to post the hand on the Forum for comments from the Omaha/8 fans about the quality of the betting from the hand.
Game was fairly passive for a change. The action is usally loose, aggressive, but last night it would be classed as loose, passive as the "shooters" must have taken the night off. Seven people limp in on this hand, but the key players were in the last three seats, and we'll call them A,B, & C. Flop comes down 8c-4c-4s. Action is checked around to A, who bets out. All 7 players call.
Turn card is the Qc, completing the club flush, but still no low. Checked to A, who bets again. B and C call but only 2 of the others fold. River card is the Js. Checked around to A, he now checks, and B bets. C calls, the other two limpers fold, and A calls.
It might have been usefull to withhold the actual hands to give everyone a chance to "read" what each of A,B, & C actually held, but as this post is a dissertation on the betting, I will give the hands right now. Player A had pocket 8's and my buddy couldn't remember what his other 2 cards were (not sure if he had a rough low draw). Player B had flopped Quad 4's, and he did not have a low draw. Player C had pocket J's as his main feature, also with no low draw. Questions:
1. Player A's bets on the flop and turn are pretty automatic, IMO. I personally like his check/call on the river, but would anyone have bet out the river and/or check-raised?
2. What about Player B? IMO he's guilty of leaving several bets on the table. Who would raise the flop with quad's, and who would wait until the turn? In this particular case, if he raises the flop, he probably loses at least a few of the low draws, but in this game, I have found the players will chase even non-nut lows in the face of raises, so who knows? If he doesn't raise the flop, how can he possibly just call on the turn?
3. At first glance, I was surprised Player C just called the river bet when he makes Jack's full, but thinking about it in more depth, it makes sense. From his point of view, that river Jack couldn't have helped Player B more than him, yet B came out firing. In fact, in the post-mortem, C said that he had suspected Player A of going for a check-raise. He was right in one respect; he was beat on the hand - he just had the wrong guy picked out. Personally, I wouldn't have made it past the flop. There are 9 small bets in the pot when it gets to him and he has what appears to be a 2-outer at best for possibly only half the pot. Why would I call?
Flame away, group.
I don't understand player C with the jacks full. He hit the perfect card on the river. If he can't raise at this point, how can he even call the turn?
Of course, I guess it's hard to assume rationality from a player who plays for a 2 out high, or thinks that J's up is really the best hand.
What a lovely game you have. Don't ever teach these guys to bet.
If i have aces full of kings should i fold? or bet? I often get beat by 4 aces.
Im confused
Always fold. The risk of quads is simply too high. Also, play at my table
Ratso's advice is especially true if the game is Omaha8 where most of your opponents will stay with any Ax where x<9.
I would be tempted to make a crying call if the river brought the last A, but if that was the case, you certainly should not be in to the river with AA on the board and KK in your hand.
Not that I know anything about omaha though.
Todd
...where's my fake id?
One other thing, what is it about stud/omaha/etc...that makes almost no one want to talk about its strategies, as they do with holdem?
Just looking at these forums, there are many times more posts about holdem than all other games combined, say 5 times as many or more. While, in card rooms, there are definitely not 5 times as many holdem players.
What is it about holdem? Personally i enjoy the game of stud infinitely more than holdem, and i was a holdem player almost exclusively for almost a year. Stud has so much more to think about, it seems that it also offers the greater advantage to the good player. Players tend to have more habits in stud and are often much, much easier to read.
I'm glad there are always many bad players that choose to play the high limit stud games, more so than I ever noticed in the hold'em games. Sometimes I think many of the pros want to play holdem because the toughest competition is there and they want a challenge. I don't know really. Who can explain this?
Speaking for myself, I would rather watch paint dry than play omaha 8 or better. That game (at 10-20) is ssssllllloooooowwwww and very bbbbooooorrrrriiiiinnnngggg. Stud fatigues me much much quicker than holdem due to the fact that I have to memorize what cards are gone and that my eyes have to roam all around the table (at the all of the other players' board cards instead of just the community cards).
Do you think that the average hold'em player is better than the average stud player, or vice versa?
Which game do you think is easier to beat?
Which game do you think offers the highest win rate to a good player?
According to Mason Malmuth in Poker Essays, omaha 8 or better offers the highest hourly returns relative to the risk ("bankroll requirements"). Check it out.
George,
>>Which game do you think is easier to beat? >>
I've been told at high limits it is different, but at 10-20 and lower, I find the skills needed are different. I can't read players as well as some people can, but I can count dead cards and do the math on the fly, so I have a better hourly rate at stud than I do at Hold 'em.
DJ
I think that there is more analysis in the holdem board because it is a lot easier to apply statistical analysis to holdem than stud. It is also much easier to remember the particulars of the hand. I think these two issues account for the bulk of the difference.
In addition, You could argue that it is easier to find the "correct" play in holdem that in stud, especially with the first two cards. Since there are shared cards you know what the nuts are, and how you compare to the nuts, how many outs you have to the nuts, etc. I am sure all of us have had full houses beaten on the river in stud, I think this ismuch rarer in stud that in holdem since the board can flop high pairs or trips giving multiple people huge hands (though not compared to their opponents huger hand)
I wish there was an easier way to analyze stud. Like "low 3 flush one after the bring in". But this is unlikely, since in holdem the flop makes you a complete 5 card hand in one fell swoop. It is easier to analyze your flush draw, than in stud when you catch an off suit on 4th, and you want to discuss what are the situations where you should play on vs. when to fold. I can be done, and DS, MM, RZ do a good job in 21century stud book.
But there is an opening here for more analysis, and I think it rests on all of us to try and take notes during our sessions, or remember the particulars of the hand in order to analyze them later. I will do that this weekend with some hands I played last week in Indiana.
Todd
One thing going against stud is that you get fewer hands per hour, so the casinos tend to rake these games more. Here in Canada, stud was almost as popular as Hold 'em at first, but the casino raised the rake to 10% to a maximum of $5.00 (this is for 1-5 stud). A 3-6 holdem game has a 5% rake.
It's very, very tough to beat a 1-5 stud game with a 10% rake.
I really wish Omaha High would become more popular. In my opinion, a good Omaha High player can make more money against a field of average players than a good Holdem player can make against the same field.
And yet, the variance in Omaha high is higher, so the fish still get to take some big wins, which keeps them coming back. And, you can play more hands without losing your shirt, so it keeps the average players happy.
Frankly, I think Omaha High is dying out because the rocks hate it (because of the variance), and these are the guys that not only start the games and keep them going, but they also have the loudest voices and complain the most when things aren't to their liking.
There is a $20,000 Jackpot at the moment, but it's only if Quad 10's get beaten by a better hand. This IMO makes Player B's play even worse. Even if A hit his 1-outer for the case 8, all that would happen would be a raising war, and no Jackpot.
passive is an understatement. I would check for pulses from all three players. I personally can't see what A & C are afraid of. There should have been at least one raise by each since they had big full houses. In the long run they lost a lot of value bets. Player B should have put in raises all the way in my opinion since in loose games the low draws will call.
I would have lost a lot more with A, folded C and made a lot more with B.
Hope I'm never drawing dead,
Albert
Player A is the dealer in 5 card draw Jacks or better. On the first round Player B,C and D all check. E bets and everyone calls.
1. Who gets their cards first on the draw. The player to the left of the dealer (player B)? Or the opener (player E)?
2. Who opens the bettting on the second round? Player B or E?
3. If in a home game I call this game when it's my turn to deal is it to my advantage to call a real small ante? Every one plays too loose. With a large ante are they inadvertenly playing better?
first player to the left of the dealer gets to draw cards first in all poker games of merit. also he would be first to bet after the draw. small ante hurts the loose players. jacks is a folding hand in jacks or better in most spots. if you dont understand the game well you would do much better with holdem.
Thanx Ray. I'm having a home game (next to impossible since the CT casinos opened) and I wanna pick the game that gives me an advantage right off the bat. I am a Hold'em player but a lot of the guys hate it when I call that game. Particulary the players in the blinds. They all like 7 stud and draw. So I figure I'll call draw with a small ante when it's my turn.
Is there a place (link) I can get a list of common poker rules that I can apply at my game? I checked my 2+2 books and could'nt find anything comprehensive.
id try the library as there are a bunch of old out dated books like holyes rules and stuff that gives rules for crazy games. someone else may be of more help as i know there are some rule books out there.
You might try Lowball (5-card draw where the worst hand wins). The dealer has a large advantage and the strategy is fairly simple.
I'm certain that if you do a search on the net you'll find a couple of thousand sites with the rules of popular card games.
Begging to differ.
JG
Could you be more brief? And after you are, with a response like:
Yes
Could you please then articulate your opinion?
Thank you very much for all of the great analysis on teh holdem board.
Todd
Sorry I was running out the door Friday. Here's a longer exposition:
1) I've made quite a bit of money playing crazy-pineapple make an 8.
2) There are definite strategic considerations.
3) Not everyone is aware of these, and there are definite variations in skill level.
4) I won't be goaded into sharing too much more as some of the people with whom I regularly play read this forum.
In summary, it is worthwhile to learn how to play this game.
JG
Alright, I might have my fact/perceptions/memories wrong here, and I have too short an attention span today to navigate the archives, BUT didn't someone dismiss the notion of beating 3-6 for $10 an hour and now is foisting the notion of aspiring to beat 4-8 for $30 an hour? Is this to be attributable to difference in money reapable in O8 visavis HE? If so I don't buy it. Once again, apologies if I'm out of it.
JG
Where do you play?
I know in Arizona, there are maybe 1 1/2 to 2 times as many hold'em games as stud, at the most.
For several months now, Lucky Chances in Colma has been spreading a pot limit Omaha8 game on Tuesday evenings (5-5 blinds)(in conjuction with a weekly limit Omaha8 tournament). I would like some advice from Badger and others about this game. I just don't see any sustainable profit in this game.
I have played once. What I gather is that the game only goes on for a while if there is a fish in the game. When I played, I actually won $700, but I realized I was a fish, so I quit.
I won most of that money on one hand. I flopped a set of Kings against three other players who had nut low draws, nut flush draws, and wrap straight draws. (And each of the other players had several of these at once!) I got everbody all in on flop, and made quad Kings, with no low. Whohoo. But I am not sure I did the right thing. (Maybe it was ok - I was getting 3-1 on my money, and they somewhat counterfeited each other, but paradoxically, if I was heads up, my implied odds would have been worse!)
For example, in another hand, a local pro flopped a set of Kings but never bet it. I flopped the nut low draw with a pair of Aces in my hand (no Ace on the flop), turned a set of Aces (making a low on the board), and rivered quad Aces (making him Kings full of Aces). He folded on my bet and said he was happly to get away from the hand for only 35$. If he had put pressure on my, I don't know if I could have seen the turn. However, he may have been taking into account that I would make "fishy" calls.
So, can this game be profitable, especially against fairly tough players? How would you play?
It seems reasonable to try to see a lot flops cheaply with good hands, but what should you play if there is a pre-flop raise to 25$ or 35$?
"So, can this game be profitable, especially against fairly tough players?"
No, unless there are total idiots in the game.
"How would you play?"
If the money is deep, just play extremely tight, both before and on the flop. Very few hands have call odds on the flop. A dry A2 or A3 is usually not worth playing preflop, and an A2 low draw on the flop with nothing else is usually a fold.
"This (pot-limit Omaha-8) is the lamest game ever. This is a contest in who plays tightest."
-Iceman
so your playing in a pot limit game that you dont understand well and are playing against good players and one of them folds kings full to you when you bet and you let him know you had him beat. how do you suppose to ever win in this game. not only do they play good but you tell them how you play. sorry to be so hard on you but it seems to be a recurring thing on this forum that many of our posters have to show how they play to their opponents then ask for advise on how to play.
Actually I never told him what I had. Remember, the low was out. I just bet, and he folded with the comment.
Foxwoods and the major Atlantic City rooms are about 75% stud.
Omaha/8 4-8 game last night. Game texture was fairly tight for a change, with often only 3-5 players seeing the flop. Much different than the usual style in this game where nearly everyone seeing the flop is the norm. Pick up T-T-9-5 rainbow in BB, a truly horrid piece of trash, but no one raised pre-flop, and on this hand, 8 players saw the flop of 8-7-6 rainbow.
Now I'm still trying to get more experience in Omaha/8, and reading posts here and RZ's book, I read about cases where you can flop the nuts but have to bail out. I realized that despite my nut high straight on the flop, my hand is very vulnerable. Any card 6 thru T is a potential problem, and I am going to get half the pot at best, but there are already 8 small bets in the pot; I do have 2 Ten's in my hand making it less likely that someone else also has the high straight; I feel I want to start putting pressure on any runner-runner flush draws, so I bet out to see what happens.
Six people call; only 1 folds. No raises. These guys seem to be programmed to not raise with nut low hands, so given the fact that no one raised, I do not feel there is another T-9 out there at this point. Turn card is Ad, changing nothing on the high, but putting a diamond draw on the board. I bet out again, and I caught a tell from the player on my immediate left. He hesitiated slightly before putting in his chips, and I read him to have made a nut low with a 2-3 in his hand. Everyone calls, no raises.
River card is Js. At this point, I am certain that I have the nut high by myself, but I was virtually just as certain that LHO had the nut low. Here is where I probably fell from grace on the hand. I checked the river, trusting my judgment that LHO had the nut low, and that he would bet out. I reasoned that if this player did indeed have the low, he should realize that no one else had a nut low, given the lack of raising on the turn with 7 people still in. Therefore,I'm thinking: "He bets, traps any 2nd or 3rd nut lows in downsteam, and I can get in a check-raise to increase my profit on the hand." Hand gets checked out.Oops. LHO had the 2-3, just as I felt, plus the added feature of a rough diamond draw. There were a couple of 2-4 and 3-4 lows, and I am not sure how much extra money I might have made if LHO had bet the river.
Now I realize I made a mistake on the river. If I bet out and get a couple of crying (low) calls, I will make an extra few dollars. I got greedy and got punished accordingly, but I have questions about this hand, and would welcome criticism from the more knowledgable Omaha/8 aficionados.
1. Was it correct to bet out on the flop? I wanted to start up the action, hope I would get raised, and 3-bet the flop to put as much pressure as possible on the draws. Or is this type of play -EV with this type of board?
2. Did LHO make the correct play smooth-calling the turn when he made the nut low? I would have raised to protect my holding, and try to force out any other rough diamond draws in case the flush came on the river, giving me chance for a scoop.
3. Is LHO's check on the river correct? If it is, then I clearly erred in not betting my high hand. If the concensus is that he should have bet out, then if my read on his hand was accurate,which it was, is going for the river check-raise reasonable, or still a bad play?
It is these little nuances of the betting in Omaha/8 I'm having trouble with, or am I trying to read too much into things?
with so many in the hand it pays to push it. since they are so passive and never raise you must bet all good hands out. if the players were aggressive i would be careful with the straight but with your group you can easily tell when you are beat. both the high and the lock low should have been jamming on the last two streets.
While a made high with no redraws on a flop with a low is nothing to write home about, in this situation you have a game where there are several people putting dead money in the pot on each round, hoping that their goofball 3rd and 4th nut lows will somehow be good. It's a feature of almost every pot you'll be in. In a situation like that, punish them.
Like Badger, I don't see a problem with going for a check-raise. Sounds like a smart, alert play to me. Most people with a nut low will certainly bet if it's checked to them. You just got unlucky.
I like your going for the check-raise on the river. It just didn't work. What amazes me is that when this situation DOES occur (you check, nut low bets, you check-raise), you STILL get several calls from the fourth low, trip sixes, two pair, etc. Even if they have to call two big bets cold. At least you had a pretty good handle on Mr. check-the-nut-low for the rest of the game---you certainly know he's going for high if and when he DOES bet!
everyone is preoccupied with the checkraise on the end. why do you think the guy will bet for you. Dunc said nobody bets and the guy with the nut low didnt raise on 4th street. why take a chance and give up the bets on the end hoping a bad passive player will bet your hand for you. there are seven players in there. just bet your hand and if they call thats great. if he decides to raise even better as some will call double bets cold and you can reraise again.
In an earlier post, some cited examples of people earning more than five big bets an hour in small O-8 games over the long run. This doesn't seem possible. If it is, what would be the explanation for it? Are the games that much better? Is it harder to get into the long run when so few hands are dealt? Does a good player end up with so much more equity in the pots due to the fact that your draws are often multiple (I find myself often in situations where on the turn I know I have the worst hand, but i am a favorite to take at least half the pot on the river)? Is it the Kill?
Just theoretically curious.
No way can anyone make that much money, even before accounting for overhead, i.e., rake and tokes, which by themselves are one to two big bets/hour, depending on venue. Certainly it may happen in the short run, but cashing out $200 ahead a couple of times in a row doesn't mean that you're some kind of poker genius and that you've got the game by the balls. The fact of the matter is that the unusual feature of o/8 is that more starting hands are playable in this game than in almost any other poker variant. This causes large fluctuations--much larger than other games at the same limit--and short-term good results may convince a person that he is the Jedi Master of Omaha and can somehow double or triple the earning rates of the top pros (as a function of bets/hour). Believe me, reality sets in eventually at this game as well as any other. Five big bets/hour? $40/hour at Omaha/8? No $^%$## way!
You may have Omaha-8 confused with Omaha high. Omaha high has a lot of playable hands before the flop. Omaha-8 has very few. To play O-8 correctly requires very tight play - certainly tighter than Hold 'em or Omaha Hi.
Though I agree that playing very tightly before the flop is almost all you need to do to come out a winner in these easy games, that is not optimum. If you are a very good player who can afford the fluctuations, you should play a bit looser before the flop, but still quite tight on the flop. Examples, play 2399 but be ready to fold when the flop is Q64 or play KQQ7, but be ready to fold if the flop is K87. Position, being suited, getting in cheaply, etc. can always swing things one way or the other of course.
Ok, given those caveats, do you think you would still play a lower percentage of hands than you would in Omaha High and Hold 'em?
I do play some of these hands when I don't think the pot will be raised, but even then it seems like the I'm still folding more than I do in 7 Stud, and close to what I do at Holdem (percentage wise)--per hour I play more hands at HE.
I wish I was a better player, because I will bet that KQQ7 when I make ks and 7s, even if I don't feel good about it. I will focus on this leak and try to throw it away from now on. I'm betting to protect sketchy equity in 1/2 the pot, which seems kind of foolish multiway.
I also can't afford the fluctuations, so maybe I should be throwing these hands away more.
I completely disagree that more starting hands are playable at this form of poker than any other. Fewere starting hands out of the universe of starting hands are actually playable here.
I think it is probably not possible to do as well as three big bets an hour even, but fluctuations in this game should actually be lower than at other games, due to the fact that it is such a simple game and people who play too many hands have so much the worst of it but are very prevalent.
A good player playing tightly can cash in frequently in these games. Players who play too many hands will experience fluctuations, and eventually a losing record.
Certainly this is one way to play....throw away everything that doesn't contain A2. It also is sufficient to grind out the bucks as long as you're playing against doofuses (doofi?). I feel that the optimum way to play is to see a lot of flops with marginal hands, but insist on the flop hitting the hand HARD...avoiding second-best when the bets get bigger. The huge implied odds in most O/8 pots make this sort of policy worthwhile. An example of the preceding would be playing hands with A3 in them....you DON'T play low-flops that don't contain a deuce. Of course, the above should be modified according to the looseness of the game.
Playing in a 3-6 game where i've seen 4 to 5 players call 3 bets on 3rd street more than once.
Low card opens for a full bet, next player makes it 2 bets with 8 up. I have split Qs mixed suits. I look left and it appears that 3 other players are going to call the double bet.
I know that against 5 to 6 players a pair of queens isn't a favorite.
What should I do? Reraise/call/fold?
I actually folded, and waited for a better start remembering I 3 bet a pocket pair of kings and got 4 callers.
You probably have the best hand...you should reraise and make other pay to try and outdraw you
But with 5 players against me - doesn't one of them figure to out draw me??
yea you are a dog to win the pot. but you are getting 5 to 1 for your dough what more could you want. if your hand is live its a go. follow Jim's advise he is good but buy our book.
thanks
Bob P,
My philosophy in this kind of game is to find another one, where just about everyone calls on third street and make a decision to play or not to play on 4th street cheaply. This particular game I would call with a pair of Q's and make my decision on 4th street. My experience in the LL games that I won the most was the call with playable hands and fold on 4th. To call on third and raise on 4th or call. LL games 4th street is more like 3rd street of a higher limit game for me and hopefully nobody at the table new that I was playing that way. Decide what works for you best and read books.
Paul
So, let's discuss those $25 per hour players, that's a great rate for such a low limit game...What gives?
I have no desire to sell my soul...
There are a couple of ol' timers in this home game I play in who always call 5-Card stud, first and last card down, when it's their turn to deal. They also call a huge ante; $1 ante for $1 to $5 betting. Is there anything published on this game anywhere?
I am tossing my first two cards unless I have a pair or 2 overcards to everyone else's upcards. Is this to tight considering that huge ante? I just can't see being aggresive without a pair. Is an Ace, straight or flush draw or overcards worth being aggressive with?
most people will lose big money playing small pairs in 5 stud. a few can make money with them. any game you dont play as well as the others play much tighter than them and you stand a chance. try winning poker systems by zadeh or how to win at stud poker by wickstead or oswald jacoby on poker. much of what is here is bad advice but will give you a foundation at least. if you use your head its more than enough to destry the old timers.
I agree. There only needs to be one fish. Especially one with deep pockets. I think you have to key: only bet when you have WAY the best of it.
Thanks! That makes sense.
It seems that the number one cause is the very nature of the game, and the fact that poor players don't understand that the action in o-8 is an illusion.
One should worry then about the games drying up, but the illusion is hopefully powerful enough to keep them going and to keep the bad players entertained. Even some people thoughtful enough to read this forum and think about the game seem to advocate some really loose play...which can only be good.
These guys have it in their heads to never, or at least almost never, raise with nut lows. They are deathly afraid of getting quartered. But in this case, as I mentioned, the guy on my left should realize that no one else has made a nut low given the lack of raising on the turn with multiple callers. At least that was my reasoning. However, in retrospect, I should have gone ahead and bet out on the river. Who knows, LHO might have spring to life and raised. If I got some additinal cold callers downstream, I could have 3-bet the river and made some additional profit. We'll never know, though.
I liked the play. In a loose game you would get a bet and several callers to raise into. In a tight game all but the nut low would fold if you bet. In the local games I play in they would know I had the nuts if I bet on the river, and they are loose enough they would bet out and I could check raise.
I added my last name now...still George.
Me and the same guy as the previous hand playing heads up stud:
3rd street: him: (??)Kh, me: (Jh2h)2c
I bring it in and he calls. I've found that when he just calls the bring instead of raising he usually (say, more than half the time) has a big hand. He really likes to slowplay big hands and trap his opponent.
4th street: him(??)KhAd, me: (Jh2h)2c9s
He checks, I check. At this point i feel he has either kings or aces, because it's very suspicious that he hasn't bet into my board.
5th street: him:(??)KhAdTd, me:(Jh2h)2c9sJs
He checks, I bet, he raises, I call. I still put him on kings or aces. The straight is a very slight possibility, but i believe he would have raised with (QJ)K on 3rd street and/or (QJ)KA on 4th street.
6th street: him:(??)KhAdTd2s, me:(Jh2h)2c9sJs3d
He bets, I raise, he calls.
7th street: I catch 7h.
He checks, i bet, he calls.
I'm assuming it's still 75/150
Heads up is a whole different animal...everything depends on your read of your opponent.
As far as I can see you played it perfect. You didn't give the result but I suspect you won against a pair of Kings.
Ray Z of course will give us the "real" correct answer when he posts
Thanks again for the stud post...maybe we'll get a 7 card stud site one day!
Good Luck
Jim
Well, I've been reading these forums for a few months now but hadn't posted anything until last week. I've already seen quite a few more posts since i posted these few hands, I wish others would do the same. Maybe that alone would generate more interest in this sub-forum.
Also, I assume he had kings, but he never showed.
I haven't been playing since mid November since I am living in St. Lucia where there is no game but I've been tuning into this forum eve