![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
I think you'd much rather be playing this hand against other high hands rather than two low hands. Chances are pretty good that one of the lows will get there and lock up half the pot. So you're pretty much fighting for 1/2 of a pot in which you are putting 1/3 of the money into. Often one of the two lows will make two pair/trips/boat/straight/flush to beat your hand which is a DRAWING HAND. Of course sometimes both lows will bust out and you'll scoop, but I think that's a rarity.
Personally I woulda dumped this hand on 4th street, especially with that round being capped. Once they both hit more low cards on 5th street things don't look too good. The only thing any more low cards would do is IMPROVE THEIR HAND(trips/two pair/straight).
Read Rays book if you haven't already.
DONT PLAY THIS TRASH HAND IN STUD/8. (EXCEPT WHEN YOU ARE LAST POSITION TO STEAL ANTES). playing the babies, starting with three low cards 6 and lower is a MUST in this game. YOU need to play low-hands that develope into two-way hands............
Wilsons Turbo Omaha Hi is pretty good, Omaha Hold'em Poker (Bob Ciaffone)
paul
Paul, Is this a reference to the software, or is there a book I don't know about?
Easy E,
To the software sorry for the confusion it's pretty good to run simulations and to play, although if you play make sure you use a tight field and run all your simulations with a tight field.
Paul
I'm looking to add some different poker games in my weekly home game. I was wondering about the different types of home games that people already play. Currently we have been playing Hold'em, Stud, Hi or Low Chicago, Follow the queen, Omaha, Lowball, 5 card draw - Jacks or Better - trips to win.
Any other games that make for good pots???
I think that seven card stud high-low is the best home poker game, and it certainly does make for some big pots if that's what you're going for. Some home games have a betting round after the declaration, but I recommend against it. It just punishes the weaker players, and they tend to get punished plenty as it is. If you do use a declare, make sure that you clarify what happens in cases where a high-low declarant blows it one way. What the ruling is isn't as important as having the rules in place before there's an unpleasant confrontation. Omaha Eight or better is a good home game too.
Since you guys go for silly games like Follow the Queen and Chicago, I was introduced to a game called Count Your Diamonds at a home game not too long ago. Ace of Diamonds counts 14 points, king of diamonds counts 13 points, queen of diamonds counts 12 points, jack counts 11, and spot cards count their spot value (e.g., 7 of diamonds is 7 points). Highest point count in diamonds splits with the high hand. It's probably not going to be introduced at the World Series of Poker any time soon, but it isn't a bad game.
FWIW, I think that Chicago is about the worst game there is. In poker, there are very few situations where you can achieve a mortal lock. In high-low stud with a declare, you can make a wheel, which gives you the lock low, but it's also a good but vulnerable high hand. Do you risk a sure half of the pot to win it all? In Omaha Eight, lock lows are common, but you always run the risk of being quartered. In high-only games, locks are rare. You'll get into a raising war when you've got a full house, and you may be confident that you have the best hand, but you usually can't be 100% sure, especially if you're as lousy as I am when it comes to keeping track of what people folded. It is this uncertainty that gives poker its excitement, in my humble opinion. In Chicago, on the other hand, the guy with the ace of spades is locked, period. The only thing left for him to do is to decide how long to wait before he starts jamming. There's no suspense. This game is as un-poker as a poker game can be.
I call this the idiot's special (after playing it a couple of times, i refuse to play it ever again):
Rules as in Chicago, EXCEPT a) Unless a person can scoop (no declare), the hand is dumped and the next person around table deals the same game, adding to pot b) Dump and deal keeps rotating until it gets back to the original dealer, at which point the "scoop or dump" rule is abandoned and it goes back to high spade/ hi hand splitting what is now a bigger pot.
So, you'd be betting trips, straights, even full houses (or not betting, actually) with no chance to scoop, so no point... VERY dumb version.
Try this: Pitch two after the flop (catchy name, eh?). Hi/lo split, with qualifiers (trips/87). Deal 5 cards to everyone. Bet. Flop 3 cards. Now you MUST throw away two of the cards in your hand. Bet. Turn card. Bet. River card. Bet. Cards speak. Pots can get big, and after the turn/river someone is usually bitching about throwing away the wrong two. Raucous ribbing generally ensues. No real dealer advantage, but usually lots of action. Try it; you'll like it.
There is a game we play sometimes at my home game called blastoff. Every player starts off with seven cards, it is played high/low. You get seven cards, then there is a betting round. Then you immediately pass four cards to the person to your left. Then you bet again, then you pass three more to your left, then you bet, then two cards, bet, then one card, and finally bet.
After all the passing, you arrange the cards in any order then lay them face down on the table. Then everyone still in the hand flips over a card, then there is a round of betting, then you flip another one, then bet, and so on till you determine a winner.
This game is buck wild, and makes for HUGE pots. I saw one of the coolest plays ever playing this game. Someone was going high (don't have to declare, but he had flipped trips already so ya had a good idea where he was going) And two people were going low.. both fliping ace, deuce, and trey first three cards. Fourth card, one of them turned over a five, and the other flipped a four. The one with the four bet and the other one was mad and folded, and showed a six high (pot was well over 100 dollars, playing 2 dollar limit during the passing, three dollar limit during the flipping) Then, when the one with the four pulled his last card, it was a Ten! Boy, was the person with the six high hot! He got the red ass like I have never seen before. Hope you try this game sometime, lots of fun!
7cs with a floater turned same time as 4th street card.
Elevator deal 4 or 5 cards to each player and three rows of 2 with the deck in the middle. Turn over the three rows cellar, 2nd flr, and finally the penthouse. Finally turn over the top card on the deck and u can use it with any row of two. Lots of action full house usually wins.
Zig-Zag deal 4 or 5 cards to each player and place 4 cards in the middle making a Z with them two on top and two on bottom. Turn over 1 at a time betting on each one top left first, bottom right next, top right next, and bottom left. Anything can win from a pair of K's to full house.
paul
Paul - What's a "floater"?
Buzz
Buzz,
Paul - What's a "floater"? It is a common card that can be used in making of your hand or anybody else that is in the hand. It makes if the best 5 out of 8. The dealer places it in front of him and turns it on 4th street, this usually makes a pair and therefore raises the cost of playing. Most people will stay to see the floater. In home games that's what you want because your usually playing for less than what you usually play for in a casino.
Paul
Here's a home game that we play a lot. Qualifier - 5 cards down to each player, 4 community cards dealt down. 1st community card turned up followed by round of betting in increments of one betting unit - let's say 1$. All raises must be in 1$ increments. 2nd card overtuned - 2$ incerments for betting (same for 3rd and 4th cards). Players can exchange one card with the one on top of the deck for the price of 5$ at the end. One last betting round of 5$. No declare - high and low split but high must qualify with a straight or better, low must qualify with an 8 or better. If nobody qualifies, the hand is redealt between those still in at the end. By the way, the start of betting rotates on each round of betting. Winning hands are usually a boat for high, and a 7 or better for low.
Mississippi is 7cs with the fourth and fifth cards dealt together and the last card face up. Great game even if I do say so myself (its my own invention) which is far better for PL play than 7cs and is also excellent for NL. Also much faster and more active than conventional 7cs when played with limit betting.
If you like the 3-2-1-1 structure of missisippi you might also be interested on some elaborations on it (which I also invented).
Murrumbidgee is mississippi with three hole cards dealt at the start (plus one upcard), proceeding the same way from there, ie with two upcards dealt at the second round, followed by the 6th and 7th one at a time, face up. Two, one or none of the hole-cards may be used at the end. Only six players can be dealt in at a time. Murrumbidgee is also an excellent hi-lo game.
Another good hi-lo game (which is not so good for high IMO) is a variation on courcheval, the French PL game: in courcheval each player gets four hole-cards and one communal is turned to start, followed by a two card flop, then a turn and river. In my variation two communal upcards are dealt in the first round, but only one can be used in each final hand. ie, you can use one for your high hand and the other (if you wish) for your low. Three upcards must be used in the final hand. Dynamite hil-lo game.
If you want to raise your blood pressure try pinatubo, which is a stripped deck game. From a 32 or 36 card deck deal everyone two downcards and turn one communal card: bet, then flop two cards, bet, turn a fourth, bet, then turn a fifth communal card. Also plays very well with three hole-cards: in both versions two hole-cards must be used in the final hand. Can also be dealt with a floating (extra) communal card on the first round. You won't know what's happening in this game when you first play it, but it is in fact a version of manila (same game with a 3-1-1-1-1 layout), which is popular in parts of Europe and which is the most popular limit game in Australia and New Zealand.
DAvid Z
KQT in fact has the same chance of making a straight as KQJ. With the first hand, you must catch AJ or J9. With the second, you must catch AT or T9. Both have exactly one rank you can catch to leave you open-ended. And as for high-card power, jacks don't cover much ground that tens don't already, especially in high-low. The difference in value between the two hands is negligible.
I don't think that his hand is all that mediocre a draw on fourth street. He has a (presumably) live open-ended straight draw with a decent flush possibility. There is also some chance that neither of the lows will get there, so he has some scoop potential. There is also the chance that he might back into something like a high pair or two pair that can win high anyway. True, it didn't work out in this case, but how many hands have you seen where a pair of sixes or Ace-high takes half? Happens all the time.
Yes, this hand can be trouble, but only if he gets married to it. He doesn't have to stay 'til the river if the other guys start jamming on fifth and sixth streets and he doesn't improve.
Ok ok In retrospect I don't think I should have jammed on 4th into the 2 low boards. However whoever said that they would lay the hand down when they could call and close the action on forth is fishing it up pretty hard. Also I am aware that Ray Zee considers 3 to a big straight flush a very playable hand.... and I mean come on fold that for a limp you are out of your mind. I must confess that when I was making this play I did remember the exact quote from the book that High unsuited straight draws are weak but when they develope they turn into "strong jamming type hands" and I figured well I'm 3 stuided with the draw lets jam. I'm still not sure did Ray mean when they develop into a 4 straight or a 5 straight. :)
You never said you could close the action, but even if you could, you are playing a weak draw for half the pot. Closing the action on 4th st is ok, but when both lows chach good, you should fold on 5th street. You are now playing for half the pot, with hand which will win less than 1/3 of the time.
It kind of reminds me of a line in Super/System.
When the pot was over, he asked David [Sklansky] how he would've played the hand. David said "I really don't know, I've never played a hand like THAT!"
While this is a hand I might play, I certainly wouldn't play it from early position without a raise. You don't say from what position you played it from. In high low, you just should not be playing these kinds of hands unless you have a good chance of stealing. It really is THAT simple.
Playing or folding on 4th street isn't that big a deal, but I honestly think that you misplayed *every* street, except the river.
- Andrew
But you like the raise on the river with big two pair? And you don't agree with Ray Zee that 3 big cards to a straight flush is a playable holding?
KQT in fact has the same chance of making a straight as KQJ.
Sorry about that, you're right. They both have LOUSY chances of making a straight.
- Andrew
Recently I was playing in a game of 2-10 stud Hi/Lo. After the river card I bet with no pair attempting to get half the pot. I was called by two players and the first showed a 6 low and the other play turned his cards over and threw them toward the dealer. I showed Ace high and the dealer is splitting up the pot. The player who threw his cards in says turn my cards over if he doesnt have a pair. The dealer had not mucked the cards so the floor had the dealer turn the hand over.
Fortunately I still won the hand. The next hand I commented that had I lost the hand the dealer would never have gotten another tip as long as I live. The dealer turned to me and said, "A mistake was made...Now shut up."
How would any or all of you have felt about a) the mistake or b) the dealer's subsequent treatment of the player?
"How would any or all of you have felt about a) the mistake or b) the dealer's subsequent treatment of the player?"
a. No big deal. Dealers make mistakes. I like people. I like dealers. I don't make disparaging remarks to them, even when they screw up. I tip them when I win a pot and when I leave the table as a big winner. I smile at them when appropriate. I think dealers like me. Usually if you like someone, they like you back. Usually if you respect someone, they respect you back.
b. I don't encounter disrespect from others. I don't think I would like to be treated disrespectfully.
Matt - From what you have written, the dealer has not treated you with respect. It's pretty difficult to establish or re-establish rapport when someone does not respect you.
Of the several things you can do at this point, I think your best choice is to behave as though the incident did not take place. Try to somehow behave in the future in a manner so as to gain the respect of others, if their respect matters to you. (From what you have written, I think it does.)
Just my opinion.
Buzz
The list of dealers I don't tip @ The Mirage is getting longer - just exactly for the incidence you describe - Dealers have a job - when they do it properly, they get tipped. When they talk back or don't pay attention, or can't read the board they DON'T get tipped. Isn't a tip for 'service'? Talking back to one who provides one's livlihood is not smart.
I was playing in a stud game at the mirage recently when a dealer "mouthed off" to a player (not me) who was a regular. I guess the problem is getting worse.
Pat
The six low only called? :^)
I had a look at my local card rooms rules, and I didn't see anything covering that period of time between when a player releases his hand and when it hits the muck. The one time I can remember someone saying, "hey, can I see what I threw away," after throwing his hand in, the dealer touched his hand to the muck before turning it over. It's my opinion that the player's hand should have been dead. Card rooms will sometimes make rulings in favor of people who might not have been aware of a rule so that they won't feel that they are being taken advantage of. I think that this was that kind of ruling.
The dealer turned the other player's hand over at the direction of the floor. The dealer had a situation he didn't know how to handle, so he called the floor over. This is what he's supposed to do. He should be encouraged to do this. The floor, not the dealer, almost cost you half the pot. I don't think you have any reason to begrudge the dealer. And I don't think your decision whether or not to tip the dealer in the future should be based on the outcome of the hand. If the dealer had made an error which gave a pot you shouldn't have won, would you now be tipping him then?
So don't tip that floorperson any more. :^)
Your behavior after the hand was no better than the dealer's, and, well, you started it. Telling someone you won't tip him again is distinctly confrontational. Now, he shouldn't have retorted, and he certainly shouldn't have told you to shut up, but we've all had those days. If I were you, I just might apologize.
The entire circumstance doesnt come up if the deal had properly mucked the players hand when it was thrown into the middle of the table. The dealer didnt and that was what I was upset with the dealer about.
As far as my comment after the hand was over, I was simply making it clear that dealer had made a huge mistake. Had the dealer simply said after turning over the player's hand, "hey, I blew it. Sorry about that and I am glad it didnt cost you the pot," I wouldnt have said a word.
I play in a home game where quite a bit of Omaha 8 or better is played and I'm wondering what the basic requirements are for coming in with a hand are. I play 5-10 hold'em fairly competently and I think that my knowledge of hold'em (and lack of understanding of Omaha) is really hurting me in this game. I basically play the hands that contain two cards that I would consider good in hold'em (like having a pair or A K as two of your 4 cards). Or cards that can make a good low like A2 or A3 as two of my cards.
Now in the game I play, pretty much everyone limps in before the flop, even if there is a raise, and most people go way to far with there hands. (these are not casino poker players).
I've started to notice that it often takes the nuts to win so I'm starting to be more selective of the hands that I play. I'm playing Axs so that I can make the nut flush and I'm not too worried about the low because it takes the nut low to win and that is split a lot of the time between two players.
So what kinds of hands do I need to limp in with before the flop and what do I want to raise with? I don't want to throw anymore money away in this game chasing the second best hand. Any suggestions?
Also, what are the best opening hands in O8? AA23 two suits?
Rob
Rob:
As Jack has said before me, you really need to get Ray Zee's book, "High-Low Split Poker for Advanced Players." It is simply the Omaha/8 book to master if you play and will continue to play this game for money. The game knowledge packed in this excellent book will equip you to play with the best in the game.
You can conveniently order this book in many ways including from the Two Plus Two publishing commpany.
Good luck!
I am an experienced Hold Em and Omaha High player going through the process of learning Omaha 8 or better. After reading Ray Zee's excellent book and getting some playing experience I have a few questions I would greatly appreciate help from forum members with. I was unsure as to whether premium Omaha hands should be raised in early postion in loose games where raising tends to inhibit callers who would usually limp with substandard values and make subsequent mistakes throughout the hand? Is the preflop loss on EV by not raising overcome by errors made by the limpers throughout the hand? In late postion when there are many callers in front of you what sort of hands are worth a raise? Would four high cards suited up be worth a raise for value or a big pair with connectors. What about a dry ace deuce with a suited ace? Another area where i was unsure of correct play concerned little blind play ? what sort of hands are worth coming in for a partial bet with several callers in front? would any 23 be playable? or 3 card high hands? Any help posters to the forum could give me would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Richard
Richard - "Would four high cards suited up be worth a raise for value or a big pair with connectors."
In my opinion, no, "four high cards suited up" is not worth a pre-flop raise (unless you are randomly raising pre-flop with any playable hand).
Try this: Choose any "four high cards suited up" you like. Take them out of a regular poker deck. Then just deal out flop after flop of the rest of the cards. I'll bet you won't see very many playable flops, probably about one in four.
Now ask yourself if you want to raise when three times out of four you'll be folding the hand after the flop, and the other one time out of four when you do hit a flop you like, the rest of the table will be already wary of you.
What it boils down to is this: If you miss on the flop your raise has cost you an extra bet. If you hit on the flop, your raise will make it more difficult to collect from your opponents on the turn and the river.
Although you can bluff it out some times, you'll go broke if you try bluffing it out very much in Omaha high/low. Why? Because it's hard to bluff an opponent who has the nuts or a good draw to the nuts.
Omaha is a drawing game. You're always on a draw pre-flop, and you're usually still on a draw post-flop. That all having been noted, I think you should sometimes raise pre-flop. Others undoubtably will disagree with me here, but I think the reasons for raising pre-flop depend somewhat on your opponents and are mainly tactical and intimidational, not because you have a good hand.
For example, suppose you have a dream hand like AA23 double suited. Raise before the flop and (1) your opponents will think you have all or some of that hand, (2) you'll chase away the very hands you want to continue playing against you, and (3) your opponents will be wary of you the rest of the hand. Is that what you want?
"What about a dry ace deuce with a suited ace?"
Probably the best two-card combination in Omaha high/low. However, remember that a four card hand has six such combinations. Even if you count the suited ace-deuce as two good combinations instead of just one, the strength of the hand also depends on the other two cards. For example, a hand like As2s9h9c seems mediocre, even though it has As2s and a pair of nines. Play it with a favorable flop like 6-7-8 and you'll be praying for there not to be an ace or a deuce on the turn or the river. When there isn't, you'll be quartered about one third of the time (in a full game).
"Another area where i was unsure of correct play concerned little blind play ? what sort of hands are worth coming in for a partial bet with several callers in front? would any 23 be playable? or 3 card high hands?"
You're out of position for all future bets when you play the little blind. Forget the amount you already posted; that's not yours anymore. You should have a hand good enough to compensate for your poor position.
Just my opinion. You asked. Hope it helps.
Buzz
there is always alot of trouble deciding whether to raise or not. in om/8 hands run closer so you can get away with less raising. but remember this. when you forgo a raise early in any game that as you say chases out most limpers, you give up alot more than you may realize. what you give up is alot of the equity you would have from the blind money in the pot. and most of all you lose the good chance that everyone folds but the blinds and then you get to play the hand against bad hands and have good position instead of playing a hand against a bigger field out of position with little knowledge of their likely hands.
Sorry Ray, but I have one little problem with your post. In low limit O/8 games is a preflop raise from early position going to limit the field to just you and two random blind hands? I don't think so, at least not in my opinion. In my experience a preflop raise from early position limits the field from 6-8 players to maybe 4-6 (in a ten handed game).
Having said that, I raise four big cards suited up because I like these hands (even though I agree with what Buzz says in his post about missing the flop) and it gives the added benefit of disguising your raises on great low/multi-way hands (AA23 type raises). In my opinion I think a hand such as KQJT double suited or KQQJ is worth a raise, but this is not a play I make consistently. By not raising these hands you get a lot of dead money in the pot by people who are playing cheesy low hands like 2467 (and people at low limits do play these hands), so when that high flop comes and hits you with a sledgehammer you've got yourself some nice free money.
- Mark Dodd
i was answering his post which said in the game he plays a prefolp raise limits the limpers. he didnt imply it limits them to 4 to 6. and for profitable events to happen they dont need to occur every time as sometimes just once in a while may be enough.
Sorry Ray, I was pretty tired when I wrote that so I must have missed that specific point. For some reason I thought LL O/8 and instantly thought of the yahoos I play with regularly. A raise means almost nothing to most of the players at the table. They come to play and that means they try to find a reason to play every hand. 6789 is a monster hand for a couple of these guys (in their opinions), I've seen them raise it preflop.
and in those games a preflop raise is only really to get more money in with a high value hand. but remember that position is important as it may not help drive people out but it saves you money or makes you some by seeing the action before it gets to you. still you will do much better by not building pots as often the high cards and pushing the good low type hands with 2 ways working.
Yah, in this game I usually only raise for value. Like you say I have found that position can save you and make you money. Another thing in your book that I've noticed is that it is better to be first or last rather than in the middle. Last preferably, then first and then in the middle. Getting trapped is the worst.
Would you mind giving a few examples of hands you would raise for value preflop in a loose game like this. Assume you are on the button, the game is 10 handed and 6 people have limped. If you raise you are sure the big blind will call. I think some examples would be:
AA23
AAK2
A234
AK23
AKQ2
But I would also raise hands like:
AAKK
KKQQ
AKQJ
KQJT
Are these raises wrong?
I'd appreciate some comments, and examples of any less obvious raising hands. I think that your advice on this subject could help my game.
you could raise with all the above and then some under the conditions you say. still the high hands do better on cheap flops as its hard to proceed often enough. with many players in, the extra low card in a hand is much more important. also high hands that only really make straights tend to tie often and get outdrawn alot as people playing against you are always drawing to beat you with a hand that has many outs.
Mark - Great posts with great responses from Ray Zee!
"But I would also raise hands like: AAKK KKQQ AKQJ KQJT Are these raises wrong? "
I think so.
KKQQ seems the best of the lot. The hand has fine scoop potential.
Yet, out of the 17296 possible flops, you really only like 1158 of them.
You’re probably stuck drawing to another 2824 flops.
You’re probably folding another 13308 flops.
Converting to 100:
You really like 7 flops out of every 100 (flopped quads, a boat, or a straight).
You’re still drawing to 16 flops out of every 100 (with trip kings, trip queens, or a JTX straight draw.
You’re folding (if you’re wise) the other 77 flops out of every 100 to any bet.
Assuming my figures are correct (no guarantee there, but they check) how do you show a profit by raising pre-flop with KKQQ?
Buzz
I'll e-mail you my 80 line, 4 column table.
Pat I think your opponent should have folded on 3. street and raised maybe on 6. street. Your play looks fine to me, I would have played the same way you did.
Regards Anders
I think your opponent had a choice here. I think she should have folded the 4's with a 10 showing if there were any other higher cards on board on 3rd street. It is tough to fold if you (opponent) has a pair in the hole and top up-card. In this case, she was correct in calling a bring-in of $2. Her 4's were live and if she paired her 10 she would appear to have high pair and definitely a scare card. You know the dangers of pairing the door card, I am sure. When she got trips, she should have raised. She had the best hand at that time and missed getting more money in the pot. If you reraised, she would have had a tough decision to make. Her not raising (1) let you in to possibly beat her--trip 4's are a fast playing hand even against 1 or 2 people (2) lost money by not raising--you would have called at least once. I suspect you would have figured her for trips when she raised your ace, but it would have gotten her 1 bet and if you folded, she would take the pot immediately. It might even have been a decent bluff in a 10/20 game. Check raising usually does not work against a novice (right Swenson?)
Your calling to the end, I believe, was correct unless she showed a card higher than your Queens and you figured her for better than queens up.
Get back to AC.
I'll be in AC this weekend. I had the same thoughts you had regarding her misplay. Having some restraint, I didnt tell her how she misplayed.
Also, she had to call a raise by me on third, so she called with a pair of fours in a raised pot. I frankly had no idea where she stood other than a vague feeling that I might have been in trouble. She was a new player to the table so I had no read on her.
BTW in this same game I played with another woman who not only got drunk during the game, even when she was sober she capped every raise on third with a three flush! It was quite a game.
Pat
I'll look for that game this weekend. I'll be there too. I'll find you. Hope you have a good $$$ weekend.
My question in this post is do you consider it acceptiable to lay down a big pair on forth st. when a player pairs his low doorcard and bets and you feel you may be getting jammed by a 4 low. I was playing 8-16 stud 8 a player limped with an 8, another raised with a 7 I made it 16 to go with Q's with a dead Jack the bring in called it cold with a duce, the 8 folded the 7 called. The guy makes open 7's and bets and I'm looking at 26 behind me. Who I know from experience jams hard on 4th I've seen this guy play pairs before so I just laid the hand down. My reasoning is if he has pair with the Ace I'm only a small fav If he has trips i'm dead plus since the brining called the re-reaise cold he must have 4 to a low so I'm probaby only drawing to half. Of course the other side to the argument is that many players feel compelled to bet out their paired doorcard esp if they stared with 3 to a good low. Its hard to say. I like the fold except for the fact that the pot was 3 bet on third so its getting pretty juicy. What do the experts think expert laydown or weak fish play??? Coments apreciated.
I'd have to know the likely hands of the 7 when he raised on 3rd street. Would have have raised with something like 742? Or would it only be something like 7Ax suited, or 765 suited, or AA7? If the latter, then your fold is probably the better play, given the likely 4-low behind you. If he would have raised on 3rd with any 3 low cards, then you probably should consider raising. By raising, you will charge more to a likely worse hand, and maybe force out the low behind you (in those cases when his 4th card actually paired him rather than giving him a 4-card low).
However, 7 stud hi-lo is not the game where I am most experienced. So, it's possible I'm making a mistake here. If Zee says I'm wrong, I'm wrong.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Go ahead an lay it down. While the pot *may* look big, you have to figure that you are playing for about %60 of the pot (the 4 low will get there about 80% of the time). I'd continue with aces, or with two pair.
- Andrew
fish never lay down hands, that's why they're fish.
i wouldnt know what to do in this situation as i wouldnt raise a limper and raiser with two queens and a dead jack. id fold. i wouldnt call on 4th as too often you will be looking at trips or two higher pair and be almost drawing dead for half the pot. your hand is terrible here. you are in between and open low pair and someone who most certainly has four great low cards or three low cards and a pair.
Thats why I folded the hand on 4th street. I didn't raise a limper I re raised a 7 that raised. I tried to make it 3 bets to the field and 2.5 bets to the bring in. Is that a bad play with Queens with a dead jack?
HIGH POCKET PAIRS DONT have TWO-WAY POTENTIAL SO SHUN THEM IN STUD/8. (EXCEPTION is when you are playing short handed.) playing the babies, low hands that can go two-ways is a must in this game, sixes and lower preferably. GOOD fold on fourth street, as you like to know where you are at in this game at all times, you are talking about getting jammed from both sides, costing maybe six to ten big bets to the river with a dead high hand.........
So, you've gotten yourself jammed in with the cinch low on the flop and you know you're going to be quartered. Fold right? Should there be any other considerations before you fold. Is it a losing play to stay until the end?
You know you're quartered? Well, how many players are in right now? If it's 4 or more, you're OK to stay.
Do you have redraws to another low? If your low is A2 with 348 on the board, do you have a 5, 6, or 7? If so, and an A or 2 hits, you might get all the low now. If you don't have reasonably good backup cards, then be more inclined to fold now, as you may be drawing for 1/4 and being freerolled at the same time.
Do you have any high potential? Like a backdoor nut flush? Or a 2-outer to a higher full? These can add a good bit of equity, more than you might expect.
How much money went in preflop? If it was capped 7-ways preflop, that's 28 bets. 1/4 of that is 7 small bets. If it's capped to the river with you and 2 others who are quartering you, you'll lose 1/4 of 20 small bets (4 small bets on the flop plus 8 big bets on the turn and river), or 5 small bets. This still leaves you with a 2 small bet profit as compared to folding now. Count the bets and do the math.
later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
I am mostly a hold 'em player, but have occassionally played some 1-5 stud in the casino. I've read Seven Stud for Advanced Players and have found it has helped me a great deal in my nightly college game (low stakes pot limit) due to its high ante structure. How do I adjust to the casino bring-in structure? I find that I am constantly drawn out at this game; for example, at college, i would raise with an Ace up and a buried pair of 8's if none are out...in the casino, this eliminated no one and seems to be a wasted bet. I hope to someday have the bankroll to play 15-30 or higher stud, but since I can't yet afford it, what are your recommendations for adjusting strategy in this game? Will my $250 bankroll force me to play like a rock while I wait to get a real job??? God, I hope not...advice, examples, and experiences appreciated in advance
Jeff
Easy, general rule is to play good starting cards. No risk (i.e ante) so do not play mediocore hands. To really do well, you will have to evaluate the game and the players. In the no ante game it is important to not make a mistake on 3rd street by playing crappy cards. I usually like to play strong cards fast and if I have a good 2-way hand in good position (i.e I know how many players I will have) I may sit back and trap. Unfortunately you will throw away some winning hands, don't worry about it. Since you will not be too many hands, make apoint to study how the others play their hands. Count the amount of money in the pot as an exercise to not get bored. Patience brings success in the no ante low limit games.
Raising with a pair of 8's with an ace is not always right in 1-5. Recognize that this hand must be played heads up, and your raise is a semi bluff. The players are so unaware that a semibluff is not the correct play as there is little chance of a fold.
You must have the patience to play only good starting hands. Your best bet is to move up to 5-10. The game is only slightly more difficult,but if you read the Green Book you should do well.
Good Luck! Pat
I am a college student like you, and started at 1-5 stud. If there is no ante, you should not make any moves. You should wait for a high pair, bet three to five dollars on third street, and five the rest of the way and watch the money roll in. You minimize your variance by not playing too many hands and the players can't stop paying you off. I built a 4000 dollar roll in less than a year playing very very straightforward against the low limit chumps. Good luck
Very good advice. I play some $1-5 stud and alot of $1-5/10 stud hi/lo with no ante, only low card bring in for $1.
Sleep till you get a monster starting hand then make em pay till the river.
in all poker you need to play like a rock. most people dont know how tight a rock really plays. if you cant play tight give up now. part of your problem is that you dont play enough to judge what really is happening. but i suspect that you play too loose, and when in a casino even though the people are far more stupid than those you normally play against they are actually alot more experienced. with a 250 bankroll without ever adding to it you are a big favorite to lose it all even if you are a good player.
Do you mean play tight-passive? Why not play tight-aggressive? I thought the key to poker was to make them pay for every card they get?
Jeff,
I am principally a stud player. I remember reading in one of Mason Malmuth's "Poker Essays" books regarding the difference between low-limit stud and medium limit stud, which I happen to agree with based upon my experience. Real 7-card stud doesn't exist until you are at the $15-$30 level or higher.
At $15-$30 you can play stud more in line with the way it should be played, i.e., you can raise or check-raise to get players out, and it will work. When the bet is $15 and you make it $30, those marginal drawing hands are going to drop.
Below $15-$30 (and believe me, I've seen this even at $10-$20), you are playing a game that looks like 7-stud but plays very differently. It becomes a trapping game. You only play strong hands, and usually wait til 5th street to put your raise in (I say usually - of course it depends upon the immediate situation - cards out and players in the pot).
Patience, live cards, knowledge of your opponents, knowing pot odds and to a lesser extent, high cards are the solution in low limit 7CS.
If it's action you want, play 2/4 no foldem holdem. You will get pleanty of action and you will thrill as you see everyone's money go down the hole in the table into the house bucket. The rake is just that. If you are patient and play like a rock with a bluff or semi-bluff here and there,7CS will show you a nice profit. In a 5/10 7CS game you should be able to make $5-15/hr. Now 15/hr is excellent. People who are looking to earn 50/hr in a 5/10 game can expect to loose at least that much about as often as they win. Of course you will have the "big" night when Bob the manaic plays, but that is the exception.
When Zee says "like a rock" he means it.
I want to thank everyone for their responses. I am taking a casino trip over my Thanksgiving break and will definitely keep all of your advice in mind. If all goes well, maybe I will be able to try 5-10 next time out. Talk to you all soon
I have to agree with the rest. Don't confuse playing tight with playing like a rock. A rock is tight-passive. It's not incorrect to raise with 88A. You need to get head-up with that hand to have any chance at all. Since there is no ante to steal, you almost always steal in late position. A raise in early position on third street can do a lot to thin the field. If you get called, know who you are playing against. You are likely a dog. The more players in the pot, the more likely you will get drawn out on. Be aware of the number and types of players in the pot. Don't push a weak hand against many callers. See you at the tables.
Sure 88 A is great heads up But I always thought that this kind of hand would do quite well 5-6 handed assuming your cards are all live and you are agasint pair hainds smaller than aces. Can't you raise 3rd st for value if you know eveyone is going to call. I claim that as long is you know your hnad will win more than one time in 6 and you are playing six handed on 3rd that you should want to put as many chips in the pot with this positive expectation hand.
Seven-card stud is a great game with one major problem: it cannot (in it's traditional form) be played at no-limit. If it could, then it would now be the world championship game instead of holdem because back in 1971 (when the choice was made) holdem had less than 1% of the market, whereas 7cs had about 70%. Since Benny Binion's aim in running the WSOP was to attract spectators, the most popular game (7cs) would have been the logical choice, way ahead of a game which very few played or understood and which is a lot less interesting to watch and commentate than stud.
If the no-limit version of stud (which I discovered a couple of years ago and called mississippi) had been invented first, then conventional seven-card stud would probably never have been invented, since it is in effect simply a slower, less exciting way of playing mississippi. Even if mississippi had been invented say fifty or sixty years ago it's status as the no-limit version of the most popular game (7cs)would probably have ensured that it rather than holdem would have been chosen as the world championship game: but then, I would have missed out on inventing it and also on the pleasure of discussing the question here......
7cs is unsuitable for NL play for two reasons: it's a round too long and it has too many live hole-cards: neither of these factors make a big difference at limit betting (apart from slowing down the game) but at PL it costs twice as much to call five bets as it does to call four, and as a result you can play PL 7cs for years without seeing a called bet in every round because players run out of money: in effect at PL stud the fifth round is superfluous anyway, since "play" in poker consists of betting, and there is almost never enough money available to bet five times.
The third hole-card in 7cs distorts hand values because straights flushes and trips can never normally be the nuts at the end, since the lowest possible nut hand with an unpaired board is usually at least quads. Again, that doesn't matter much with limit betting but it is another reason that 7cs is not suitable for NL and for most players, less than ideal for PL.
Mississippi has neither of these problems: the fourth and fifth cards are dealt together instead of one at a time, shortening the game to four rounds and inserting a multi-card draw, the central invention of poker. The seventh card is dealt face up instead of down, so hand values remain consistent for the duration of the hand.
These changes make 7cs a faster more exciting game with any betting form, but particularly at PL and NL. There is a lot more action and better pot-odds, since the added value of getting two cards instead of one for your opening call ensures that there are more active players in every round of play.
As test of these arguments try playing PL 7cs and PL mississpi in rotation for a few hours and see which you prefer. It's a great head-to-head game so you don't need to gather the clans to do it. Pot limit Mississippi is now on the BARGE playlist, and is probably being played at MARGE too (if Lou Kreiger has his way). Pokerspot.com is looking at introducing NL mississippi tournaments online at some stage and a number of tournaments are considering adding it to their playlists.
David,
Have you developed any odds tables for Mississippi yet?
Hullo Bruce, I missed your post before for some reason or I would have replied earlier. There are some stats at http://www.geocities.com/mississippi_seven, mainly comparing it with other games. You can also work up some interesting stuff if you have a programmable simulator like Wilsons turbo 7cs, by turning off all fourth street play. It's the last-card down limit-betting version of the game, but the charts are interesting.
Thanks for your interest
David Zanetti.
Hello,
I am looking for a book on razz...do you have any?
Thank you..
Tim
I do. But there aint many of them. It's called "Sklansky on Razz" I paid 2.95 for it. It's in mint condition (which is also where I bought it). I've heard they also incorporated this material into one of his later books, so check with Conjelco or GBC.
Sklansky on Razz is not published on its own any more, but it is included in Sklansky on Poker, which is available through 2+2.
I am planning a 4 or 5 day trip to Las Vegas in December and would like to play $10-20 up to $20-$40 stud. I play in Chicago, and my regular game is either $10-$20 or $15-$30 stud. Occasionally I have played $20-$40, but never higher than that. I believe that I am one of the better stud players in my regular cardroom (at the level I mentioned), but I am wondering how I would fare against the regulars in Vegas.
I have done a little research on the web and it looks like the Bellagio and the Mirage are the only two rooms who spread the limits I am interested in.
My questions are: 1) Which is the better cardroom to play in and why? 2) When would I find the best games (day of week)? 3) Is there a week during the month of December that would be better than others (more tourists)?
Any further advice would be much appreciated.
Thanks in advance
I am having a problem reaching my ceiling of wins when it comes to stud and high low. I cuurently play 4-8 up to 8-16 stud and hl on planet poker.com. I started out with a hundred dollars and worked my way up to a thousand in about two weeks in 4-8 stud and hl . I then tried to take my 1,00 and go up to 8-16. Every time I do this this I just seem to get bad beats over and over. Example I'll start with trips ang get run down on the river, or have a K flush beat by an Ace flush.My losses don't take place because I change my play or am not good enough to handle the players, I just seem to get run down over and over. What happens is I will lose all of my winnings down to around a 100, then I'll lick my wounds go back to 4-8 ang again get back up to a thousand and try again. This pattern has occured at least 5 times over the past couple of months. ( start at 100, get up to a 1,000, lose down to a hundred, back up to a 1,00). What usually happens is I loose 600-700 in one session of 8-16. What I am wondering is the laws of averages catching up to me. Because I win 5 or 6 days in a row on 4-8 to get me back to a thousand am I just ready to be beaten when I go play 8-16. Should I set a limit of loss when I move up, even if the game is good and I am one of the better players. I know I need to move up in stakes if I want to make the max amount of money. Please help!!!!
When you reach $1000, cash out. Have them send you the money. Continue 4 more times until you have amassed $5,000 in cash, then you can think about moving up to the 8/16 game. You need a bigger bankroll. Now once the 1st 5 grand is in your pocket, then continue playing Planet Poker 4/8 until you reach 5,000 in funny money. Then and only then should you move up to 8/16. You will have earned some decent money. You willhave gained experience and confidence and finally you will have a decent bankroll to begin at the 8/16 level.
Play two-way low hands for awhile, starting with 3-babies, forsake all one way high-hands(except pocket aces with an [8 or lower] or rolled up trips. You find some sanity for awhile playing strictly low in these low limit stud/8 games. HIGH HANDS JUST DOESNT HAVE ANY EQUITY IN THESE LOW-LIMIT STUD/8 GAMES WHERE 5 OR MORE ARE CALLING ALL THE TIME.
I don't play on the internet, and I don't play H/L; but I've had similar experiences and have come to the conclusion that you must expect to be drawn out on as much as half the time. When you move up, do you overplay your hands? Always enter the pot with the lead. Be sure your cards are live so that you may do a little drawing out, too. Don't overplay pairs in multi-way pots. Your chances of getting drawn out on are too big. I can't really tell you what you're doing wrong. I can only tell you what I do wrong. I go on tilt and overplay my Pairs. Good luck.
Seems to me like you're beating the crap outta the 4-8 game yet you still want to move up? If I were beating the 4-8 for a thou a week, I don't know if I could leave. But assuming you must move up, I'd follow ratso's advice.
home game, dealer antes $3 5 till 5th st. 10 thereafter,7CS/8. Most pots are jammed and players will stay to the river with most anything. I play almost strictly for low and am not doing as well as I think I should against these extremely loose players. All advice would be appreciated.
I find no true general rule. You still have to play good starting cards. A little looser when you are the dealer of course. You will have to evaluate the players and your position. I would play more hands early for the minimum bet and tighten up if I did not improve. I would play agressively when I was pretty sure I had the best hand.
In the real world, I don't think I've ever met anyone who really played too tight.
Is there a bring-in in this game, or just an ante? If there's no bring-in, the pots are smaller to start with, which usually suggests tighter play on 3rd street. Also, lots of people coming in loosely also suggests tighter play, as you'll need to make a bigger hand to win on average.
Play the top 15% or so of your starting hands, keeping in mind that since the game is loose and multiway, your top 15% will be adjusted more towards good drawing hands and less towards good made hands than if the game were being played by mostly tight players.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
my guess is you play too loose. is playing for low only mean you play 2,5,7 in jammed pots with some of the cards you need out on board. or do you fold this hand. do you really folds two kings in jammed pots with an ace on board, or do you stick around for a while. many believe playing only for low is the secret to this game. the real secret is----wait i have to run now.
Is this a game full of total fish and losers who are there playing bingo, or are there actually decent players who know whats going on?
If you are regularly getting 4-way action to the river, then you should generally play loose on 3rd street, and tight on 4th street. This lets you do two things.
1) It makes it look like you are giving a lot of action because you'll be entering 30-50% of the pots. You'll also be doing a lot of raising with the best of it when you choose to go on to 4th and 5th street.
2) It allows you to take maximum advantage of your opponents poor play. If you're not in the pot when they call when they brick out on 4th AND 5th street, then it won't be you making their money.
If you are looking for more hands to play try:
low connected pairs (443, 556, 665)
hidden pairs with a low door card
AKx, where x is 2-5, and your low/pair cards are live
Remember, with these marginal hands you have to improve greatly on 4th street to continue, hitting trips, 3 straight lows, having your opponents hit bad on 4th, etc...
Remember, in wild games your profit comes more from the mistakes your opponents make after 3rd street, not before.
- Andrew
Andrew the post said the pots were jammed. does your advice still hold true?
It's much more important to know when the jamming is happening. When I think of a jammed stud hi/lo game, I think that the jamming doesn't get heavy till 4th or 5th street usually. At least that's what happens when the pots I play in get jammed.
I've never seen a game where it is regularly re-raised before 4th. That's just my experience. Since this is stud, a raise 3rd street hand costs only one small bet to play, not too expensive, especially when you consider the implied odds that 4-way big bet action will get you.
Like I said in my post, it really depends on whether your opponents are playing bingo, or whether they are sophistocated players.
Playing as loose as I suggest against bingo players is very appropriate.
- Andrew
"the real secret is----" Read Ray's book.
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
with pictures and stuff?
Dino Where's Pebbles,
Buy a book Zee's if you can read small letters.
Paul
Thanks a lot guys!
I play a 7-stud home game. Spread limit $2-$10 anytime, you can bet $20 on the river. Five of the players will increase the maximum river bet to $50 if they are the only ones left in the hand.
I am thinking of joining them. How should I alter my play? I'm thinking such a large spread between low and high bets ($2 to $50) will take a pot-limit strategy rather than limit. Comments?
Draw to every hand you can if you know it's the best draw. I would guess that made hands (1 or 2 pairs) are almost worthless in this game unless you can often catch someone bluffing on the river. But if you can confidently call a $50 bet on the river in a 2-10 spread game with a lone pair of aces you have alot bigger balls than I.
Two questions-How big is your bankroll, and how well can you read the other players? If you have a big enough bankroll you should value bet as much as possible, esp. in heads up pots. Value betting is easier if you can tell if anyone hit on the river. Also if there are people who like to call to "keep you honest" this is the time to punish them. You should rarely raise on sixth st. save your raises for the end. Also such a large bet is a license to steal, esp. by raising on the river, I would try to develop a rep as a bluffer so folks will have to call me on the end. Slowplaying also becomes more correct, maybe even checking a great hanD on 6th st. to let folks catch enough to have to call you on the river.
Well, it's been a long time since I've posted a hand, but here it goes.
8 handed 60-120 stud game.
3rd street:
Me: (Ah5h) 2h. I bring it in for $20.
Solid player on my left (SP): Makes it $60 with the 3s showing.
Loose aggressive goose (LAG): Makes it $120 with the 6s.
It's folded around to me and I call the $120. There was one other heart out and all my pair cards are live.
SP calls the $120.
4th street:
Me: (Ah5h) 2h2c
SP: (xx) 3s6d
LAG: (xx) 6s9s
I check and it gets checked around.
5th street:
Me: (Ah5h) 2h2c5c
SP: (xx) 3s6d6h
LAG: (xx) 6s9sJd
SP bets $120, LAG calls, I raise to $240, SP thinks for a bit and folds (which is what I expected/hoped he'd do), LAG calls my raise.
6th street:
Me: (Ah5h) 2h2c5cTd
LAG: (xx)6s9sJd4c
I bet $120, he calls.
7th street:
I catch the Ad and check. He hesitates for what seemed like 15 seconds or so, then bets $120. I raise it to $240. He calls and my aces up are good.
Questions:
What did each of the other players have?
What would you have done differently? Based on the way it turned out it seems I played it as good as I could have, but I feel I make a couple mistakes in the hand. I hate to let the results of a hand make me think I played it well. I don't know.
I would have checked and folded on the turn, but that's what makes you better at this girl's game than me.
Seriously, I think an argument could be made for folding. Sure, you knew you could blow SP off the hand, but what made you think LAG didn't have you beat? He probably did until you sucked out on the river.
Of course, what do I know? I usually start out with nothing...(inside joke).
Nobody bet the turn, I assume you meant 5th street. You damn Hold'em players don't understand anything about stud. ;)
Seriously. I agree that maybe I should have done that. I also wondered if I should have played the hand at all.
ALSO stupid damn holdem players who call high stake stud a "girls game" cant get there terminolgy correct from turn to street... HEY grab a rack of $20 chips and park your arrogant ass at a 60/120 or higher talk think that way we'll put your high horse in the soup line... I guess I got a little carried away.
Actually we use $10 chips but either way. ;)
Makes the pots look much bigger than they should.
Get in line. There's a lot of people in front of you who want to put me in the soup line. But it would be better for you if I stay in action.
You stud players are so high-strung.
Actually, due to the higher long run variance in stud as opposed to holdem it takes more balls to play stud. So put that in your pipe and smoke it!!
Pat
I like your re-raise to get SP out of the game. He probably had you beat at that point. It was also a gutsy move to re-raise LAG on the river. Way to induce a bluff! Your two pair probably had LAG beat, but the Ace on the end sealed your hand. Of course, had SP called, as he probably should have, you would have been a dog. There is certainly a case for folding this hand on fourth street.
George,
Me: (Ah5h) 2h2c by checking it looks like your slow-playing trips especially when you raise on 5th street. That's what got the 6's out IMO and then your heads up against a high pair or low pair with straight possibilities who is hoping to catch trips to beat you or back into a gut shot straight. Ends up catching two pair and loses to you with A's up. I think you played it well.
Paul
what are you doing going in with ace five, to a solid player?
Aaron, you wouldnt play a live three flush with an ace here?
My only thought on the hand is that LAG was not bluffing. Why would he think he could bluff a guy who paired his door card? He probably had two pair higher than tens but lower that Aces.
Pat
George your too young to have CRS syndrome so deliver!!
ukw
I put in the post that my hand was good. I made aces up and I have no idea what he had because he never showed (2 pair I'd guess though).
"What did each of the other players have?"
I thought you knew when you asked this Question!!!
Paul
Heh. If I show down my hand after betting and my opponent goes to muck their cards, that's fine by me. I'll be the last one to ask to see a hand. ;)
But the reason I asked that question is to see what others thought the hands could be, I had no idea what they were.
This is a hand that happened in the 60-120 stud game last night that I won't soon forget.
8 handed...
3rd street:
Extremely loose player (ELP) in seat 2 brings in for $20 with (xx)2d. It's folded around to me in the 5 seat and I make it $60 with (JhJc)7h. Loose but sensible player (LBSP) in seat 6 calls with the 6d showing, aggressive player (AP) in seat 7 raises it to $120 with the 9d showing (the 9 was the high card on board), ELP calls, I reraise to $180, LBSP calls, AP calls, ELP calls.
4th street:
ELP: (xx) 2dKd
Me: (JhJc) 7h4d
LBSP: (xx) 6d9h
AP: (xx) 9d2c
ELP bets $60, everyone calls.
5th street:
ELP: (xx) 2dKdJd
Me: (JhJc) 7h4dAc
LBSP: (xx) 6d9h9s
AP: (xx) 9d2c4d
LBSP checks, AP checks, ELP bets $120, I call, LBSP calls, AP folds.
6th street:
ELP: (xx) 2dKdJdTs
Me: (JhJc) 7h4dAcTc
LBSP: (xx) 6d9h9s8h
LBSP checks, ELP bets $120, I call, LBSP calls.
River:
LBSP checks, ELP checks, I catch a blank and bet $120. I did this expecting LBSP to fold since he's gotta put me on a decent hand that can beat the 9's up which is what I thought he had, and the fact that if he calls, he's facing an overcall by ELP. I also thought ELP couldn't call my bet because I figured she didn't have much.
So anyway, LBSP thinks for about 10-15 and folds what turned out to be 2 pair (9's and 6's), then ELP sits and thinks for an even longer time and calls. I show down the pocket jacks and they are good.
Any comments are welcome...
I think you played this well, and LBSP played very poorly. He should have known that R.. er.. ELP would have bet if she could beat his two pair. The pot was large enough to justify a call. His only concern should have been you.
I made a similar mistake a little while ago, when I threw away Kings up on the river when Randy bet into me. I knew he had AA to start, and I though he made two pair. Another player called him and he showed his one pair to take the pot. I did't give him credit for being smart enough to bluff.
What did I learn? If I'm playing stud, just call.
I agree that he should have probably should have called but it's definitely not an easy call to make. I just thought it was funny when ELP called I hardly wanted to show my hand. She most likely called with a hand that couldn't even beat the open nines (unless she had tens).
On a side note, the irony in this hand is that the player that folded on the river was talking just a few minutes before this hand about his theory that "if you call on 6th street you gotta call on 7th street".
How come you're playing so much stud all of a sudden?
ELP might have made two pair. I don't know what she could have called all those raises with on 3rd except a pair. She obviously didn't start with a flush draw.
I told you before about spreading my money around the casino. It wouldn't be fair to leave it all in the same game. Also, Mason says Caro is all wet about stud being a game of luck, so I'm trying to learn. Besides, I really get off on the insults and whining.
On the river, in a three person pot, you can sometimes successfully bluff if you put a hand that probably beats you between you and a likely drawing hand. It can be difficult for the player in the middle to call because he will think that you probably have him beat, and if not the player behind him can easily beat him. So I like your play ion the river.
However, I disagree with much of the rest of the hand. I would have not made it $180 on third street. This would have allowed me more opportunity to raise later in the hand, especially on fifth street, in an attempt to knock other players out; or perhaps just fold and not lose as much in case the cards have broken badly. Your kicker is a very poor straight flush card and I don't think it is in your best interest to build a big pot.
In this case, the extra raise probably helped George win the pot. He let them know he could beat 9's, and therefore AP folded when he got no help, and LBSP was afraid to call the river.
Of course George is so lucky, it probably wouldn't have mattered what he did. See the post below. :o)
While the third street re-raise my be questionable, I'm most disappointed with his failure to re-raise on fourth street. He had a golden opportunity there to clear the field and put himself heads up against ELP who likely held an inferior hand. Instead, he put himself in the position where he had to bluff on the river. Jacks may have been the best hand on third street and fourth street. He should have been betting to thin the field then.
I agree that that is the problem with the hand. Instead of betting/raising to eliminate opponents, he bets/raises in an attempt to build the pot. This is not the right hand for that.
I guarantee you the field was not going anywhere on 4th street. Not the way this game was being played. I was gonna raise her on 5th street to try to do that but the other player in the hand made an open pair and I decided against it after this.
The main reason I made it $180 on 3rd street was to try to get the guy on my left to fold and get 3 way action instead of 4 way action. Unfortunately it didn't work.
George,
I'm a little late with this one because I forgot about the other poker forum. Mason is correct about the third street play. At least he is with regards to 15-30. I have fruitlessly tried to thin the competetion in the same manner you did on this hand. I have found, at least at mid limits, that the better strategy and less frustrating I might also asdd, is to call a reraise on third and try for a thinning rais on a bigger street. It works. I love your bet on the river. It is one done by an aware player.
vince
I think that you played the hand OK. I dont mind the reraise on third street, although you probably would be better off not reraising, and then going to knock people out on fifth, or just seeing how the hand played out. In a multiway pot I dont think you have a great hand. Maybe you are better off calling with the intent of raising on fifth, as your reraise on third merely builds a bigger pot, and gives better odds to your opposition.
LBSP must be a somewhat weak player, as his hand is not terrible, although somewhat weak, as he was getitng a fairly decent pot. What would you have done if he bet on the river and you had to call? You probably would have folded. Since you only called on fifth and sixth, he should have known that you did not have two pair, so he should have raised on sixth street because he was the favorite and he sets up a play on seventh by leading right out. I think he played the hand weakly. He had to figure you for a high pair in the hole, as you would not have played on fifth with a busted draw,and you would have raised if the ace made you two pair.
Of course, I am only a 5-10 player so what do I know!?
Pat
I have to agree with much of your analysis. The LBSP played the hand weakly (because he had a weak hand that is hard to play). He never really knows where his hand stands as compared to the other hands and that alone made his river decision a tough one.
As for the raise on 3rd street I agree that it was questionable but my goal was to try to drive out the player on my left to make it 3 handed instead of 4. Obviously this did not work.
Paradise, Omaha/8 4-8, 6 people. My hand: (54)3 rainbow. I bring in $2, 7 on the left raise to $4. K, Q, 8, 3 folds. Pot is $9.
1. Is my reraise mandatory?
2. I called. Next card: he (..)7A off suit, me (54)3J. He bet $4. Pot is $15. Should I call?
Zbych,
One heck of a strange Omaha hand.
Obviously this isn't Omaha8, but stud/8.
I would fold. You need 2 more cards now to make a hand, so it will cost you 4 plus 8, most likely. Plus, he just caught an A, so he either has a four-card low, or a pair of As. You're coming from way behind now to scoop this one.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
I recently played a low limit hand at the Trop in AC and am wondering if I made the statistically correct move on third street. I had AKA. A player in seat seven bet with xxK. I put him on kings. I thought that since I had his other King, his chances of improving to trips was diminished; but my chances of improving to Aces Up were also diminished as my kicker king was dead. I bet my Aces to the river where I improved to trip aces to beat his Kings up. Was I the statistical favorite in this hand?
Without knowing anything else I would have to say--Absolutely!!!
No question at all here. The Ace is so unique. I would play the Aces. His chance of trip Kings is exactly the same as your getting trip Aces. Unfortunately your having the King is actually to his benefit since the king is almost useless to you. Sounds incorrect, but it is true. I love having aces against kings. Think about it. Would you fold if you had a pair of 4's and you knew you were against a pair of aces? Of course you would. Aces beat 4's and Kings-see, no difference. In fact the 4's might be better since there might be a better chance of a straight
Question: You said that the King bet on third street in seat seven. Were you after him? What did you do?
You definitely were the favorite--infact you were in probably the best situation you could have aside from being rolled!
Pat
yes you were a favorite. if the pot is heads up you are a considerable favorite, although probably not as good as if your kicker was completely live. this is because you are taking away 1 of his outs but you are lodin two of yours.
this question becomes interesting in a multiway pot. there you usually have to improve to at least two pair to win. you decreased chances of improving may sometimes make the hand unprofitable, although i doubt it as long as your A is live.
scott
if he has kings and you have one of them that helps you with the aces. see, he has to catch up and you dont so having one of his outs helps you more than it hurts you. you are about a 7 to 3 favorite to beat him if he has the kings here. the downside of having his king is that if he has a big pair he is more likely to have some other pair than before so that it is tougher to read him and you lose more when he hits trips, as you cant see them. also he is more likely to have almost nothing so you get little action from him, or folds on fouth street as his hand is dead.
Isn't that contrary to what the Green Book says about you having the King. If he has 2 Kings and you get one of his kings, then that card is pretty useless to you. Of course it makes you feel better that his trip chances are diminished. I see your latter point, but I am not happy to get "his" card since it "takes up space" for the one I am looking for and diminishes my chance at 2 pair which I might need if I have a couple callers. I think a lot has to do with how the other person beta his hand and the knowledge of the opponent.
Lat weekend in a loose game 5/10 7CS, I have pocket Aces with a Queen showing. I am under the gun and just limp. Only 1 caller, then a King raises. I reraise and we get head up. Neither of gets visible help, but he bets, and I call. This continues till the river. I check the river unimproved aces. He bets. I make a crying call with bare aces expect to loose but win. Figure that one out. How often does that happen. Guess he figured me for Queens.
I got 1 of his kings on the river
Ratso, Was the river king the reason you decided to call, or not?
I think you definately missed a couple of bets here ratso. You've got your A's completely hidden and he's most likely got a pair of K's ? assuming the boards were blank enough to warrant it, I'd have popped him when the big bet. but that's just me and I'm a holdem guy.
You didn't check the river, as he was first to act. But anyway I would have probably raised him on 5th or 6th street (more likely on 6th), and then bet the river unless you had reason to believe you were behind. But I'm more one that likes to be in control of the hand, not the one calling (except in cases where you're catching a bluffer).
1) Eazy....I would have called because the pot had enough money in it. I probably said something like, "Well, I'll have to pay you off."
2) You are probably correct
3) You are also probably correct here too. I was too conservative. next time, I'll push the bet and he'll have 2 pr.
By a large margin.
- Andrew
I didn't see anyone mentioning a raise on 3rd street- was that just assumed by everyone, or would I have been too aggressive (i would DEFINATELY have raised the K's bet, partially BECAUSE i have his kicker which doesn't help me much, other than blocking him)...
My raise drove out the 3 player
I have played 1-5 at Trop AC. Generally, I have found that betting hard (in the absence of a threatening board or any raise backs) is a profitable strategy. You destroy the implied odds of flush draws and tend to be heads up quickly. If it is bet to you on the river, you will be surpised how often, a raise will induce a fold. This assumes you a playing against fish or passive players.
I agree as I think back. I really do not like the 1-5 games at the Trop even though I do very well. They are too slow and boring
Thebest 1-5 game I ever played in was at the Sands in AC. Many callers, few folders, people calling on the river with nothing. Any moderately tight play will make you a winner. Unfortuneately this was approximately 8-9 months ago when I first started playing poker,adn I dont know if it is still this good.
Pat
I agree. The Sands is a lot of action. I sat in on a 1-5 game that had 5 way action to the river about half the time. I wons a lot for a 1-5 game. I was waiting for the 5/10/15/20 game which I did not get into. (is it a requirement that you have to chain smoke to get into that game?).
I find a lot of the Trop dealers play at Sands. One problem at the Sands is that I find the dealers too friendly with some of the players, and the dealers are sometimes very slow. Oh yea, the neighborhood is a bit sketchy.
5-10 stud at the Trop in AC. Typical weak lineup. I get rolled 9's and call on third in late position with a 4 way pot.
On fourth I get a blank- 99/94. My opposition has xx/6s10s, xx/4cKd, xx/JdQd. The King leads and the JdQd raises. I am in last position with my nines and what appear to be two draws, both of whom limped in on third. There was no raise on third. I read the two draws as players who would have both stayed in for the raise but might fold for a second raise. The K was a player who would likely pay off all the way even if he knew I had rolled nines. So, I decided to raise, and the two draws folded.
Was this the right move?? Was the risk of getting drawn out on worth it to slowplay and try to build a bigger pot? The pot was not big at the time I raised, as there were no raises on third, so I figured that I was better off if they both folded.
It seemed like, as always, there are two competing interests here; building a big pot versus increasing my chances to win. With only one draw against me I probably, but not definitely, would only have called.
If they were tough players, how should I have played it? All comments are appreciated. P.S. the K called the whole way and showed his hand as only two kings!! I guess he though I was bluffing.
Two questions-How big is your bankroll, and how live where the draws? If you have a big bankroll or have been winning you can just call (you're going to win or lose a big pot), but if your roll is small or you've been losing, then going for the surer money I think is best, also did you put the QJ hand on diamonds or a straight or two pair, if he's drawing to a straight he's basically got a gutshot, and you want him in, but if you put him on diamonds then the question is how live were they, if very live the raise is probably better, esp. if that makes it three bets to the spades, one draw against you is OK, but two is more troublesome, the fact that they folded means they didn't have hands as good as you thought or are better players than you thought, because most weak players would call a tie-in raise with a four flush, esp. since your hand looks like a med. two pair, but what was your table image? Also was it two bets or three bets to the spades hand?
i would have usually raised on third. the main reason to slowplay rolled up on 3rd is to make sure you don't just steal the antes. but you already have someone playing with you. and if the bring in is as loose as you say you have two people playing with you. you have to try to win big pots with monsters.
also, if you would only raise there with a wired pair higher than Js (which is just my hunch about how you would play in that situation), then you become too predictable to beat good players. after one limper i am raising most hands i play if the table is not very loose passive. in this spot that includes split 9's, wired pairs 8's or bigger, rolled up, live flush draws live straight draws, 2 live overcards with a live two flush, etc. if the game is very loose passive than i will sometimes limp with the draws and the weaker pair hands. i would usually still raise the good hands especially rolled up because i expect to be paid off.
on 4th, you 3 bet and the raiser folded? that is very strange. i can't imagine cards that make his play even close to correct. in any case, once you have two people betting and raising for you, it's ok to slow play. also, the fact that the pot is small means slowplaying is more likely the right play because you are risking less by giving cheaper cards to draws.
scott
5-10 stud at the Trop in AC. Typical weak lineup. I get rolled 9's
.
Curious here, smoking or not smoking?
======
I decided to raise, and the two draws folded.
I figure the other sread you for trips (reasonable assumption, eh?). I woul;d have played the same way. If they are going to draw out on you, make them pay. You are getting good implied odds. If they fold, great if not then you'll still probably win. Most players have what they represent in 5/10 and I suspect the other players realized the draw to their flush/straight was anot in their best interest.
Hope I do not bump into you at the Trop at the same table.
======= If they were tough players, how should I have played it?
If you wanted to move them out you did the correct thing. I know some good players who would have slow played till 6th street, but a good opponent would put you on trips with that junk showing and staying for 2 raises. I would have done what you did even against better players.
It was in the smoking room.It was a weak lineup, even for the Trop. I actually moved there from a much tougher game in the non-smoking room with a bunch of regulars.
Pat
Trip nines is not a small set. You probably did the right thing by playing it fast, but I don't think that taking a risk to win a big pot would have been incorrect either.
Joel's post brings up a question I've had for a long time: assuming that you have a bankroll that can withstand large swings and emotions that can withstand being drawn out on over and over, why is it preferable to drive people out when you're a favorite against each person individually (and are, of course, getting even money from each on your bets)?
I know the probability calculation method of adding together each of the opponent's probability of beating you - and, yes, you will win much more often if you drive people out - but aren't you getting more than adequately compensated by the even money return from each person?
Also, I think that Joel's post is the first I've read where anyone has said that under different personal circumstances (bankroll and recent winning/losing) one should consider taking different action concerning whether to drive people out or not.
Thanks for any comments.
Regards, Connie
4-8 O/8 game last night with a half-kill. I pick up Ac-Qc-Qh-Td in middle position. Half-kill not in effect on this hand, I limp in for the $4. Six of us take the flop of Jc-Tc-2h. Checked to me, I bet with my nut club draw & gutshot for Broadway. Three callers.
Turn card is Kd. Check, check, I of course bet. Guy to my immediate left raises. First limper goes all-in for $10 of the $16, other limpers folds. I reraise, and LHO caps it. I figured that if a blank comes, I split with LHO. He obviously has Broadway as well, and possibly 2-pair or a set to go with it. I did not get the read on the all-in player that he also had the str8, but he quite possibly also had a set, or why is he calling, all-in or not? I've got 8 clean outs for the scoop, including the possibility of the miracle Kc hitting the river for who knows what kind of action? The Bad Beat jackpot was over $13K.
Well, the ten pairs on the river. I check to the guy on my left, he bets, and I make the crying call. Guy shows me A-Q-J-T. As it turns out, he had 4 outs to make a full house, but only wins the side pot, as all-in had KK for the over-full. The Kc was live which would have resulted in the jackpot, but that's only a sidebar.
I believe I was completely correct in maxing out this action on the turn, as I had the best chance to scoop the pot. With 3 of us contesting the pot, I had to think that there were more small clubs lurking about than there were cards to pair the board. For sure if all 3 of us were putting $$ into the river: but what about the fact that the 3rd player was all-in. In retrospect, I wasn't really free-rolling either player. I had the current best hand, but they did have outs to knock me off.
Anyone handle this situation any differently?
Dunc - After the turn there are only ten cards that might hurt you and one of them, the two of clubs makes your flush so that you won't be splitting the pot, although if it makes a boat for an opponent you won't be winning it either. Eight other cards make you the nuts flush (although three of them might also make a straight flush for an opponent). The twenty six other cards probably get you a split.
IMHO you played the hand just right. You just got out drawn. It happens.
Buzz
you had the best of it, but you weren't freerollig. one way you can tell you weren't freerolling is you lost the pot.
scott
So there is a No Limit (delt 5 card one w/discard to 4 card preflop) Omaha 8 game in my Town. The minimum buy-in is 100 but the usual is 500.
The action around town is so loose that I'm thinking about checking this game out.
Anybody had experience with this type of game? Seems like the No Limit form of Omaha is a shut out game.
CV
I see that I mistyped the discard rule: Everyone gets 5 cards preflop and then all players discard one card before the flop so all players that stay in to see the flop only keep their 4 best cards.
CV
Sounds like a fun game to me.I would tighten up on my starting requirements because with the discard before the flop everyone will be starting with a better hand than usual.
For some reason I feel that I would be much happier playing No Limit Texas Hold'em with these guys. With the action around this town though I think I should like this game better. Must be my lack of O8 experience.
CV
crazy omaha.
scott
This is a great game if the opponents are loose. With 5 cards pick 4, you will make the nuts or a draw to the nuts even more often than regular Omaha. If they will bet/call with hands that are neither the nuts nor draws to the nuts, you have a goldmine. Just be sure that you're freerolling before you put in a lot of money with less than top full before the river. It is easy to be tied when you have the nut straight and/or nut low, so you need redraws before your hand is worth a lot of action.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
I decided to post here rather than the Internet forum because this is really about the game, not the internet accident.
3 handed low limit Omaha (High only), a game I wish I could play.
I have 8993 in the big blind, call to me, I check.
Flop is 5 8 A rainbow. All check.
Turn is a 2 (rainbow). LB bets, and, trying to fold, I click the Call button by mistake. (Mistake #1?)
River is a J, so the board is 5 8 A 2 J.
LB checks, I check. He shows 664T, and I win with a pair of nines.
LB has been a agressive player. Looking back on the play, I think I should bet the river, even though the call on the turn was an accident (Mistake #2?).
My more general question is: what constitutes a hand with some value in short handed Omaha? I generally think of it like a full holdem game, i.e., top pair is a playable hand, so perhaps the pair of nines actually is not that bad. Still, I would have mucked it on the turn without the click mistake.
I'm actually not sure what questions I have here, any thoughts on short handed Omaha or this hand would be appreciated.
I don't care to get into details about this hand (even though I found it to be an interesting hand), but 75-150 stud game saturday night, 4 different people had flushes in the same hand, 1 in each suit. Luckily, I had the only ace high flush. Something I'll probably never see again in my life.
I wont get into details about this on. BUT in a certain 20/40 stud/8 I saw " 3 bicycles in one hand talk about jamming. Unfortunately the the poor chap with only the bicycle got reamed twice with the two six-high straights the other opponents had to go with the their bicycles. I suppose the colluding phobics at PARADISE and POKER SPOT will some think someone sold their software program to this casino.
.
I forgot to proof my thread before I posted it, so cut. some slack 3 Bet. Besides me and Jack/Daniels like to enjoy these threads after our session at the stud/8 tables...good education and entertainment.
This is somewhat of a theoretical question I guess, but it's an actual hand that happened to me in the 75-150 stud game on Saturday.
8 handed:
I'm the bringin with (As4s)4c. I bring in for $25. Everyone folds except the person on my right (a fair to good tight aggressive player) who raises it to $75 with (xx)Qh. Except there's one catch. Many times when he's dealt his first 2 cards he lifts them up and I can easily see them. And this is one of those time I saw his cards. So I knew he had (6h7s) Qh.
The question now is how do I play using this information...I decide to reraise to $150 and he calls.
4th street:
Him: (6h7s)QhJs
Me: (As4s)4c5h
He bets $75, I raise to $150, he calls.
5th street:
Him: (6h7s)QhJsTs
Me: (As4s)4c5hKh
He bets $150, I call. (I'm just letting him bluff for now, even though I'm not really that far ahead anyway. I thought about raising again but I decided to wait to see how 6th street turned out.)
6th street:
Him: (6h7s)QhJsTs9s
Me: (As4s)4c5hKhJc
He bets $150, I call. He caught about the worst card imaginable, but I'm still ahead (but he's got to be a significant favorite to win the hand, I would guess).
River:
He bets in the dark. I know he has nothing going in to the river. I look at my river card and it's a blank, so all I have is the pair of 4's I started with. I believe I have to at least call obviously but I believe raising is also a viable option. After thinking a while I call and my pair of 4's are good. (It brought about quite a bit of discussion at the table. Heheh.)
But anyway, knowing his hole cards, would you play the hand any differently?
I think you have to raise (you got very lucky here), if he catches any pair you lose, the question to ask yourself is this-if I raise will he throw away a hand better than mine-since you hold only 4's there are a lot of cards he can catch that will beat you if you call, but that he would throw away for a raise, plus you raised earlier in the hand, so he's got to put you on something much better than what you hold.
I have recently gone about trying to add Omaha 8 to my repoitoire of games. One particular area of play that i am having trouble coming to grips with is play out of the blinds. In an unraised pot with several callers what hands are playable in the little blind? Would a dry deuce trey be worthwhile? what about three card high hands or dry big pairs like queens or jacks? How should your starting standards be modified in the big blind in a raised pot with many callers ahead? What about a shorthanded steal situation? I would be extremely interested in the views of forum members on these issues and any help they could provide.
Richard
There is some traffic in the archives about Omaha/8 blind play. The structure matters a lot for the little blind. If you are only posting 1/3 of the the big blind, you have to tighten up considerably.
One hand to stay from: middle straight cards.
I'm posting this under Fred The Shark to add to his comments, not to disagree with him.
"Would a dry deuce trey be worthwhile?"
No. A dry 2-3 is no good.
"what about three card high hands or dry big pairs like queens or jacks?"
Depends on your opponents and the mood of the game. In the game you have described, I think not. Three card high hands only have two worthwhile two-card combos. In general you want your cards working together to give more than just two two-card combos. A pair of jacks is not very good because you don't hit the flop very much, and you may be stuck when you hit a jack on the flop. (You tend to end up splitting with low if the other cards are all smaller than a jack. If there is a card bigger than a jack, you're often against a higher set. The pay-off isn't usually commensurate with the risk of playing a dry pair of jacks.) Queens are a little better, but still not worth it.
"How should your starting standards be modified in the big blind in a raised pot with many callers ahead?"
Play as tight as you can while still projecting a tough image. Easier said than done. Perhaps you should look for another game if your blind is getting raised too frequently. Tend to waste two bets (by re-raising) to protect your tough image.
"What about a shorthanded steal situation?"
Depends, at least partly, on the tenacity of your opponent who has posted the blind. Worth a try or two.
Just my opinion.
Buzz
Oops. Three two card combos.
Still not enough.
Home game-Omaha-8 no fold`em--10 handed--no rake-- 6 or more always see flop no matter what the bets are. Bets are $1.00 to $4.00 any time. I am a winner most of the time on other games. I can`t beat this game. HOW DO U BEAT THIS GAME?
Please advise. PS I read and studyed Zee`s book, No help there.
Coyote
I suggest you re-read Ray's book. An other good investment I've found is Wilson's Turbo Omaha-8 program. I can blast through Thousands of hands and quickly get a feel if I'm playing too loose and going too far.
Which brings me to a question. Do you often get jammed in on the end, and show down second best? This happened to me a lot when I was learning how to play the game. Also, think about the draws that didn't come but would not have been good even if they did.
CV
If Zee's book didn't help, I think you failed to really study and comprehend it.
In the game you're describing, just playing for the nuts should be sufficient to win. I suspect that you're calling with less than the nuts, and drawing to less than the nuts, and doing so much too often.
Also, what percentage of your hands do you see the flop with? If it's more than 20%, including the blinds, it's too many.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Thankz for the info fellows. I have found when U have the nuts U will get Quartered a great % of the time. If all players are about equal ability it turns out to be just show down most of the time. don`t know who invented this game, but I think it is piss poor game at low limits.
Coyote.
When the opponents are playing no foldem, this game is a great money-making machine. It is boring also, but very profitable in terms of bets/hour. I used to play this in Chicago, 3-6 limit, with a rake of $5/pot + $1/pot jackpot + $1/pot (almost mandatory) tip. I averaged something like 2-3 big bets/hour despite this rake.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
You have to play two-way hands more often which can be boring waiting for them in this type of no foldem. "A,2 needs back up with suited babies or even A suited, HIGH pocket pairs with A,2 OR even A,2,3,K double suited, or hands that protect you from getting conterfeited. NOTICE I didnt mention median cards which are sure losers in this type of game. PLAY FOR THE BRASS NUTS.
This is not a game, this is a dream.
All that should be required to beat this game is to be solid before the flop, and play the nuts.
Short term results always swing in wild games ... you may be just in a bad streak.
Offensively, you play to get either one of two kinds of big winners. (1) scoopers, and (2) whipsaws.
Defensively, you play to avoid being second best, especially so as to avoid being caught in a whipsaw.
The hands in between, the hands where you split small or medium pots, the hands where no one bets and you end up a winner (or a loser) are just time killers waiting for the big one.
Kind of like fishing for marlin. Put your bait out and wait for a strike.
I agree that it can be boring, unless you are a fisherman at heart.
Buzz
Buzz-- I agree with U--U said it all about that game.
G'day Lads!
I was varying my venues of games this weekend I played in AC Caesar's Palaces 1-5 7cs.
I'm seated in seat #6 and buy-in for $150.
I'm playing like a rock as per Ray Zee's characterization which means I've been dealt 20 hands and have been caught as the blind once.
A couple of players are practically playing every hand while player#7 lights up a smoke every 5th deal.
So player#7 winds down and is all in and wins...
OK I'm still passive and watching...
A few rounds later player#7 is all in again... This time his luck runs out.
hmm
Player #7 buys in for 20 big George Ws. and next hand he some how wins the pot... Takes the red chips and puts them in his pocket...
I fold my next hand and goto the Floor manager and ask to be seated in another game complaining about player#7s action.
Surely I was in my right avoid playing against ALL IN characters...
Comments?
You're right that it is against the rules to take money off the table. You're wrong in changing games from a weak line-up to what might be a tougher table. When the guy put the chips in his pocket, just politely, in a nice voice, say "Excuse me, sir, but you're not allowed to take money off the table."
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Greg:
I was signed up for 1-5-10 which was open when I left...
What I got from Player#7 was verbal abuse to the tone of "He's only lost 1 buck... What's he complaining about!
I will take into your account the polite methodology that should be used.
Thanx
Brudder A.
loose players often play implied odds situations. if he is short but not real short (like, say, 5 top bets), it could actually help you.
scott
I've never posted here before but I just had to relate this story. It happended in a 10-20 stud game a few nights ago.
A woman to my right beats a pair of aces with kings up. The aces were pocket aces and she had the kings from the start. She's a good player and played the hand as anyone should. The guy with the aces was disgusted and threw his hand in, not because she got lucky, but because he was having a bad night and kept losing like that.
Another woman to my left (a pretty poor player) comments that it was like playing 1-5. And made a few other disparaging remarks about the woman to my right. I turned to the woman to my right and said in a whisper that if there is any justice in this world the poker gods will take care of her. She had been getting pretty obnoxious.
2 hands later I'm dealt (Ah10s)Ac. The bring in is to my left and just about everyone calls so I just call. On fourth I have (Ah10s)AcAd. Nobody is showing anything so I check. The guy to my left checks and then the obnoxious woman who has (xx)9h6s, which turned out to be (9d7c)9h6s, did not see my aces so she bets $10. The 2 guys after her fold. Then she realizes that I have the 2 aces and asks for her $10 back. Of course the dealer denies the request and after another fold the bet comes to me and I call. The guy to my left folds. On fifth I catch (Ah10s)AcAd10h. She caught another 9 for (9d7c)9h6s9c. I check and she bets and I call. At this point everyone at the table, except her, knows I have aces full or 4 aces. On sixth she catches a 6 and has (9d7c)9h6s9c6c. I start muttering about how lucky she is and check. She bets and I call. On the river I check, she bets and I raise (there was a dead 6 and dead 9). You should have seen the look on her face. She then calls and everyone has a laugh at her expense.
I can't believe that this situation occurred not 2 minutes after I suggested that she deserved some abuse. What fun!
z
But you gotta love the pay off :) Victory for the kindergarten slow play!!!!!!!!!!!
can someone tell me?? From what i can see in my limited experience. when i have played holdem i feel like i am betting blind since i have no idea what anyone else has.
thanks
billy burwick
I used to play only holdem but now I can't stand it. I get so bored after playing it for more than an hour or so. Stud is a much better game in my opinion but I think it's just suited more for the way that I think than is holdem. I think alot of the people like holdem because of the appearance of simplicity in the game, even though it is anything but. I mean, you only get 2 cards, you don't have to remember anyone's folded cards or which card is their door card or whatnot. I think it's just a different type of personality that makes someone like stud more than holdem, or vice versa.
I like it when maniacal holdem players come to my stud/8 table, try to post a twenty dollar blind next to their ante.I know but the floor man authorizes it, then get committed to the river losing approx. 80% of his rack,getting jammed by two made lows, one who makes two pair to spilt the pot. he he he why should I tell him you cant holdem B.S. in stud/8.
Holdem is fast. It allows those machocists (sp?) to punish themsleves quickly. I love the people who post the blinds in early or mid position because they just cant wait.
Most people find holdem to be more fun. It is faster and requires less concentration (but not less comprehension) to play adequately at relatively low limits.
In a similar thread not long ago Jim Brier commented that poor Hold'em players play Hold'em a lot worse than poor Stud players play Stud, and I tend to agree with him. I'm only a stud novice, but in the mid-limit Stud games I've seen, the worst players seem to have much more of a clue than the worst Hold'em players do. Additionally, the community card nature of Hold'em means the fish have less of a chance to draw out. There are probably exceptions from place to place, for example, in Atlantic City the mid-limit stud games seem to be softer than the Hold'em games, but I think on the whole that Hold'em games are softer.
If you meant why do the fish prefer Hold'em, I suspect it's because Hold'em is faster, and simpler. You only have to remember two cards, and any two cards can win!
-Sean
Holdem players can play a lot more hands by convincing themselves that it is worth playing, i.e. A6s in early position, even though they are taking the worst of it. Plus, they dont have to remember any played cards, and there is a lot more betting.
I think it is a matter of personality. Trying to read people in stud is much more difficult, even though (or because of) the upcards, and holdem players can play fast and loose if they are so inclined.
Pat
I am still amazed why people still have to look at their down cards in Holdem. Talk about short memory span. Anyway, is it better to be a stud novice or a novice stud?
QUESTION IF YOU HAD 1000 AND HAD TO DOUBLE IT IN 6 HRS WOULD YOU PLAY STUD OR HOLDEN AND WHAT LIMITED
SAM DAVIS
The Candy Man says- In a good game of no-limit hold'em, you can double through, in a lot less time then six hours.
GOOD LUCK
Howard
Holdem is better when playing tournaments and stud is better played in a ring game. That is my conclusion, but why. Ring game-- Holdem in by opinion gets boring as time goes on. Stud requires one to always to be paying attention because the exposed cards are so important. Tournaments-- One must always pay attention in a holdem tournament, or one may be eliminated before they know it. The more that a player has to think about the more interesting the game becomes.
You write, "when i have played holdem i feel like i am betting blind since i have no idea what anyone else has."
You have explained why many players consider hold-em more profitable.
My friend and I who consider ourselves to be very good stud players couldn't agree on these figures we were hoping someone here knew the correct figures.
1. If you start with a pair on 3rd what percent of the time will you make 2 pair or better by the river.
2. How about improve to 2 pair or better by 5th
3. If you start with a small pair and an ace kicker what percent of the time will you make Aces up or trips by the river.
4. How about by 5th.
5. Or also say you are chasing "correctly" with a pair and a straight flush kicker on 3rd how often will your hand imporve either to 2 pair or a pair+draw combo on fith assuming live cards.
1. Almost 50% if your cards are live, but I ma not sure of the exact number.
3. Approximately 41%
The rest I am not sure about, but I dont think the exact number is that important, although it is useful.
Pat
Some of these really depend on what you have, for exmaple if you have (Kh Ks) Js you will improve alot more often than when you have (Kh Ks) 2c.
And alot of things change depending on what cards are out.
But for 1) You could calculate the Probability you make 2 pair trips or a fullhouse or quads w/o much difficulty. Just calculate the probability you don't make any of the above hands:
So it should be (assuming you have seen no other cards), P(not making one of the above hands)=
43/49 (39/48)(35/47)(31/46).
2) Its 1 - P(of not improving)=
1- (43/49(39/48)).
5) Say you have Ts Js Th (note probability of improving to a draw depends on how high (or low) your pair is), if you hgave seen no cards the probability of improving to two pair or better is already given.
The probability of picking up a flush draw is 10 C2/ 49 C2.
The probability of picking up an openended straight draw thats not a flush draw is 45/ 49 C2.
The probability of picking up an gut shot staright draw is 90/ 49C2.
These numbers change depending on the liveness of you cards.
I could refigure them depending on more specific situations...
You know "ship it" is also "the grasshopper" right? Next time you give your mathematical calculations could you give us the number, I don't really care how you get the numbers I just would like to know them. All you math PHD just like to solve the equation and mutter something like, "the rest if basic calculus" or "the rest is just a dry, technical affair"
so the grasshopper is ship it!?
you know one would think, after giving the tools to make the given calculations the poster would figure those things out (and post). and after all it is a dry technical afair. once one has a method to solve problems putting numbers ina calculator and getting a number isn't so hard.
maybe one can post these and other numbers. i said id work some of the others out if the original poster responded...
Enough of the once one has learned... crap just post the percents dude. I mean please.
1) If you have only a pair and have seen no other cards you will improve to two pair, trips, full house or quads w/probability .6 or 60% of the time. (i got this using P(making one of these hands)= 1-P(of not making one of them)= 1- 44/49(40/48)((36/47)(32/46) . Note your two pair maybe be 77 and 66 if you start w/ 77 A as we calculated only the probability you improve to the above mentioined hands.
b) If we assume you have seen 7 other cards and your pair cards are totally live and all the cards you catch are totally live the you will make one of the above mentioned hands w/ probability .66 or 66% of the time.
2)Lets do this one another way again assuming first we have seen no other cards: P(improving by 5th)= 5C2 + 5(44) +6(11)/49C2 = .25 or 25%.
b) if we assume your pair cards are totally live and you catch a totally live card on 4th if you miss then you will improve w/probability P(you improve) = 1 - (P(you don't)) = 1 - (37/42)(33/41)= . 29 or 29%.
3) For this lets calculate the probability you don't catch an A or 6 (say you start w/ A 6 6), assuming no other cards are seen.
This will be 1- P(miss miss miss miss)=1- (44/49 43/48 42/47 41/46)= .36 or 36%.
b) assuming you have seen 7 other cards and all your cards are live this number is 1 - (37/42 36/41 35 /40 34/39)= 41%.
4) 1- P(miss miss)=1- (44/49 43/48)= 20%
4B) 1- P(miss miss)= 1- 37/42 36/41= 23%.
Ill post 5 in sec...
If there are any stud experts out there I'd like to know what you think about how I played this hand.
I'm playing in a 5 handed 15-30 stud game. A seemingly loose but a player who I know to have been beating the game for many sessions comes in for $5 in the bring in with a 6. A tight and very sold player limps with a K. I have and Ace queen high 3 flush with a Q doorcard and I limp as well a player who I don't know limps with a 10 behind me and I think a 7 folded.
4th Street.
The 10 pairs it door and bets 15 the 6 calls now KJ diamonds calls I make it 30 with a 4 flush. Should I make it 45 what do you think. I want to make it just enough so that everyone will call and I get more in on a 4 flush plus I'm thinking I might slow the 10's down on 5th and make it look like I have queens. Ok so the 10's fold for 15 more the six calls and KJd now makes it 45. I call so does the 6 and other low card which is also suited. So I have to think maybe he limped with Kings which he might do and now that he doesn't fear 3 10's he is ready to put the heat on but it might be K's and J's or a big draw.
5th Street We all catch offsuit the K bets call call
6th Street I pair my doorcard and nobody catches suited or a pair. So I bet they both call. The plan is to check the river if I make Q's up and to come out betting with either a Fush 3 Q's or just one pair I'm actually not sure what to do if I make Aces up, probably bet as Kings up might call but check behind if I check. I'd be getting nearly 11-1 on that steal so I think its worth a shot with just queens if they are on draws that bust out I pick it up and one pair of kings will fold and maybe 2 baby pair will fold too.
7th Street Ok so I got lucky here I caught another Queen but I my 4 flush was still live as well as my ace and Q draws. I bet the loose player calls and now the tighy raises. It didn't take long for me to muck as I know he will not raise unless he has 3 Q's beat I'm putting him on either K's full or the flush. I fold and the hand is shown down.
He has Jacks full so I guess he limped with pocket J's and made 3 J's on forth. And I'm guessing since the other player called it down he must have either made his draw on the river or improved to small trips. Well played hand or not?
uh, how live is your flush? i am going to assume completely live the whole time. the only one who caught your suit is you.
with the live A i might raise 3rd. i think you played fourth fine. fifth too. sixth is only well played if you think some better hands might fold. i know you will call a bet and wont likely get raised with what could be trip Q's. but no one folds on sixth and you can maybe get a free card if the trip J's fear a check raise.
i dont think he would have limped with split K's on third. maybe if he had a suited broadway kicker. i also dont think he would have call reraised with just the split K's on fourth. he probably had either a big draw or trips or two pair or a three card straight flush and a pair.
that sure was a gutsy river raise with the possible underfull.
scott
1. I think you should have raised on third.
2. If you thought the KJ was drawing, then you should have raised on fourth with the best draw.However, he raised you after calling a paired door card and a high draw that you showed. Since you described him as a tight player, this should have been a clue. However, I probably would have played the same way as long as others were in the pot.
3. You paired queens inthe door and he still didnt fold. It is clear that he has a hand, and you are correct to bet here.
I think that you played the hand OK. He had the right odds to draw toa full house even against a possiblke flush, and he just drew out.
Well played: here are some possible improvements
3rd street: you could raise, at least next time you raise split queens everyone won't groan and fold.
4th street: I like your raise, however, I would give more consideration to trips when your opponent calls reraises.
6th steet: betting is not bad, because you will probably be bet into if you check.
7th steet: great fold, that's how you save bets in poker.
Tried to use a kill button on the 08 hands in my home game last night, but no one was sure how. I said I thought kill pots were those that followed a hand where
a) there was a showdown b) there was a low hand possible and c) one player took showed the best high and low hands without any ties, thus taking the whole pot
Is that right?
What about if there is a low possible, but none of those showing down have a low, and one person still takes the whole pot?
What about scoopers with a low possible and no showdown?
We end up with only 4 or 5 sometimes, so the no-showdown part is key to our proper application of the kill.
Thanks,
KJS
A kill comes when someone takes the entire main pot (if there is a side pot). It doesn't matter if there is no low possible or not. Any scoop starts the kill. Generally the main pot has to be over a certain amount (4-8 pot has to be $40).
Derrick
No showdown required,just winning the whole main pot over a set dollar limit.
Definition used at the Indian casinos near Albuquerque: Scoop pot in O8; win two pots in a row at HE. There must be a flop; pot size is irrelevant. Good luck -- I can't even get our irregularly scheduled home game to use blinds, much less a kill button.
playing 7 stud I had pocket ace's with a jack up. so i raised to thin the field i drew a blank on the next and my opponent drew a suited club he raised and so did i figuring if he wanted to draw on me he would pay. next card i get a jack and he gets another club. I raise he raises and i call i got 2 pair he's working on a flush. next card i get a blank he gets a club. he ends up with a flush i was hoping for another ace or jack with mine being the only ones i saw should i have stayed or folded. I stayed all the way to the river and lost when he had a flush??
let me know hwat you think
billy b
Tough call here. I think you did OK. Had your Jack fallen on 4th street and he raised, then he was an idiot. He probably was gettingthe correct odds since he put you on 2 pair and his flush draw was OK for him.
1. What level was this? Also, were you heads up? If you were at alow ante table and were heads up you should have tossed your hand, as you were not getting good odds to draw to a full house if your opponent had a flush. However, if you knew him and knew there was a chance that he would raise without a flush, the you might play. Who was high on board?
If he was a tight/weak player you definitely should have tossed it if you thought he had the flush before the river. How many clubs did he have in the hole? If he had only two, then it is possible that he caught the flush on the river, in which case you couldnt do anything.
Pat
Your opponent was not getting the correct odds to raise on purely a flush draw, and ifhe knew what you had on 3rd street he made a mistake. He may have had a big card for a possible high flush or may have just been exercising his once-a-night semibluff. Heads-up, I think it is OK to chase a flush with 2 pair if your cards are live (i.e 4 live ones). It is tough to fold aces up.
It was late, and the game had gotten short-handed, and Doc Ray (who usually plays 30-60 or higher stud, and is one of the best stud players in the card room) sits down. The other players were average to weak, and the game had gotten rather tight. Doc played his normal aggressive game - raising on 3rd with any 3-flush or pair.
I had 10s up, KK in the hole. I just called the bring-in, just in case Doc raised - hoping to trap him with a bigger hand. He did raise, and I was the only caller. Next card is a blank for him, another spade for me. He bets, I raise, he calls - perhaps putting me on a flush draw. 5th street is a Q to Doc and I pair my 10. I bet, Doc raises ( I put him on Queens up), and I reraise. I'm thinking Doc raised because he put me on a flush draw with one pair. Doc calls all the way to the river, and my Kings up are good.
When the game gets tight I frequently make these trapping type plays. Of course, sometimes it backfires and I get drawn out on.
How much of a risk am I taking, making these type plays, and would anyone have played the hand differently?
I'm not sure what Doc had showing. Heads up I like the re-raise, esp. if kings and 10 were live.
Well played Bruce........don't be doing that to me in our home games though!!! The reraise of fifth street is total ownership. By representing the four flush you squeezed quite a few extra bets out of him...........you were exactly right with your reraise since it looked like a pair and a four flush. Clearly Doc thought he was milking you with two pair (a favorite against a pair and a four flush) and you made him pay. Textbook.
I like to do this myself heads up of course. This is fine as long as you are willing to toss if you think he has you beat -- like if he gets an ace. I find it profitable and improves your table image if you show down
You mean Doc plays 300-600 and up right? He's a raiser and always ready to go to war with the hand he has. Not a bad way to play 7CS normally. But you had Kings up nicely done. I remember once I had Aces with a royal flush draw on fith. I decided to fight the raising battle against Doc's 8's and 3's sadly he prevailed.
In the cardroom where I play (Harrah's E. Chicago) they seldom have stud games higher than 40-80, so that's what Doc plays. However, when Doc goes to Vegas, he does play 300-600 and higher.
Thanks to all for your comments.
1.I was wandering, how much money can I make on 10$-50$ Seven card stud ? 2. Is really possible to make it a living ? 3. Can you make more money on poker than blackjack ?
I appreciate any help
Michael Anderson
you can make from maybe 10 to 100 an hour depending on your play and your opponents and other variables. blackjack players that play poker well move over to poker. its much easier to learn to beat blackjack than poker but with poker you can play forever as opposed to blackjack if you are a winner and bet any significant amount of money.
I used to make more money at blackjack than I will probably ever make at poker. However, what Ray says is true. At significant betting levels (and even low levels in some places) you attract the attention of the casinos and will not be allowed to continue.
Poker is a much more difficult game than Blackjack and is therefore much more interesting and rewarding. If you do become proficient at it, then only your opponents can limit your income.
In my opinion, professional blackjack is becoming extinct. I know many that have given it up or are in the process of giving it up. Besides the large swings and the dearth of good games, the casinos are employing very high-tech methods to track and identify advantaged players. Also, continuous shuffle machines are starting to become more prevalent.
I've been having trouble tranfering from Low Limit to High Limit O8. In Low Limit a person can Make (A,2,Any,Any) pay.
In Tight Games I see some changes happening. First, I'm getting 1/4ered a lot and the Pots are usually 3 handed. This makes for bad situations.
It seems the biggest skill I need to work on right now is to find out when my cinch draw is going to get chopped up, and if I should dump it or raise it. I also need to learn how to play High Hands better.
Any Comments from people who have made the move up?
Chris
Chris,
What I found is to tighten up and here's a phrase I use "Two Ways Or The Highway" not true in all situations, but it works for me. This way you learn to play high better and you also have a low draw.
Paul
It sounds so easy to play four cards that work together, but it's not. You have to wait a long time to get a good O8 hand. Probably longer than any straight high game.
When you do enter the pot, pay a lot of attention to your outs versus pot odds. Don't play against the math. You must also develop hand reading skills that will allow you to tell when you risk getting quartered.
The higher limit games do offer something that lower limit games don't: The opportunity to bluff. Recently, in a 40-80 O8 game, I was in a pot with two other opponents. I flopped nut low draw, and a straight draw, but there were two spades on the flop as well. They put pressure on me, but I hung in. The river brought the third spade, which gave me a pair. My hand was busted, but I held the Ace of spades, and being first to act, I bet out. Both of the other players folded. Try that at low limits.
8 handed 30-60 stud game...
3rd street:
Seat 6 brings it in for $10, seats 7 and 8 fold, seat 1 raises (a somewhat loose, very very aggressive player) to $30 with a ten showing (suits are unimportant in this hand), seats 2 and 3 fold, I (seat 4) raise to $60 with (QQ)A (note that 2 other aces were out on 3rd street), seats 5 and 6 fold, seat 1 reraises to $90, I reraise to $120, seat 1 reraises to $150, I call.
4th street:
Him: (xx)TK
Me: (AA)QQ
I catch the case ace to make open aces, and bet $60 and he calls.
5th street:
Him: (xx)TKT
Me: (QQ)AAQ
I check and call after much deliberation (thinking that I should fold but I must say it's hard to fold queens full on 5th street), not knowing what hand he could have that I could possibly beat.
6th street, we both catch blanks and I check and call his bet. On the river I get a blank and check-call again.
Any comments are welcome...
My 4th street hand should be (QQ)AA instead of (AA)QQ. Sorry for the confusion.
I'm sorry, but I'm just going to have to lose more money on this hand because I'm going to stick him for a raise either on 6th and/or 7th street (the 5th street call is a nice change-of-speed maneuver which surely threw him off). He knows you don't have Aces-full (your door card), and he doesn't know you have Queens-full. His most likely hand is Tens-full, and if he's lucky enough to have Kings-full, then he's just going to have to win a big pot.
I don't see how he could have less than Kings full, but I'd probably call the river (crying).
Tom D
I've given this hand more thought. The first question I would ask is: would your opponent continue raising on 3rd street with (10,10)10 against your dead Ace? Maybe not...feeling safe, he might wait until 5th or 6th street to pop you. Next question would be: would he continue raising on 3rd street with (K,K)10? I think he would, to take control of the betting. Your Ace will keep you acting first unless he pairs, and he likely would assume he has the better hand. Next question would be: would he continue raising on 3rd street with (K,10)10? Again, I think he would, to take control of the betting.
On 4th street, against your dead open Aces, if he was rolled up, he would probably wait until 5th or 6th street to pop you, fearing you might give it up if he raised you here. The same would go for (K,K)10,K. If he had (K,10)10,K, he has to think he's in trouble, and probably shouldn't call your bet, but I'm not sure. I can't think he would put you on a three-flush with the action on 3rd street. Bottom line: He wouldn't have raised you here, no matter what.
On 5th street, my question would be: did he start with (K,K)10; or(K,10)10. He would bet either one after your check. Since he can't know you have pocket queens, I think he would have raised with either hand had you bet.
My conclusion: I don't know. I'd have to do what you did, which was call him down.
Tom D
Was this player the type to be able to read your hand?He knew that you didnt have A's full. I wouldnt read him for four tens, and if he has kings full then he'll be a big winner. I could never bring myself to fold my full house here. But,if he is a good player, and can read hands, I guess your hand would be easy to read, especially if he has K's full, since he would definitely read you for pocket Q's unless he thought you would play so strongly on third with less than two Q's.
It wouldn't surprise me if you told me that you won the hand. I guess not being able to fold this hand is the type of play why I am not able to play big games yet!
Pat
I did win the hand, and in a way I was surprised to see him turn over his hand, which was 2 pair, Jacks and Tens. The player next to me was amazed when I turned my hand over and said I should have won a much bigger pot than I did, but the way the hand played out I would have thought it was better than 50/50 he had kings full.
I think you played the hand well. Here's how I see it. When you hit queens full on 5th it cost you $180 to see the hand to completion. With $430 in the pot at the time it would cost you $180 to win $610 ($430 plus his $180). It would seem to me that the odds were less than 3 to one that you could beat him.
Obviously the only two hands to worry about were quad 10's and kings full. If he were rolled with 10s don't you think he would have raised on 4th. The pot was big at that point and you had the definite possibility of filling. That would also explain his raising on 3rd (concerned about you hitting trips).
I think that he would have played the hand the way he did whether he started T K T or K K T. Either way his kings or king kicker looked strong with 2 aces dead.
There is also a remote possibility that he was bluffing. Therefore you were 50/50 or better getting more than 3 to 1 odds.
How did it turn out?
It seems to me that a loose, very, very aggressive player is too tough to pigeon hole as having 4 tens or Kings full. I would have to know my opponent very well for me to muck on 5th street.
The part of the hand that I don't understand is the reraise and rereraise on third street by the VAP if he is not going to raise on 4th street if you bet, regardless of what you catch. If he was representing 3 of a kind or Kings, he has to pop you again to get you to throw away your overpair or 2 pair. He knows you cannot have 3 Aces, and it now looks like he made 3 kings on 4th, or still has 3 tens.
His play on 4th street led me to beleive he didn't have Kings or tens in the hole. The rest of the hand played as if he did but this gap in the play of the hand makes me think he did not catch full and I would have led out on 5th street and called a raise if necessary. If it was popped again back to me on 5th, I would check call on 6th and the river also.
John Gaspar
I've been playing in a Loose Agressive Crazy Pineapple game (High Only) and been having a hard time trying to figure out what type of hands to call with.
Here's how the play of the game is like. It's always raised at least once and more likely twice pre-flop with 4 to 5 people seeing the Flop. Post flop the action cools off to a just Loose. (I believe the reason this is happening is because the stakes are too small, and I have been trying to get them raised from 3/6 to 5/10. Its funny because 5/10 scares people into not coming to play, but 3/6 makes them play Loose, and there is another game on a different day that is 2/4 and it always is capped preflop. I have got the game to accept 6/12 overs.)
You can possibly see the problem I have in the 3/6 game. I can never call with mediocre hands. It seems like the only hands I can possibly call with are the following:
Three straight cards Ten or above two suited.
High Pocket Pairs Jack or above with a Straight Flush Kicker.
Here is a trouble hand that I played, and I believe it was too loose (Ac,4c,Qd). The flop didn't hit me and I folded. The trouble would come with flopping A4 split pair or to a lesser extent AQ Split Pair which would just require decent post flop play to limit the field. My biggest worry would be Flopping a Pair of aces with a Queen Kicker.
I have been tempted to play (8s,7s,8h).
Comments?
Thanks, CV
Chris - You’ve asked about Crazy Pineapple (High Only). Let me answer in general, and maybe you or someone else will have a suggestion or two for me.
In truth I don’t know how to beat a loose aggressive low-limit or mid-limit game of anything.
Thus I avoid loose aggressive games like the plague. I think they are crap shoots. I want to have an edge. I guess I’m not much of a gambler.
If you sit in a game for several hours, people come and go. One new person can change an otherwise nice, peaceful, passive, profitable game into a crap shoot with frequent pre-flop raising. It usually isn’t easy to change tables. I try to position myself to the left of the aggressive pre-flop raiser. If I can’t do that, sometimes I take a break or just quit for the day.
If there is more than one player who is pre-flop raising, the game becomes a nightmare for me, no fun at all. The reason is that my defense against loose, aggressive play is to tend to play tighter, (except, of course, to survive, I have to join in the raising frenzy when I get a good starting hand, which, of course, increases my variance). Since I already play a tight game, if I play any tighter, I become like a rock. Rockness stands out like a sore thumb. Opponents remember me playing like a rock, which is terrible for my table image in future games. Overall, it’s not worthwhile playing in a loose aggressive game, even if I end up winning.
If I draw a seat in an unlimited re-buy tournament at a table with loose aggressive pre-flop raisers, I wait for a good hand and then join in the frenzy. With limited re-buys or no-re-buys, or when the re-buy period ends, I play very tight until the maniacs are eliminated. But it’s awful. No fun at all.
I have no experience playing high-only-crazy-pineapple. Even though I consider it a mediocre hand, I would play Ac,4c,Qd in a high/low ring game. However, my seat of the pants guess is that the hand is not as good in the straight high version as it is in high/low.
If the pot is capped, pre-flop, once you decide to play the hand, you’re joining the crap shoot.
Ugh.
Just my opinion.
Buzz
This crazy game also is one half Hold'em depending on which game the Button wants to play.
The way I go about beating loose aggressive (LA)games is to: "Play like a whimp.", as Sklansky says. Everyone tries to bully me around and I just call them down when I have something. At the end of the hand they usually hold something close to a bluff and I have the winner. Of course this is much easier to do in Straight Hold'em.
A friend of mine thinks that he should take the opposite approach and be even more aggressive when he has a hand because on average his starting hands are better. This gets him into lots of trouble. The LA players fold their bluffs that would have made him money and reraise him when they have something. My friend is stuck to this easy game.
It's easier to use the "Wimp" approch in Hold'em because the bluffers don't draw out as much. In Crazy I sometimes fold the best hand because of all the Draws that could be against me.
CV
Again in Hold'em. I will sometimes comeout Bluffing myself if I have nothing on an early street. Since I have a Tight Image even the LA's fold to me sometimes.
Now don't think that I only bet when I don't have a hand. I will bet my hand if nobody is else is doing it for me. I also will raise if I have a lot of players caught in the middle.
I try to balance my strategy and keep the other players on their toes.
Chris
Chris - Thank you.
Buzz
I have been tempted to play (8s,7s,8h).
Go ahead and play it, especially if you have shape. It's a good hand, but in this kind of game (and most pineapple games) watch out for a two-spade flop. It's much better to flop an eight, or an eight-out nut straight draw with one spade. Generally, if two spades flop, and then spades make, you may be beaten.
When a hand like this flops a straight flush draw, I play it agressively, but then check/call if I catch the eight-high flush.
I think it is a much better hand than Ac, 4c, Qx, which I also play. With this hand I want the nut flush. As you note, 2 pair need care, and even a wheel can be vulnerable to a 4, 6 in some games with a lot of action on later streets. Are you able to read any of the players?
As you get closer to the button you may be able to play more pairs with a straight (non-flush) draw. This includes one gappers.
High Pineapple is virgin territory in a lot of areas and has a lot of opportunities. I haven't played in a game like you described for a couple of years, but I do play in a L/A no-limit game where some very good hold 'em players make some silly mistakes.
PM
You say (7s,8s,8c) is playable. I'd think with position and unraised its playable. I'll see what happens if I loosen up a bit with Suited Connector Pairs.
An hand that would be very loose I think would be something like (7s,8s,9h) eventhough it flops a lot of straights and straight draws, if the board is 2 suited I can pretty much guarrentee that someone will be drawing for a Flush. What would be interesting for me to find out is how much more likely someone would make a Flush in this game rather than in Hold'em. I don't have enough time in to have a feel for it.
CV
What would be interesting for me to find out is how much more likely someone would make a Flush in this game rather than in Hold'em.
I worked out a bunch of math on this game when I first started playing it. My impression after doing so was that if a flush came, then somebody had it - even in a short handed game. After playing several years, I haven't found any reason to change my mind. I'm talking about when two flush cards flop - I assume that players may break up runner/runner flush draws.
(I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I think +/- 60% of 3-card Pineapple hands have flush capabilities, 45% at least ten high, 38% Jack high. So presumably 15%, or 1 in 7 1/2 have a draw for the suit flopping. In an eight-handed game I assume it's out there. Even four handed I assume it's a coin flip.)
An hand that would be very loose I think would be something like (7s,8s,9h)
I agree that this hand is playable with position, but suspect that it is the weakest of the three you mention. I always seem to be flopping 5,6,x to it, then have to watch one of my outs sail into the muck. With a flop of 4, 6, 10 I have to throw out the made straight and one of my draw cards, but I get the double belly buster which may have some stealth value. (I'm not sure stealth has a value in the type games we are discussing.)
Never played crazy pineapple. Would someone please explain the game for me. Thanks
Dino - Crazy pineapple is a high low game with an eight qualifier for low, just like Omaha-8 and seven stud high/low-8.
(1) Each individual player is dealt three cards. A betting round follows.
(2) Three cards are flopped (just like in Texas hold 'em and Omaha). A betting round follows.
(3) Each player then discards one card, thus ending up with two cards (just like in Texas hold 'em).
(4) The dealer turns over a fourth card (the turn). A betting round follows.
(5) The dealer turns over a fifth card (the river). A betting round follows.
You can use two, one, or no cards from your individual hand, just like in Texas hold 'em.
If anyone qualifies for low (five different ranked cards, all lower than 8), the pot is split between the best high and the best low.
That's about it. It's fun.
The main danger for Texas hold 'em players, as I see it, is that they don't fully appreciate that good hands are about 3X as likely in crazy pineapple as they are in Texas hold 'em. You need more patience than in Texas hold 'em, but don't need as much patience as in Omaha.
But be careful! I know excellent hold 'em players who think crazy pineapple is a vicious, dangerous game. Don't just go and play it in a casino, without learning more about it, or at least practicing it at home first.
I have played the game at the Bicycle Casino, the Commerce Casino and the Hawaiian Gardens Casino (all in L.A.).
Take care.
Buzz
The game we are talking about here is high only. I think hi-lo is the more common format.
Phat Mack - Yes, I gave directions for the high/low variety rather than straight high. To play the high only version one would simply ignore that which I wrote about splitting with qualified a low hand. Right?
Buzz
To play the high only version one would simply ignore that which I wrote about splitting with qualified a low hand. Right?
Yes. Incidently, your post below is the best I've come across on Pineapple. If I had seen it a couple of years ago it would have saved me a lot of work. I enjoy solving problems, but, good grief, I'm slow.
.
Chris - Since you helped me, here are some numbers that may help you. Never a guarantee my math is correct, but this time I think it is.
Three card pineapple or crazy pineapple hands may be organized into the following six groups:
(1) trips,
(2) pairs suited,
(3) pairs non-suited,
(4) non-pairs non-suited,
(5) non-pairs, suited (all three cards),
and (6) non-pairs, suited (two cards).
(1) trips = 13*4 = 52
(2) pairs suited = 13*6*24 = 1872
(3) pairs, non suited =13*6*24 = 1872
(4) non-pairs, 2 cards non-suited = 286*4*3*2 = 6864
(5) non-pairs, suited (all three cards) = 286*4*1*1 = 1144
(6) non-pairs, suited (two cards) = 286*4*1*3 + 286*4*3*1 + 286*3*4*1 = 10296
total above is 22100
check: 52*51*50/(1*2*3) = 22100 possible pineapple or crazy pineapple hands.
Thus 13312/22100 or 60.2% of all three card pineapple or crazy pineapple starting hands have two or three cards of the same suit. This is in close agreement with Phat Mack’s recollection of his numbers “+/- 60% of 3-card Pineapple hands have flush capabilities.”
If this is compared to Texas hold ‘em, where 312/1326 or 23.5% of the hands are likely to have two cards of one suit, then roughly a flush with three cards of the same suit on the board is two and a half times as likely in pineapple as in Texas hold ‘em. This is not exact, since if you have three cards in the same suit, rather than only two cards in the same suit, the board is not as likely to have three cards in your suit - but it’s a good approximation because 1144 is less than ten per cent of 13312.
For boards that end up with four cards of the same suit: In Texas hold ‘em a hand is likely to have either two cards in that suit or one card in that suit 378/1087 or about 35% of the time. In three card pineapple or crazy pineapple, a starting hand is likely to have (a) three in that suit, (b) two in that suit or (c) one in that suit 7779/16215 or about 48% of the time.
For boards that end up with three cards of the same suit: In Texas hold ‘em a hand is likely to have two cards in that suit 45/1087 or about 4% of the time. In three card pineapple or crazy pineapple, a starting hand is likely to have three in that suit or two in that suit 1785/16215 or about 11% of the time.
In summary:
(1) A starting hand in pineapple is about two and a half times more likely to have at least two cards in one suit as a hand in Texas hold ‘em.
(2) If there are four cards of the same suit on the board, a hand in pineapple is 1.37 times as likely to have a card in that suit as in Texas hold ‘em.
(3) If there are three cards of the same suit on the board, a hand in pineapple is 2.66 times as likely to have a card in that suit as in Texas hold ‘em.
Hope this helps.
regards,
Buzz
Ray my first question is about low draws and how live they are. If i'm playing in a full game and more than 3 of my needed low cards are out I feel like i'm in trouble. But 2 or less are out I feel ok. Does that sound about right? Also I'm restricting my low hands on 3rd to either hands that include an Ace although I won't play the A87 and A86 unless I'm the only one going low, or the ones that can make str-8 or flush draw. But I'm unsure abour a hand like 875. I assume its profiatable for the bring in but maybe not in raised pots. I like the staright potential but the hand is so rough I often get into trouble. What do you think? Additionally if I'm playing in a game with bad players who often play or raise hands like A2J its my contention that hight hands go way up in value do you agree with this. I've got your book which was a big help as were the articles in card player thanks.
the 1 way low hands get hurt without live cards much more and more so with others going your way. 2 or 3 are usually out anyway so you have to go from there. you have to restrict your hands according to whats against you and not by any set theme. the hands with an 8 do poorly when not alone for low and much better when with an ace or a 3 st. or fl. high hands tend to need to have heads up potential sometime during the hand and generally want to be the best high hand.
Thanks for the advice. I'm also having some trouble playing the pairs. And buy that I mean the smaller ones. Of course I'm almost always folding 9's and 10's and I never play 2's-8's with a high kicker except the ace. But I'm not sure how to play hands like (55)6 what about something like (33)7. I know in your book you mention that with these hands the higher of the small pairs(88, 77, 66) are better as they have more chance to scoup against other busted lows. My policy is to fold if a high card raises because I'm against a high pair but how do these hands play against a raising low card?
ok headsup. in most of the games where many people are in or going way too far the low cards that offer both way possibilities is where the money is
As long as I've got your attention I'm going to try to gain as much knowlege as I can. My next question is do you have any practial advice on putting alot of bets in on 3rd with a low hand. I just had 234s capped up 4 handed not long ago caught a 6 and got half the pot. Of course with a monster draw like that it makes sense to get alot of money in but what about other low draws that are just smooth like A26 but don't have a lot of hi potential. Its nice to get value if weaker low hands or bad high hands will pay the raises but I don't want to get myself in a situation where if I bust out on 4th I'll have to make a call that I don't want to. Any advice on this?
Thanks
I don't really consider myself an Omaha player but I play the game while on the list for stud or holdem. I was playing in a picular situation last night and I wasn't sure if I made the right play what do you guys think.
So I limped in on the button with A389 with a suited ace. Not very good with 89 and all but to close the action on the button I think its ok cuz the Ace is suited. Flop comes A67 rainbow. 5 handed maybe checked to me I check. The turn is a 10 makeing a 2 flush on board. An early position player bet and there were 2 callers. I pondered for a sec then raised. All called then the river was a queen so KJ is the nuts but when it was checked to me I bet all called and I get half. I'm not sure I should have raise the turn because very few river cards make me the nuts.
A,K,Q,J,10,9,8,7,6 or any diamond could beat my hand. and since there is a low out there I am only getting half maybe I should just call do you agree??
Thanks
Ship It - "So I limped in on the button with A389 with a suited ace. Not very good with 89 and all but to close the action on the button I think its ok cuz the Ace is suited."
I agree.
"Flop comes A67 rainbow. 5 handed maybe checked to me I check."
I would have bet here. Ideally everyone would fold to you. Second place ideally, everyone checks the turn to you and you can bet if you hit your straight or check if you missed, thus getting a half price draw.
In this hand you have position. You have leverage. But you didn't take advantage of your position after the flop. I think that was a mistake.
"The turn is a 10 makeing a 2 flush on board. An early position player bet and there were 2 callers."
A reason to have bet on the flop, hopefully to eliminate runner-runner flush draws (or make them pay).
"I pondered for a sec then raised."
Good.
"All called then the river was a queen so KJ is the nuts but when it was checked to me I bet all called and I get half."
Good.
"I'm not sure I should have raise the turn because very few river cards make me the nuts."
True, only 15 out of 44, and then your hand will only be good for half the pot, thus you do not seem to be getting good direct odds for your bet. However, if your raise induces someone to fold, there is one less person to draw out on you. More importantly, if you have the nuts on the river (with one of the 15 good cards for you), you will be in position to profit from one of the two most profitable hands in Omaha-8, and thus can count on implied odds, to make up the difference.
My philosophy is that you play for one of two kinds of hands in low or mid limit Omaha-8: (1) scoopers, and (2) whip-saws. All the other hands, the small splits or small wins or small losses are just killing time waiting for a big one. Here you are teeing up for a big one, for if you make the nuts for high you will be in position to push one end of the whip-saw. (Of course, you hope no opponent also holds 89XX, but you will probably break even if one does.)
I think you played perfectly, except for not betting the flop.
Just my opinion.
Buzz
How come you are not worried that I will be check raised on this flop. Also since I only have a weak top pair and open ended draw and there was no raise before the flop I feel that my hand should be folded on the flop for one bet because the flop was 3 low cards anybody agree?
I like the the suggestions by Buzz.
It's true that you missed the flop, ideally you wanted a 2, suited with your cards. However, there is a good chance that everyone else missed as well. Those other players with a A2 or A3 can't be happy here. A bet on the flop will probably significantly narrow the field, may buy the pot, and may get you a free card on the turn. I like it.
If you get check raised, so be it. But Omaha is a much more straightforward game ... people tend to bet their hands. A67 is a tough flop to come up with a hand that is good for a check raise anyway. The great hands for this flop are AA23, 2345. I would not want to give free straight draws with a pair of Aces, and 2345 is too vulnerable to a higher straight.
I'm not even sure you mind an early check raise, you might get heads up for the dead money.
I agree with Fred the Shark. "If you get check raised, so be it." and "I'm not even sure you mind an early check raise, you might get heads up for the dead money." You can't worry about being check-raised in this situation (or most situations in low-limit or mid-limit Omaha-8).
What hand could someone have to check-raise a flop of A67? Well... perhaps someone with 234X could check-raise this flop, but that's about it. IMHO, it would be better, by far, for the person with 234X to simply bet in a straightforward manner, because check raising here with 234X would be like turning your hand over for everyone to see. Thus anyone check raising would be making a mistake. Therefore, bet, and let someone make a mistake. As a general rule, you shouldn't mind being raised when you bet, unless you're bluffing. (And bluffing the flop in low-limit or mid-limit Omaha, at least in L.A., would be simply stupid).
Rounder recently wrote something very profound in the tournaments section that seems applicable here. "Good things happen when you bet and raise. Bad things happen when you check and call."
Just my opinion.
Buzz
You and Fred have avoided Ship It's other question: do you fold when someone bets into you on the flop?
I think you should, and a similar reasoning suggests not betting the flop. You have no hand and a crappy draw. It's true that the value in betting is getting some hands to fold, but I don't think you will get the right hands to fold. That is, I don't think that your chances of winning (high/low/scoop) will change much, and I don't think that you will be winning a biiger pot.
Eric
"You and Fred have avoided Ship It's other question: do you fold when someone bets into you on the flop?"
Eric - My answer to you is, "It depends." I would rather play this hand against multiple opponents than play it heads-up with someone, but only so long as they were paying opponents.
If the blind bet and everyone in between folded, I might tend to fold. However, against five opponents, I would play it. And even heads-up, although the hand doesn't look as good as it does with more than one opponent, I might tend to play simply to present a tougher image. Having position definitely gives one an edge. Here you have favorable position, a not to be underestimated asset.
If the seat immediately before me bet, what I did would depend. I would have to consider if the bettor was trying to "buy the button." I would also have to consider how likely it would be for the other opponents to call. If I thought they would all call, I would tend to just call. After the flop, you're still on a draw with this hand. You want your opponents to either (1) all drop, or (2) all stay in, but pay to stay in.
"I think you should, and a similar reasoning suggests not betting the flop. You have no hand and a crappy draw."
I don't think it's a crappy draw. It's not great, but you have 8 outs and there are back-door possibilities. Anyone who bet into you probably has a low hand. Heads-up your pair of aces might win the high half, and you do have a low, albeit poor.
Secondly, don't forget that by betting here you very well might buy a free card on the next betting round, when the bets are doubled.
In general, faced with the decision whether to bet or check (unless it is a clear-cut decision) I think you should tend to bet. The decision to call, fold, or raise after an opponent has bet is more difficult. Here you have a playable hand that may lead to a big win, even though you will probably only get one half of the pot. IMHO you should tend to play this hand.
"It's true that the value in betting is getting some hands to fold, "
I wouldn't want some hands to fold (after the flop - while I am still on a draw) as much as I would want everyone to fold. However, that's probably far fetched. :-)
"but I don't think you will get the right hands to fold. That is, I don't think that your chances of winning (high/low/scoop) will change much, and I don't think that you will be winning a biiger pot."
Maybe so. Good point. What if I bet the flop and thus created a heads-up situation - a situation I didn't want to create? Even so, I would take a chance here and bet the flop. You don't make any money if you check. Getting the dead wood out is definitely worth while, because "dead wood" can draw out on you, if given a free chance to do so. However, your point is well taken.
Buzz
Just as a prelude, I would like to say that I would be more comfortable playing this hand heads up than six way. My pair of aces and straight draw might be worth something in that situation.
Having position definitely gives one an edge. Here you have favorable position, a not to be underestimated asset.
I think that the best way to use position in this circumstance is to take one off on the flop with your bad hand.
I don't think it's a crappy draw. It's not great, but you have 8 outs and there are back-door possibilities. Anyone who bet into you probably has a low hand. Heads-up your pair of aces might win the high half, and you do have a low, albeit poor.
Perhaps we are getting closer to the origin of our disagreement here. I feel that a draw to a middle straight is a bad one. One time in three it gets there, but you will have to split the pot IF you win. I think that you would need to be getting at least 6-1 on any money you put in voluntarily. Sometimes that will happen, but it would be a near 0 EV situation with a large increase in variance.
Secondly, don't forget that by betting here you very well might buy a free card on the next betting round, when the bets are doubled.
This is true, of course. Then again, I have no intention of seeing the river without a made straight.
Here you have a playable hand that may lead to a big win, even though you will probably only get one half of the pot. IMHO you should tend to play this hand.
As you note, you will only win half the pot, if you win. The win won't be that big. Save your money for when you have a better hand.
You don't make any money if you check. Getting the dead wood out is definitely worth while, because "dead wood" can draw out on you, if given a free chance to do so.
I don't view this as a money-making hand, rather as a money losing hand (which probably ought not to have been played in the first place). The other hands aren't going to draw out on you since you don't have a hand at this point. Even if you get it on the turn, they will be there whether you bet on the flop or not. Perhaps someone will bet the turn and you can raise to really charge the people who might suck out on you.
I suppose that I may have presented my case a little too forcefully here. I think it is fairly close (but a clear check/fold in my opinion), so that it probably won't have a significant impact on your bottom line in this case. I guess I want to warn the newer O/8 players about the troubles inherent in playing middle cards, and to show why they need to be playing for scoop type hands. A draw to half the pot is not as good as it looks.
A further note: if you are in a game where lots of people will see the flop, but can be driven out cheaply, then betting here is a better idea.
Eric
Eric - “I would like to say that I would be more comfortable playing this hand heads up than six way. My pair of aces and straight draw might be worth something in that situation.“
After the flop, the straight draw is the main feature of this hand. If you make the nut straight, and if it holds up, your profit is greater with more players. Therefore the straight draw is better with more players. You really can’t afford to take a straight draw to half the pot with only one opponent. I’d be worried about my one opponent having a better low than 83, in addition to two pair or a set. I would agree that A389 is a good hand if you start out heads up against one opponent, but that is not the case here.
“I think that the best way to use position in this circumstance is to take one off on the flop with your bad hand.“
Maybe I’m too opportunistic here, but when everyone checks to you after the flop, the hand does not look so bad to me. Of course it depends on your opponents. Here there are so many of them who paid to see the flop, but then checked the flop, that you have to believe they are either a bunch of world champions playing cat and mouse, or a bunch of players who are not Omaha experts. Which do you think it is here?
“I feel that a draw to a middle straight is a bad one.“
The flop is A76 rainbow. The obvious draws are: (1) the draw with 89 to the nut straight, and (2) draws with two pair or a set. In addition, there is little doubt that someone already has a made low (maybe with a re-draw), but perhaps not the nut low or even the second nut low (both of which, IMHO, should have been bet here, for different reasons).
Yes, we both would prefer a flop of 2-4-5 or 5-6-7 with this hand. But you can’t pay to see flops and then only play the flops when you flop the nuts. That’s really poor play! Omaha high low is a drawing game. Even when you flop the nuts, an opponent frequently outdraws you. You have to take your shots at draws too. Here you have 9876, with the 98 in yur hand. A 10 or a 5 gives you the nuts for high. Of course you don't want the board to pair. But the board hasn’t paired, and it’s more likely that it won’t pair than it will!
“One time in three it gets there, but you will have to split the pot IF you win. I think that you would need to be getting at least 6-1 on any money you put in voluntarily.“
Eric, you’re failing to fully comprehend a very important concept here. If you do make the nuts for high, and someone makes the nuts for low, or even better, if two opponents make the nuts for low, you stand to greatly profit, even though you will only win half the pot. The reason? The pot could very well get capped on the last two rounds. This, and scoops of course, is where you make money playing low-limit or mid-limit Omaha high/low. Period.
I have no intention of seeing the river without a made straight.
You’d see it for free, wouldn’t you? If you bet the flop, maybe you can get to see the river for free. Well, all right, not really for free, because of your half-big-bet on the flop.
“As you note, you will only win half the pot, if you win. The win won't be that big. Save your money for when you have a better hand.“
There’s that important concept you’re missing again. The win might not be that big. Then again, if you end up with the nuts and someone ends up with the nuts for low, and a couple of poor devils get caught in the middle of your raising battle, it might be a very large pot.
“I don't view this as a money-making hand, rather as a money losing hand (which probably ought not to have been played in the first place).“
Come on, Eric. You’re on the button! Dont you want to capitalize on your position. Don’t you want to ease off a bit in your opening hand requirements when you are on the button, especially against a passive field that will check to you after the flop? You have to be playing the hand to take advantage of your position!
And don’t forget the ace was suited. A3XX suited has scoop written all over it. In this case, the incidental 89 ends up winning half the pot. Before missing the flop with the suited ace, the suited ace was the main feature of the hand. I agree eights and nines (and sixes and sevens) are not generally good cards to have before the flop. And I agree that a bare A3 (8 is not much of a back-up) is even worse than a (mediocre) bare A2.
“Even if you get it on the turn, they will be there whether you bet on the flop or not. Perhaps someone will bet the turn and you can raise to really charge the people who might suck out on you.“
Yes. That is the risk. The risk goes with the territory. In a drawing game like Omaha high/low, you can always get outdrawn.
With this particular flop, a straight is the most likely possibility for a winning hand. You’d rather have a big wrap around hand, but your 89 is good enough for a draw. But only because of the implied odds. Only if you can play well enough to make the straight pay if you do hit it.
“I suppose that I may have presented my case a little too forcefully here. I think it is fairly close (but a clear check/fold in my opinion), so that it probably won't have a significant impact on your bottom line in this case.“
Same here.
“I guess I want to warn the newer O/8 players about the troubles inherent in playing middle cards, and to show why they need to be playing for scoop type hands.“
Good point. I completely agree. Perhaps my suggested play is not a play for beginners.
“A draw to half the pot is not as good as it looks.“
Usually that is correct. However....
Shucks. Now we’re back to disagreeing again. And just when I hoped we were done with the lack of accord.
....However, in this particular situation, IMHO, a draw to half the pot may pay off big. For it to pay off, (1) you have to hit your draw, (2) someone has to hit the nut low, (3) someone else (hopefully more than one) has to be caught between the two of you, and (4) you both have to have the courage to bet, raise, and re-raise. In Omaha high/low you wait hours for opportunities like this. You have to make them pay off when the opportunities arise.
“A further note: if you are in a game where lots of people will see the flop, but can be driven out cheaply, then betting here is a better idea.“
Agreed. :-)
Buzz
As we both can guess, we may not disagree as much as it might seem to the casual observer. Partially I have been 'arguing' this one for the sake of discussing issues involved with O/8.
One thing about your rebuttal is that much of it centers on the whip-saw which could occur when you make your straight on the turn (preferably) or the river and have it hold up. Yes, the potential for profit is bigger than I gave credit for earlier. And this is a very important point. Of course, there has to be at least two other people caught in the whip-saw for it to be profitable (and sometimes you will still lose when you make it on the turn).
I think that the big issue here is about the opportunity to bet the flop. There I still believe you need to be getting 6-1 (or knock everybody out) for THAT bet to be a good one. By not betting, you give everyone a chance to get caught when you make the straight on the turn. I agree that I may have been a tad pessimistic when I talked about folding to a bet on the flop, but getting a free turn card is too good to pass up.
I agree completely that O/8 is a drawing game, and you are getting the best price of all when they all check the flop. Even if you bet, I think you won't get a cheap river card, because one of the lows will bet on the turn. By the way, I think you may have misunderstood my position on what happens when I hit the straight on the turn. I am not at all worried about the suck-outs at that point. I am willing to get as much money into the pot as I can. I consider the suck-out factor on the flop, before I make my hand, and let it have its place in my decision.
One further concession: I would see the river for one big bet if I missed on the turn but was still drawing for the nut high.
Eric
I hate to jump back into this discussion at this late date, but I want to revisit the idea of betting the flop. I see the following cases:
1. Everyone folds. For a risk of one small bet you picked up 5. It probably won't happen 1 time in 5, but it might 1 time in 10.
2. Many (everyone) calls. Bigger pot, better drawing odds, and you still may be drawing a free card on the river.
3. A check raise. See earlier in this thread.
4. One caller. I still think this is a desirable outcome. It's true you would prefer #1 (pick up the money and run), or #2 (chances for a big pot), but now you are probably playing heads up against a low, and possibly not even a great one. A two may counterfit his low, and give you 3/4 if your high holds up. The worst low is playing against 2345; you will have to muck to a 3 or 4 and a bet. Of course there are worse high senarios for you (like a set or A256), but I think with the dead money in the pot you are going to do OK.
1. Everyone folds. For a risk of one small bet you picked up 5. It probably won't happen 1 time in 5, but it might 1 time in 10.
Obviously the best result, but I don't think it will happen enough.
2. Many (everyone) calls. Bigger pot, better drawing odds, and you still may be drawing a free card on the river.
I'll stick to my guns and say that you almost certainly won't get enough callers to make it profitable in itself, nor do I think it will have much of an effect on what happens later. I don't see a free river card in the future, nor do I see a big tie-on. Of course, YMMV.
3. A check raise. See earlier in this thread.
Perhaps the biggest danger, unless (maybe) it gets you heads up. Even then you will lose many times and sometimes quartered.
4. One caller. I still think this is a desirable outcome. It's true you would prefer #1 (pick up the money and run), or #2 (chances for a big pot), but now you are probably playing heads up against a low, and possibly not even a great one. A two may counterfit his low, and give you 3/4 if your high holds up. The worst low is playing against 2345; you will have to muck to a 3 or 4 and a bet. Of course there are worse high senarios for you (like a set or A256), but I think with the dead money in the pot you are going to do OK.
I see some of the same problems as in the check raise scenario, but your situation here is probably a little better. Personally, I wouldn't mind getting down to me-and-him (without being check-raised) since I see myself getting enough of the dead money to come out ahead. As I implied in an earlier post, if you can find a game where lots limp in and fold on the flop, then sit down and glue your ass to the chair.
Eric
Fred - Welcome back to the discussion!
“......4. One caller. I still think this is a desirable outcome........ The worst low is playing against 2345........ Of course there are worse high senarios for you (like a set or A256)...... ”
I had a wisdom tooth pulled this morning and spent the rest of the day alternating between sleeping and thinking about the hand under consideration here.
A question to be answered here is, “Who, in front of you in the betting order, would check this flop?” I think the answer is that either someone with a poor hand or someone with an excellent hand might check this flop.
What kind of hand would be an excellent hand with this flop? The answer is that 2345 would be an excellent hand. Someone with such a hand might very well slow play the hand after the flop, trying to keep as many players in the pot as possible until the big bet rounds.
Another nice hand would be AAYY, with Y not = 6 or 7, maybe something like AA28. Someone with this hand in early position might check, planning to raise if someone in late position bet, with the hope of getting heads-up with one opponent or stealing the pot.
Someone with 23XX might also check, and would be likely to call a bet after this flop.
I don’t think there are any other decent hands, aside from the top straight draw, 89XX.
66XX and 77XX are trap hands after this flop. A7XX and A6XX do not look very good to me either. A76X looks a bit better. Someone with 58XX or 76XX (or any other hand) might also check after the flop. Any of these hands might check after the flop, hoping for a free ride.
Heads-up, if your opponent has 2345 you get half the pot about half (49.6%) the time. The result is probably similar for 234X and even 23XX. (But that's a seat of the pants guess).
Heads-up, if your opponent has AA82, you get half the pot 36.6 percent of the time, a quarter about 1 percent of the time, and win the whole thing about 3 per cent of the time. You lose the whole shebang the other 59.4 per cent of the time. Thus, roughly, you get half the pot two hands out of five and get nothing three hands out of five. You definitely don’t want to be heads up against AAXX after the flop.
My guess is that you would not like to be heads up against some of the other hands listed above, even the trap hands. My guess is that with a flop of A67, A389 doesn’t do well against 66XX, 77XX, A76X, A7XX or A6XX, the other hands that might play, heads-up with this flop. However, I didn’t specifically check them. Maybe I’m wrong.
Pre-flop, I like A389 for heads up play. After a flop of A67, with multiple opponents, who all fold except one, I don’t like it much, because we’re not talking about one random opponent here. We’re probably talking about the best hand that fits the flop out of five hands.
Just my opinion.
Buzz
Eric - “As we both can guess, we may not disagree as much as it might seem to the casual observer. Partially I have been 'arguing' this one for the sake of discussing issues involved with O/8.“
I agree. Same here.
“I think that the big issue here is about the opportunity to bet the flop. There I still believe you need to be getting 6-1 (or knock everybody out) for THAT bet to be a good one. By not betting, you give everyone a chance to get caught when you make the straight on the turn. I agree that I may have been a tad pessimistic when I talked about folding to a bet on the flop, but getting a free turn card is too good to pass up.“
I can see your point.
“By the way, I think you may have misunderstood my position on what happens when I hit the straight on the turn. I am not at all worried about the suck-outs at that point. I am willing to get as much money into the pot as I can.“
Thanks, but I don’t think I am misunderstanding the position you have taken. If I may paraphrase, I believe your contention is twofold: (1) A389, even with a suited ace and favorable position, is a poor pre-flop hand, and (2) eight outs is not enough to justify betting 89XX with a flop of A67 (as compared to seeing a free card on the turn).
If I read you correctly, the issue is not what to do on the turn and the river, but (1) what to do with A389 (suited ace) pre-flop and (2) what to do post-flop when the flop is A67 (rainbow), you are on the button, and the hand has been checked to you.
“One further concession: I would see the river for one big bet if I missed on the turn but was still drawing for the nut high.“
This is a new issue to me. At least I haven’t even been thinking about it.
Thanks for the concession, but, perhaps surprisingly to you, unlike after the flop, I doubt that I would initiate a bet after the turn if (1) I missed the turn and (2) it was again checked to me. At that point I would prefer just to wait and see if I made the nuts on the river, then bet or fold accordingly. If someone else bet, my response would depend on the position of the bettor and the subsequent actions of the ensuing players. I might call, or I might fold.
For example, if everyone checked to the player immediately preceeding me in the betting order, and if that player bet, then I would tend to fold. On the other hand, if the first player bet and everyone else called, then I would tend to see the river for that one bet (hoping to hit and connect for a whipsaw).
I’m not in love with the hand (A389 with suited ace) by any means. I just think I would play it pre-flop, especially if on the button. In addition, I think I would bet the flop (A67 rainbow) if everyone checked to me. After the flop (1) you have two draws to make the hand and (2) you very well might get the second one free if you, yourself, bet the first one.
After the turn, things are quite a bit different if you have not made your hand. (1) You now only have one draw to make the hand and (2) a “half price” bet won’t get you a free card.
There is a tide in the affairs of men, Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune; Omitted, all the voyage of their life Is bound in shallows and in miseries. (W. Shak.)
Even though a free card on the turn is a tempting proposition, if you don’t make that bet after the flop, all the voyage of their hand is bound in shallows and in miseries. In other words the hand is much more difficult to play.
Just my opinion.
Buzz
Even though a free card on the turn is a tempting proposition, if you don’t make that bet after the flop, all the voyage of their hand is bound in shallows and in miseries. In other words the hand is much more difficult to play.
I guess this sums up our major difference. I have trouble understanding just what benefit is derived from a flop bet. There is unlikely to be an immediate financial benefit, since I don't see everyone folding, nor do I see enough callers for you to be making enough to cover the cost of the bet.
I don't see any future benefit, in that there should be no significant tie-on effect and I think a low hand will bet the turn, eliminating the cheap river card play.
My opinion of this situation is that whatever happens later is independant of whatever happens on the flop. Consequently, the hand plays as easily one way as the other. I think the only misery to be found is that you end up making less when you make a voluntary bet on the flop (albeit it will be probably be on the order of 1/3 of a small bet).
Eric
Eric -
"I guess this sums up our major difference. I have trouble understanding just what benefit is derived from a flop bet. There is unlikely to be an immediate financial benefit, since I don't see everyone folding, nor do I see enough callers for you to be making enough to cover the cost of the bet."
Here is the benefit: You take control of the hand yourself.
Just my opinion.
Thanks for the discussion.
Tooth is better. Gotta go play some Omaha-8. Maybe I'll get in some of my new favorite game too (Crazy Pineapple).
Regards,
Buzz
Buzz,
As a LL hold'em (primarily) player known to "dabble" with O8, I have to say your analysis seems to be absolutely on target. Great stuff. Thanks.
Paul - You're welcome - and thank you. I'm clearly compulsive.
Buzz
I understand you think that I should bet. But how would you play this hand if you were bet into? I have top pair and a straight darw. A hand that I would consider weaker than a set. And it is my undersating that in a low flop with no low you should throw your set away as you are an underdog to get half the pot. Don't you agree I should fold if bet into.
Ship It -
"how would you play this hand if you were bet into?"
Please see my (above) response to Eric.
"I have top pair and a straight darw. A hand that I would consider weaker than a set."
Yes, right now, after the flop, it is weaker than a set. But Omaha is a drawing game. Unlike Texas hold 'em, to be considered a decent hand in loose low-limit or mid-limit Omaha high/low games, a set still has to make a full house. To be very honest with you, a set of threes, or eights, or even nines doesn't look very good here. You make a boat with a set of three, eights, or nines and you're putting your money at risk. Here you have top draw for your straight. But, yes, if the board pairs, your hand is trash.
Top set here, but only top set would look better than your top straight draw after the flop.
"And it is my undersating that in a low flop with no low you should throw your set away as you are an underdog to get half the pot."
Depends. I don't think I would dump a set of aces here.
"Don't you agree I should fold if bet into."
Depends. See my (above) response to Eric.
In this situation, as you have described it, no one did bet into you. That's a lot different (and less dependent on other factors) than facing the situation where someone bet into you.
Just my opinion. :-)
Buzz
Maybe, it is a stupid question, but i`m a new player in seven card stud. I have read a book ("how to win at medium and lower limits" by Roy West, and I try to follow the strategy, but it seems to me, that I have to fold very often.
I`d like to know, if you could tell me how many percent of the time you have to fold, in a average 7-card stud game, low limits with seven players. I know that it is depending on many variables, but if you could give some approximate value.
I appreciate any Help
Michael
A rough rule of thumb, fold 85% of your hands on third st. ........But remember, that is just a rough rule of thumb.
A great man (Ray Zee) once said....."In all poker,you need to play like a rock. Most people don't know how tight a rock really plays. If you can't play tight, give up now".
Forgive me Ray, if I took anyting out of context. I just love that quote.
Good Luck
Howard
PS
Two Plus Two's 'Seven Card Stud For Advanced Players' is THE best book on stud. IMHO
85 % is probably about right. i find that when i start to lose i am usually playing way too many hands. I find that the fewer i play the more i win and the less i get called.
JMHO
billy b
While the advice here is fairly accurate, there are really two issues. If you are playing 1-5 or 5-10 and can limp in with no raise, I would say that you should be playing more than 15% if you are willing to throw your hand away on fourth if you do not catch the right card. If there is no raise you would likely play a hand with two big cards suited in late position, i.e. KsQs/4h or something of that sort. If it were raised I would toss it without hesitation in most low limit situations, especially if you are new to stud. Your implied odds are pretty high at low limit when many players will call you to the end even if they are obviously beaten.
So you should play tightly in a raised pot, SLIGHTLY looser in an unraised pot, but DONT use the lack of a raise to play anything. Play hands that can improve to big hands, and play multiway hands.
Good Luck!
Pat
that is pretty good advice. I will limp in with big cards as long as they are live but bail if i dont improve. but it still kills me to throw away split kings with the other 2 showing but i know i cant improve them.
I always seem to agree with Pat. The one thing I can contribute is that in low limit games, it is very important to understand the feel of the game. In low limit, it is very difficult to give general rules except to play very tightly until you get a read on the other players. You must be able to adjust your game to adapt to the visitors who feel "it's only money" to the weekend warriors to the professional bottom feeders who try to make a living playing 15 hrs at a 1-5 table 6-7 days a week.
can you make a living at 1-5 15 hours a week that would seem to be stretching it. I would think you would have to get very lucky.
I know a 2 guys who claimed to earn a living at the Trop in AC playing 1-5 daily. I suppose it is possible. I figure he made 5-8/hr (and that's good) plus some comps, and his social security which probably got him by. The other guy claims to do well enough to not have a real job. They are probably the exception. Both are low maintenance guys and must have some other source. Neither has moved up to 5/10 or 10/20.
My biggest winning nights amount to maybe one hand in thirty going to the river, three hands seeing fourth street then folding, and folding the remaining 26 hands folded on third street. Your mileage will vary.
If you play five hours, take ten hands to the river, win six, you've done okay. In low limit it's not how many hands you play, but how many and which hands you win.
There is a real [deadly] ratio of hands you play compared to money you make in low limit stud.
1. Can anyone recommend some good 7-card stud books. I only have one book (7-card stud, how to win at medium and lower limits by Roy West) ?
2. Are there some specific 7-card stud forums or websites like twoplustwo, where I can find some more information ?
3. How can you learn to memorizing exposed cards. I can remember the numbers like (3,6,8,j,Q), but when I also have to remember the suited cards, it`s become much more difficult to remember. Can anyone explain me the easiest way to practice meorizing the exposed cards ?
I am very thankfull for all the answers
regards,
Michael Anderson
My Answers:
1. Can anyone recommend some good 7-card stud books. I only have one book (7-card stud, how to win at medium and lower limits by Roy West) ?
You're at 2+2 and asking about good Stud books and you don't own 7CS for Advanced Players? Go to Borders Books and skim through it, but buy it from ConJelCo.
2. Are there some specific 7-card stud forums or websites like twoplustwo, where I can find some more information ?
No Clue
3. . How can you learn to memorizing exposed cards. I can remember the numbers like (3,6,8,j,Q), but when I also have to remember the suited cards, it`s become much more difficult to remember. Can anyone explain me the easiest way to practice meorizing the exposed cards ?
Comes with practice. The more you understand how the cards affect your hand the easier it becomes to remember exposed cards.
CV
First..the book you have and Sklansky's Theory of Poker and Sklansky 7CS for advanced playets are must reads. I understabd Chiaffone's is very good too, but I have not read it.
This forum could be very good but most of the "great (or grate) minds" on this web site prefer the Holdem forum. For now, use this forum and see what happens. I think it is much better than RGP. I think there are some knolwlegable posters on this site.
I memorize them by putting them in order. For suits, I count my suit first and unless someone looks like he is suited in another, I do not bother. See Sklansky's green book for that.
Michael,
Primo stud book as mentioned is the Sklansky 21st century edition. Another one I like is the Doyle Brunson book - the section on 7 stud was written by Chip Reese. The book is rather expensive, though, and for the money you're better off with the Sklansky book. Another good book, if you don't have it yet is Sklansky's Theory of Poker. Although it does not focus on 7-stud, there is a lot of good information there that will help your stud game.
As far as remembering cards, the first thing I notice when the 3rd street cards are dealt is how many of each suit are out. Then I use Roy West's technique of remembering each card as it is folded. If it is a high card, then I remember the suit also, as you sometimes get into a situation where you would like to know how high your opponent's flush could be. Otherwise, I don't remember a specific card's suit - like "7 of clubs" or "deuce of diamonds". This "selective accounting" of the cards reduces the quantity of information I have to keep track of, and I don't think I lose much by not remembering each specific card.
As to other 7-stud forums - I can't help you there. If you find any others, please let me know.
Roy's book is good, and I also like konstantin otmer's book a whole lot. you can get it through gambler's bookshop.
I use the roy west method for remembering the cards, and it works, it just takes time...
I find myself in unfamiliar waters. I have been playing holdem for about 3 years and know find myself in a new city where the only games are dealers choice. What is the strategy for opening hands? I have been trying to play based on two good holdem hands and I only play A2 low hands, as I am unfamiliar with that game. Any suggestions would be appreciated.....
choppy
O/8 is much different from holdem. I suggest you buy Ray Zee's High-Low Split poker book which you can order at through this site.
Here is a little advice, but I am no expert. A2xx hands are OK, especially if the game is loose (preflop and postflop). Playing 2 good holdem hands is not a good way to look at o/8 (not a good way to play omaha high either). You are looking for "coordinated" hands. Hands where all four cards are working together. If you pick two good holdem hands then you are only using two combinations of cards out of a 4 card hand. A 4 card hand has different 2 card combinations so you only have 1/3 the potential if you just pick 2 holdem hands. You are looking for hands that can scoop the whole pot in O/8. A simple example is a hand that contains A2 and the ace suited with another card, therefore you can make the nut flush and the nut low.
Other things to keep in mind are to avoid middle cards like the plague. They suck, there is no other way to say it. A hand such as 6789 is terrible in O/8 (but it is a decent hand in Omaha High). The reason is that if you make a straight with this hand a low will be possible so you will only be shooting for half the pot. Therefore, if you don't have good low possibilities in your hand than you should look for hands where all the cards are 9 and above. An example would be KJT9. This way, if you make a straight (or some other hand) it is less likely to be a low on board so you will be aiming at the whole pot. There is a catch 22 to these hands though. They look pretty, and they are good hands, but they are not raising hands. A hand like KKQQ does not constitute a raise for value (you can raise for other reasons of course) in O/8.
So, aim at the whole pot. Build hands that can acomplish this. If you are going for low than build a hand than can be a lock (eg. A234 has a great chance to make the nut low). Finally, always be drawing to the nuts if you are drawing, there is no other way to play.
These are just some quick thoughts, it is probably pretty eratic, but I don't have time to proofread or anything like that. Hope this helps.
Thanks for the thoughts. One other question. How do you play when you flop a hand. I have been betting them hard and getting burned. Is it best to just wait in the weeds and see how you stand after the river, or should I continue to make them pay.
P.S. - I'm talking about 3-6-12 and 5-10-20.
Oh, well the betting structures of 3-6-12 and 5-10-20 change post flop significantly. I am no expert and I have never played in these games but you should be able to relate to how this betting structure would change your holdem game. Hands that thrive on "reverse implied odds" such as big pair and big offsuit cards (ie. AKo) lose a lot of value. Hands that thrive on "implied odds" gain a ton of value (such as 67s). This is simple to understand. Reverse implied odds hands can not bet with confidence at the end of the hand very often whereas hands that thrive on implied odds can bet with confidence near the end of the hand because they usually make strong hands.
I've never played in this type of betting structure and hopefully I never will. It rewards suck out artists. The implied odds are so high for drawing hands that it can be "correct" to stay with some pretty wild draws. I wouldn't enjoy this type of game, your bad opponents will be playing more "correctly" without even realizing it.
Back to omaha. How to play when you flop a hand? Depends on the hand of course, on it's relative strength and the chance of it standing up. It also depends on the redraws you may or may not have (remember in omaha you can get some pretty monster flop, eg. Your hand: Ac As Kc Qs, Flop: Ah Js Ts. You have the nut straight, top set and the nut flush draw. You can confidently push your whole stack in on the flop here, hehe.) But that's not a very good answer, I always hate the "it depends" answer, but this is poker, and it does "depend". Anyways, I tend to play my "good" hands strongly. These include high straights where there is little chance of someone drawing a higher straight. Nut flushes, big full houses. I also play mediocre hands a little harder than I am beginning to think I should (medium straights and such that are temporarily the "nuts). I like to bet my nut lows but if I have a second nut low I won't stand any action with it usually. I think that you need to bet your hands strongly in O/8 because it is a drawing game and you need to make people pay to draw against you.
BUT, with that betting structure it may change things in a way that a non-expert like myself won't be able to pick up on. One obvious change that I can see is that value bets on the river take on a whole new meaning. Cold calling raises on the turn are not that bad of a deal as they usually are because the betting doubles again on the river. Oh, I'm getting a headache just trying to come up with a strategy for this betting structure, let a lone try and come up with a strategy for an Omaha game with this betting structure. My advise is to only play strong hands and then to bet them hard. NEVER draw to less than the nuts in this game. Make sure that you make a lot of money on the river when you hit your hands.
Hopefully Pac or Ray Zee or someone can get in here and help you out a little better.
Mark Dodd is "right on" here.
Just my opinion.
Buzz
I don't think this structure is so bad for O/8.
The point is in O/8 you shouldn't be paying off on the river (in a loose game). period, you should only be drawing to the nuts and if you have players who will pay you off on the river so much the better.
I think unlike in holdem (where this structure rewards the suckout artists more), this structure isn't as determental to the good player in O/8 since drawing is what you should be doing in this game.
Good point suspicious. After some further reflection I don't think that this structure would be "terrible" for O/8 but I would prefer the regular betting structure. With this structure I would put a lot of emphasis on the low side of the pot (I would play for low a lot) since you would be able to gain money from the big bets on the end since you should have a cinch lock.
I think that this structure would be simply TERRIBLE for holdem, but I hear this is what they mostly play in Calgary (3-6-12 holdem). What a bad game, I'm so glad I don't live there.
Thanks for the help guys, I need it.
I'll just add to what mark said.
A set is still a drawing hand. Any time you have a set w/ two wheel cards out there be careful - the lows aren't going anywhere and they're drawing for the wheel to scoop. Baby sets(even top set of say 8's) are trouble and bottom sets are BIG trouble. I can't stand hardly ANY action w/ a set unless I've got top set. I'll only play bottom set if it's combined w/ a low draw(Even then I'm mainly looking to 3/4 someone who's just on a low). Just my thoughts - I had a very expensive lesson when I first started playing omaha b/c I played a set like I did in Holdem...It ain't that strong.
Patrick
Played this for the first time tonight. Honestly...has anyone ever played a stupider card game than that? It is the stupidest game I can think of. Am I wrong? Comments appreciated.
It was a great money-maker for me when it became popular for a while in Oceanside.
I wish I could get it spread regularly out here at Foxwoods. At least for a while, no one (else) would know what they're doing, and I would presumably be able to make a lot of money at it again.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
x
I like this game. But the problem is, at least for me, action dries up when other players discover the importance of the Ace. I'd be interested in Greg's experience with this. I too would love to spread this g ame at Foxwoods...though based on Greg's post I'd want to watch him play for about 100 hours before I sat down in the same game.
Can you make money at stud worth your time? It seems like you can't. You get fewer hands per hour, and in my experience, it's much harder to make winning hands stand up.
Draws that are worth it are also harder to pick up because half the time you have a drawing hand, your cards are dead, so you have to fold anyway.
But the real key is hands per hour. Stud is so slow that your "winning edge" doesn't get applied to as many hands as in hold'em. Is this true or not? It seems like hold'em is the way to go if you want to make money from fish.
natedogg
I agree that stud is a lot slower. It also seems like there are not as many fish as hold'em. The only way I justify playing stud is that while the win rate is low, at least it is constant.
I forgot to say that I don't understand how people think Omaha/8 is slow and boring. Stud is a lot more boring to me.
Seems though if you live certain areas of the country (eg the east coast), you are much better off playing stud. there are more games to choose from and the games are better.
The bigger games aren't that slow. (10/20 or bigger).
I doubt a good holdem player does significantly better than a good stud player. (If at all).
The 10/20 and 15/30 games at the Trop are not slow.
I win more than twice as much per hour at stud than at hold'em. I think it just depends on which game you do better at as there are certain nuances to each game. Stud is a more mathematical game than holdem in my opinion but there's also alot of play to it once you get good at it.
Yes there are more drawouts in stud than in hold'em but in a way that's exactly what makes the games better. Since people know that they can draw out easier they try to do it all the time, and eventually the law of averages catches up to them.
To me, stud is just more fun and much more interesting than is hold'em.
I've seen you play holdem. It isn't pretty. But I'm sure if you applied yourself to holdem like you have to stud, you would do just as well.
Although stud is slower, there is an extra betting round which makes up for having less hands per hour. I make more per hour in holdem, but I have less variance in stud.
I think stud players play the game more mathematically, and holdem players are more strategic. Those players who don't grasp strategy are more likely to play stud. Bad players tend to think that holdem is all luck, because they don't know when they are outplayed.
But due to the nature of the exposed cards, the worst stud players still play better than the worst holdem players. That is why the highest limit games are usually stud. The fish have a better chance in stud than holdem.
The bottom line is, look for the best game, and don't worry about if it is stud or holdem.
Tight stud games can be very profitable, unlike most tight holdem games. There are many more potential steal opportunities in a tight stud game, and this alone can permit a large win rate. Also, when your opponents in stud are too passive you can play a (relatively) large number of marginal hands profitably to take advantage of this. In passive holdem games there are a number of strategic and structural reasons that prevent you from loosening up much.
Mediocre play is also more exploitable in stud than in holdem. Once people don't make the beginner mistakes in holdem, you can't win much from them, and you just concentrate on the fish. Stud play is more complex, and even "decent" players almost always have serious flaws in their games; due to this the expert has a larger advantage over mediocre players in stud.
At low-limits, the above doesn't hold. Loose-passive holdem games are much more lucrative than the idiotic rockfest 1-5 no-ante stud games (and Omaha-8 usually better still). When there are terrible players in both games, holdem is usually the better choice. But when both games have no obvious fish, stud is usually the more profitable one for someone proficient in both games. Especially on the East Coast, the holdem games at lower-mid limits tend to be tight and full of regulars, while the stud games range from medium to quite good.
Can you categorize East Coast stud players by the limits they play, as hold 'em players sometimes are?
1-5: Very loose and very passive. Tiny pots. Difficult to get any action. In general, everyone calls the $1 but they fold as soon as there's any action. With the $4 rake, not beatable for much. (I haven't played this low in a few years) Also varies by casino - can be better in casinos that don't have large poker rooms. Foxwoods spreads this with an ante, but I've never played it there.
5-10: Loose and passive. A lot of people call the bring-in and then fold easily on 4th and 5th. Few steal opportunities on 3rd, but many later in the hand. Definitely beatable for a decent amount. This level players still treat the game as recreation - you don't find good players this low.
10-20: Tighter and more aggressive than 5-10, moderate by the standards of higher stud games. Most pots 2-3 way, and many steal opportunities on 3rd. A mix of fish, rocks, and some better players playing down. Almost always a profitable game.
15-30, 20-40: Often loose and aggressive. Play far from world-class, but tougher than 10-20. Opponents more tenacious, and they play more aggressively than 10-20 - you can't run the table over like you sometimes can in 10-20.
pm
Perfectly stated Dan. I agree entirely
*
I believe that if all things were equal, and by this I mean that your opposition is approximately the same whether you play stud or hold 'em, at the middle limits the expert stud player will make a little more than the expert hold 'em player. However, in many places the hold 'em games are better since more new players are attracted to hold 'em than stud. Furthermore, it probably takes a little longer to become an expert stud player than it does to achieve similar status at hold 'em.
Interesting posts so far. I'm an avid player of both games and I'll have to cast my vote for stud becuase of the extra betting round and opturnities for the "expert" player to make money. Of course I also feel that holdem is not far behind as far as making bets per hour. Even still my wins are more consistant in stud. Every fish has its fry in the crazy texas holdem games but it is IMPOSSIABLE and I do mean impossiable for an unskilled player to win at 7CS hi low 8 or better. There are just to many ways for the fish to go wrong. I'd also like to add that I take a personal averson to the poster who stated that "people who don't understand strategy play stud". One could easily sum up Holdem strategy as an exercise in check raising.
Go Stud
It is, of course, possible to make money playing Stud. Just ask any of us who do. Is it better than Hold Em? Other posters have more experience than I playing HE, but for what it's worth, this is my opinion.
If you play on the East Coast then Stud is the better game. It is the ENTRY game for most players out here -- the game they come to casino familiar with from their home games. So the recreational player, who isn't trying to earn money, is more likely to play Stud. Consequentially, you will see more first time casino poker players playing Stud. Many won't return because they will go bust. And they will be replaced by new blood, drawn from the pools of home games on the East Coast which spread much more Stud than Hold Em.
On the West Coast and in Vegas, I found the opposite to be true. There are fewer Stud games (above 1-5) than Hold EM and m any fewer people who enter the casino knowing Stud better than Hold Em. So HE is the entry level game and, thereby, better action. With a few notable exceptions, the 15/30 Stud games are not as good as the 15/30 HE games. The Stud games, for the most part, are populated by people who know how to play the game well while the HE game has a number of people who enter at that level because they know the game from their home game or lower casino game experience. Simply put, there's a larger pool of bad Hold Em players on the West Coast than on the East Coast so the games are better.
I am planning to take a short (3-4 days) trip to Atlantic City in December or January. Where is the best stud action - the Taj or the Tropicana? Which one offers the best poker rate for rooms?
Thanks in advance.
Matter of opinion and comfort.
Taj has the largest variety of games. The very low limit games (1/3-1/5)are frequented by a lot of old timers. The 5/10 and 10/20 games are very good with plaenty of action. the 15/30 and up are pretty tough. Some allege partners. I cannot say. They have hig limit games up to 500/1000. No smoking throughout. Nice Hotel; very big, lots of slots for the spouse etc. Comps are OK, about $1-2/hr of play. Discounted room rates. Some call the place a noisy meat market, others love the action.
Trop is smaller but still >40 tables with a tournament every day or night. Some tournaments are only $20 entry fees. Stud from 1/3 up to 100/300 but mostly only up to 15/30. A group of regulars paly a 15/30 hi-lo stud all weekend. Excellent dealers and knowledgable floor people. Place is well under control. The Trop goes Non-Smoking tomorrow. They offer a high limit room isolated from the general floor. Hotel offers discounted rooms and comps for hourly play similar to Taj. Lots of slots and video poker for the guests. Probably in a little nicer neighborhood but not a big deal.
Overall the weather will be chilly. The Hotels are on the beach and boardwalk. Neat if you have never experienced it. Cabs are cheap. Transprtation between casinos is cheap but you can walk to almost all but 2.
Need more, just ask
Tournament PL 7cs is in something of a golden age in Europe these days, with plenty of sizable prizes up for grabs. My prediction is that this will grow for the next few years and then gradually be replaced by PL and NL mississippi 7cs, which is a much better big-bet game which contains all the elements which make 7cs so popular.
Despite it's popularity in europe, the problems with big-bet 7cs are what kept it from being selected as the NL championship game at the WSOP in 1971: with a 70% market share as a limit game back then it would have been the obvious choice if it worked well at NL.
The 3 problems are firstly that five rounds is too many for a big-bet game: it costs twice as much to call five pot-sized bets as it does to call four, and with normal buy-in requirements it is rare that anyone has enough money for five bets, which makes the fifth round superfluous.
Secondly, the bet at fourth street means that anyone drawing to a straight or flush has to call 2 rounds of betting to even have a chance to make a hand, which reduces the playability of those hands.
Thirdly, the third hole-card has about the same effect as a paired board does in holdem/omaha in that it makes it nearly impossible for a straight or flush to be the absolute nuts. They are therefore trouble hands at PL since they can't be bet with confidence at the end if everyone has plenty of money left (which is admittedly rare because of problem #1). Limit players should understand that at PL 7cs it makes about as much sense to bet on a straight or flush at the end as it does when the board is paired in PL holdem, since a raise will kill you. The third hole-card also pretty kills the bluffing potential provided by having a 3-or 4-card exposed straight or flush, since you can't bluff with a hand which wouldn't be safe to bet for value.
Mississippi doesn't have these problems, since it is 7cs with the fourth and fifth cards dealt together and the last card face up. It is unique as far as I know in providing for a fully protected, unraisable value-bet at the end with a non-nut hand. When you are showing the possible nuts at the end with an exposed 3- or 4-card straight or flush then you can bet a medium hand like small trips for value with no risk of being reraised. Similarly you can bluff in the same situation, again representing the nuts.
Since NL mississippi contains all the bluffing situations which holdem does, based on tells, betting patterns etc, plus a variety of situations based on upcard strength which don't exist in holdem, can it not be said to be a better game than holdem for bluffing, as well as a far better PL/NL game than 7cs?
David Z
I think Mississipi is a better game for big bet poker than regular 7CS, but your idea that it will take over any time in the near future is just silly. I've never met anyone who even knows the rules of the game, while 7CS has been played in the thousands of home games for a hundred years. Has Mississipi ever been spread in a casino even?
Hi deadbart, glad you like the game. But you are right, it isn't spread in casinos yet, though it was a small hit at BARGE at Binion's this year, and I think Lou Kreiger (who was there and thought it was great) is aiming to get it onto some playlists soon, so things are starting to move. NL tournament exposure will be a big step forward.
AS for 7cs being a hard game to run down, 7cs players have been wrong twice in 20 years when they have said "it can't happen". So it's pretty vulnerable on that record, though it is to be expected that they will again say that it won't happen. I think there is a good chance mississippi will do it pretty quickly because a lot of 7cs players will take to it once they get over their initial skepticism. For new players there won't be a contest: a large majority, maybe 80-90% will prefer mississippi. Pitbosses will make about 10% more money on every table they change from 7cs to M7, so that's a huge motivation for them to push the game. It's hard to see the two games coexisting for long since they are versions of the same game.
BTW, apparently 7cs was invented in the 1920's, or maybe the 1910's: there were several versions around at that stage. It wasn't a big game then: didn't get big until WWII apparently.
DZ
One situation that I have particular problems with is when I have 2 low pr on 4th street in low limit, against several players at least one of which I know has a high pair, like queens.
I am torn since 2+2 seems to suggest raising to drive out other hands and get heads up with the Q's, while West seems to say let them go, they dont stand up enough. I mostly let them go, but I feel like I am screwing this up more often than not. And this leads to more passive play if I continue to do this.
Any suggestions?
Todd
An easy solution. In stud, don't play to make 2 small pair and don't play to make a small straight. You'll either win small pots or lose big ones. (Note that the only way you can make 2 small pair is to start with a small pair that has a bad kicker.)
I agree, but in this case i was the bring in with split 3's with a 7 kicker. Caught a 7 on fourth.
todd
You should not be playing that hand unless it has a straightflush kicker. The reason why is precisely the problem; you make two small pair and it is a multiway pot. You should try to get it heads up by fourth street and if you cannot you should fold in low limit. Your advantage in low limit, as opposed to middle or high limit, comes in large part from playing better starting hands. The hand you described with split threes should be thrown away on third unless you are in a VERY weak game. You just cannot make a good enough hand often enough in low limit to play.
Good luck!
Pat
I'd like to chime in here. If I remember correctly Roy doesn't say to drop the hand in all cases. He say that the hand must be played fast (betting and raising) but if you're not prepared to play the hand fast then just let it go. I would like to add that if your cards are live then there is value in the fullhouse draw in a multiway pot. I think your chances are 25% of makeing a fullhouse by the river. So if you've got 6, 7, or 8 players going all the way to the river you are getting good value on this draw. Anybody agree? If you make a full house esp early like 5th it could be a nice payday. Still I'd like to get the hand heads up.
I definitely agree that if you have a lot of players it is worth it to go for a draw. But, you only have a 16% chance of a full house (I think) with one of your pair cards out, so there must be a big pot.
The real issue here is not how to play the low two pair, but whether a hand such as the one described, i.e. split threes with a seven kicker and no straight flush card should be played in a low limit game. I would not hesitate to toss it on third street without a straight flush kicker. If I had a higher pair, such as 9's I might play if there was no raise and if my hand was totally live and hope to hit a third 9 on fourth street. This play is a good one if you are able to toss it if you do not catch.
Once you are in you must play for a full house if the pot odds are correct, but the key in low limit is not to routinely play such hands.
Patrick,
In this situation, I was the bring in. Do not call with this hand otherwise.
That said, this is a problem that has occured several times to me. I am forced in, make two pair, fold, and the winner shows down a pair of Q's.
The question is, when you find yourself in this position, with two pair, lower than your opponents likely pair, how do you play. Same could be said if I started with split J's, make two pair on fourth, and one opponent makes likely Q's - A's.
I am troubled with folding the best hand.
Todd,
In this situation and you are high on the board check. If someone bets try check raising to get it heads-up. Usually LL players will drop thinking you have trips and get out. LL players do not like check raising not in their vocabulary. The original better will call and if he raises you will have to make a decision as to how he plays. This works for me when I'm the bring-in sometimes and sometimes I do have trips. Otherwise don't play these hands as Earl says unless you are the bring in.
Paul
hi everyone, i'd like some comments.
Game is 2-6, loose-passive. Usually 4 people to 4th street and it's not uncommon to get 2 or 3 free cards. Winner of these 2 hands has been a calling station, but has switched more to loose-agressive in the last few minutes.
1. I get (77)Q and limp. calling station (CS) limps with xxJ and bring in has xx2. pot $6
4th street: (77)Q7, cs xxJK, bring in xx2h8h. I check, CS bets 4, bring in calls, i raise to 10, cs calls, bring in calls. pot $36
5th street: (77)Q78, cs xxKTA, bring in xx2s8hTc. cs checks, bring in checks, I bet 6, cs raises to 12, fish calls, i worry and call. pot $72
6th street (77)Q783, cs xxKTAQ, bring in xx2h8hTcJh. Cs bets 6, bring in calls, i call, convinced i should've folded on 5th. pot $90
7th street: I catch a T, cs bets 6, bring in raises to 12. I fold. cs shows the broadway, bring in wins with xAh2h8hTcJh6h.
I couldn't have put the bring in on the flush draw and he shouldn't have been in there, but should i have folded on 5th when i got raised by the 3 straight on board. Like I say, he was a calling station who had been throwing in a few raises with the last few hands and they didn't always merit it. I figured I had 8 outs to the boat on 6th out of about 19 cards and that the pot size justified drawing for the boat, but I didn't like losing (haha)
#2
same 3 players. cs brings in with xx8, fish limps with xx7, i limp with (9J)A. pot 6
4th: I bet 6 with (9J)AJ, cs calls with xx82, fish calls with xx7x. pot 24
5th: i bet 6 with (9J)AJA, cs calls with xx82A, fish calls with xx7xx. pot 40
6th: i bet 6 with (9J)AJAx, cs raises with xx2A6, fish calls with garbage. I call, figuring 3 outs out of about 19 for the extra six bucks. pot 76
7th: cs bets 6, i catch a rag and call, he shows me (6A)2A696 for the full house. fish had nothing.
should i have folded on 6th or 7th?
In hand #1 you should not fold on fith st. even if CS were to turn his hand over and show you the straight. In the second hand it looks like you ran into trips on 6th maybe he made aces up though. I didn't do the math but I think with a $76 pot you call is pretty much correct. I've never seen a 2-6 7cs game anywhere. Where is your game? I never liked spread limit anyway people always making strange bets to try and suck people in. I hate that, Stud is not a game of sucking people in its a game of kicking them out.
good luck
soaring eagle in mt pleasant michigan spreads 2-6, 6, meaning that on 3rd and 4th its 2-6, with 6 on 5-7.
I would have either folded the 77 in a loose passive game depending on position or raised. I would not have called
I make this play a fair amount in loose-passive games because I'm in good shape (this hand notwithstanding) if I catch my 7 on 4th. I often get a free card on 4th when its checked around. When I catch my kicker, if it's not an ace or a king, then i've got a head-scratcher if no one will fold. I usually let queens up or lower go if i can't figure out where i'm at. Do you think this is a bad play?
Duff, I wouldn't have folded either hand in these situations before the river. In the first hand, you are getting great pot odds to play for you full house draw. Also you have the best draw. If everyone hits their draw you gain an extra 5 bets. I think you more aggravated that you didn't make your draw. You played the hand properly.
In the second hand, I would not have played your holding for the bring in. That being said, after you catch Aces up on 5th street, how could you possibly think you should fold on 5th or 6th street. Unless I'm misreading the hands, you were in the lead until the river. Your mistake may have been not reraisng on 5th street and allowing your opponent a cheap draw to beat you.
I'm not sure your description of the calling station is accurate...he was capable of raising with Aces up against your open Aces and slowed you down completely. I don't consider this play normal for a calling station. I find that this type of aggressive player is quite more difficult to play against than a CS.
If he had become a loose aggressive player, even less chance that I would fold. By definition, this type of player will play a much wider range of starting hands and will be more difficult to put on a hand. Even more reason to raise or reraise when given the opportunity with what would appear to be the best hand or even a small underdog because you don't want to give free or cheap cards to beat you.
John Gaspar
1. I would have raised or folded coming in. I think a limp is incorrect. Your hand should be played heads up if possible, and you should have raised. That said, you should have called all the way with the pot size, since you had a good enough chance to get a full house.
2. Once again you should not have limped in, in my opinion. Your hand has value only to win small pots, or if you pair the A in the door or get some other scare card. You should have raised coming in to try to catch a scare card on fourth. Additionally, I would have gone for a check raise on fourth or fifth. I posted a similar problem a while ago. By keeping the pot small, you have a better chance of checkraising and knocking someone out. But, it is a tough position. In this case it probably wouldnt have made a difference as your opponent would have called.
You got unlucky in a way, as your opponent drew out on you and you had the best hand on sixth street. Unless I read your post wrong, your opponent caught the full house card on the river, and you had him beat.
Good Luck,
Pat
I think in hand one, CS let you do the betting through fourth. When I popped a set, I would have bet the max through fifth street and not gone for a CR.
Hand two, you were committed, I think.
Whenever I am happily betting along and two or more players are happily calling, lights and sirens go off at fifth street. It's time to take a look around and check the bushes.I think you better put CS in a higher bracket of playing ability.
I'm looking for a poker game in or near the Catskills in Upstate New York. I'm willing to drive an hour or so. Unfortunately, the nearest casinos (Turning Stone in Syracuse and Mohegan Sun in Norwich, CT) are 2 hours and too far.
I'll be vacationing in the area from 12/25-12/29. So any help in finding a game in these parts will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
$3/6 stud, $.50 ante, $1 bring-in. Generally a loose passive game, although there are a couple of players on the other end of the table who are aggressive. I am one of about six limpers with (AJ)8. One of my jacks is gone, and I don't notice that an ace is also gone until my chip is in the pot. On fourth street, I pair my ace, but the player two to my right makes an open pair of jacks. He bets $6. The next player folds, and I raise to $12. All other players fold, and the jacks reraise. I call him all the way down without improving. Your comments sought. I'll post my thoughts later.
I dont think this is a hand to limp in with in a multiway pot unless you have a two flush. You should have folded, or raised if the A or J was your door card. This is especially true when you had two dead cards.
However, once you caught the second A you played the hand OK, except that I would have re-reraised on fourth, since all he could have was two J's or two pair, as he likely would have raised coming in with a pair of jacks on third. However, if you had any idea that he might have three J's, i.e. because he is the type of player who might limp with a pair of J's and then reraise only with three J's, but not two pair, then you should have folded. You frequently see this type of player at low limit stud.
Note that if he only has two pair, i.e. he limped in with a small pair, you played the hand correctly once you paired A's, but I would have tossed this hand unless the game was weak.
Pat
Thanks for your thoughts, Pat. I wasn't looking for an opinion on whether I should have called the bring-in, but I figured I'd get it. The game was pretty weak. There were a few mediocre players and a couple of downright awful players. One of the aggressive players is at least decent, but I haven't played against him quite enough to decide whether I think he's actually good or not. Although I was in middle position, I had little fear of a raise behind me. I frequently limp in with little more than an Ace or maybe a KQ in the hole. If I don't make a big pair on fourth street, I fold to a bet. The texture of these games is such that I can frequently see fifth street for my bring-in if I so choose, so I just might have two shots to pair my ace. Also, if I pair my eight, I can frequently pick up the pot right there. I think that limping with these kinds of hands is correct for these games, and if it isn't correct, it isn't that wrong. If I had noticed that an ace was out, I would have folded. I'm usually much more observant than that. :^) I usually don't limp in with these hands in my usual $4/8 game, where the bring-in is $2.
Anyway, I was mainly interested in three issues:
(1) My decision to raise on fourth.
(2) My decision to call my opponent's reraise.
(3) My decision to call my opponent down even though I never improved.
I raised to get the hand heads-up. I thought that his most likely hand was jacks-up and there was a pretty good chance that he had only jacks. In either case, I think I want the hand to be heads-up. I've tried this before and gotten callers behind me, but this time it worked. I didn't think he could have trips since (1) most people will raise with a pair of jacks on third, and (2) I had one of his jacks in the hole. If he has jacks-up, I need to improve, and my hand's a bit dead.
Reraising on fourth really didn't occur to me, and I don't know that I think it's a good idea. He probably has jacks-up, in which case I'm the one drawing, and with a somewhat dead hand at that. I don't think many people reraise with an open pair unless they have something to go with it. If you make it four bets and he makes it five, do you release the hand? At that point, it's really starting to look like he has trips. If he does, you've got one out.
This was an unknown player, and for all I knew he had trips. As you say, you do see people who play like this at low limits.
I think I have to call fifth and sixth street, as I'm getting correct odds to draw if he has jacks-up. I think I have to call the river because the pot is pretty big by that point. Of course, I'm only getting those good odds because I threw in so much money on fourth street.
The other guy had three jacks. He had his river card separate from the others, so I know that he had a pair of jacks to start with.
I am only rading the 1st part. I would not have played the hand. My experience in low limit stud is when a guy reraises an Ace he has trips or possibly Aces with a big kicker. He pairs his door card and is now very dangerous. He bets into you and you raise. You essentially have to call not raise. His reraise clearly tells me he has trips. I have to fold. See Roy West's classic description. Your possibility of trip aces is a stretch. He has his trips and can improve to a boat. You have to catch 2 cards. Fold.
Now if he does not have trips, disregard what I said above. He must be have brass balls to do a bluff like that in a low limit game.
I looked. He had the trips OK, but on the river???
He made a mistake and got lucky.
Ratso,
He started with a pair of Jacks as you suspected. Everything you said is right. I think a better illustration of this is Vince's starting with xJ/AAA against TT/xTT and gives up knowing the player had 4T's. I don't know if this is exact so I don't want the total recall police coming after me for screwing up.
Paul
Hi Paul,
Should try to get to AC for the big tounrnaments at the Taj so you can watch Fosilman win the big one? I am trying to get down there with my wife if I can convince her to go if only for the day. Crappy weather though.
I don't think that I would have played the hand as you did.
Even if I hand't noticed that an Ace was gone I doubt I would have called third street. I some how I was the bring in and a bunch of people had called and there had then been a raise I may have called the raise.
BUT, even so, on fourth street when a player paired his open Jacks I would have conceded when I was reraised back. Why? THe pot was not already huge. I had slim chances for improvement (by then you had noticed that one Ace was gone, plus at least two of the Jacks. He at least had Jacks up (unless he chronically overplayed his hand, in which case I think you played the hand correctly).
8-16 O/8
Utg Makes it 16, sick pisser cold calls 16.
I've got AQsA10d I make it 24. I know I have no low but I'd like to get the blinds out after all I do have doubly suited aces with 2 good kickers.
SB folds BB cold calls Utg calls.
Flop comes down...
Ah 8d Jd
Giving me no less that top set nut flush draw and a gutshot.
Utg bets, pisser calls I raise all call. Turn is a 4c
Utg checks, pisser bets I call, all call
The river is a 2h Utg checks, pisser bets I call, fold fold
He turns over 9935s
for the ruuner runner wheel
This makes me so sick
He must have soon given it all back to the table.
Did you stay to collect?
yes
Its a high low game............pretty cards are nice and all but I'd rather have a low. The real question is did the sick pisser stay to collect.
JV - No. No. No.
After the flop, SP needed either runner-runner 42 or runner-runner 99 for the nuts. The odds against SP making one of those hands were 973 to 17, or about 57 to 1 against, post-flop.
SP did not have favorable odds to play, pre-flop.
SP did not have favorable odds to play, post-flop.
SP did not have favorable odds to bet the turn.
Continuing to play in this manner (bucking the odds) for a couple of hours makes SP a huge favorite to have a losing session.
SP made several mistakes in the course of playing this one single hand. One can only imagine how badly SP played the rest of the hands, and how lucrative the game was for the other players, including Ship It (in spite of his frustration at losing this one hand).
Even though Omaha-8 is a high/low game, because of the 8 qualifier for low, some high-only hands are very playable pre-flop. Ship It, with AAQT double suited to both aces, had one of them and played correctly here.
On the other hand, although SP, with 3599, held two low cards, they were not very good low cards. After the flop, someone with 23XX, 24XX, 34XX, or 25XX had a better chance to win for low. Just as in a high only game you need good high cards, you usually also need good low cards to win for low in a high/low game. A 53 in Omaha high/low (or even in Texas hold 'em high/low) doesn't qualify as a good low starter hand.
There are some situations where you might play 3599. Ship it and I agree this should not have been one of them.
However, a fish who makes three mistakes in only one hand, especially the passive pre-flop and post flop calling mistakes, is favored to make at least one mistake in every hand. Should have been a good session for the sharks.
Just my opinion.
Buzz
Hey nice analysis and all, but I was joking. I mean I think top set, a royal draw, and nut straight draw, does a little better than the runner runner eight nut low draw. I may be a pisser by I know a 57-1 shot when I see it.
I play in a 6-12 O/8 game that is usually very loose. Often 6+ players see the flop, sometimes with hands like 4567, As5sK9 and the like. A raise does not always mean A2. People draw to non-nut lows all the time.
Here's how I've been playing my A2 hands.
If I have a good hand in early position, even a very good one like AA23, I just call. I figure I don't want to drive out the players playing the crappy lows. After all, they're the ones who will pay off my low when I have the nuts and they don't. Of course, if it gets raised, I'll re-pop it.
But if I have A2xx in, say, the big blind, and six people have limped in, I always raise, even though a naked A2 isn't that strong a hand. My reasoning is this: many of these players will limp in with crappy lows. I will only continue playing my A2xx after the flop if two low cards come (or if a miracle flop catches my xx). Many of these guys will call with their A3s all the way to the river.
So does all this sound right? Should I always raise with A2crapcrap after many loose limpers?
Crash -
"So does all this sound right?"
Not to me.
"Should I always raise with A2crapcrap after many loose limpers?"
I don't think so.
For one thing, it may not be wise to always raise with a certain holding, unless you are playing with morons. For another, why would you raise pre-flop with a poor starting hand (A2crapcrap) when you fully expect your opponents to call the raise to see the flop?
Your bare A2 frequently (one time in four when the flop is the ideal 6,7,8) gets counterfeited on the turn or the river. When your bare A2 doesn't get counterfeited, you frequently get quartered (one time in three with eight or nine opponents). Two hands out of five when you hold A2crapcrap, no low is possible. When low is possible, and when you do win for low, A2crapcrap is probably only good for half the pot.
Sounds dire, doesn't it. But it's not. I think A2 is generally playable but not raisable, pre-flop. How can that be? (1) The hand is playable because it pays off big if you can catch one of those chasers in a whip-saw. You have to be careful, though, because you don't want to get into a raising war with another A2. (2) The hand is not raisable, pre-flop, because you do better seeing the flop as cheaply as possible with it. A2 is a drawing hand: you still have to hit the flop, make a low, and miss getting counterfeited on the turn and the river.
Just my opinion.
Buzz
mostly right as usual buzz. but if they play really bad there is alot of equity in the hand. also with alot of chasers that have something to play with you will find that with ace,duece there will have a few of them in their hands so you will not get drawn out on(conterfeited) as often. and getting quartered doesnt matter as you get odds with so many contestants.
Ray - Thanks, as always, for the correction and feedback.
Buzz
Thanks for the help. I agree with you that it (A2xx) is a drawing hand, and as such, I generally don't want to pay more than I have to preflop. I wasn't really advocating raising to get anyone out preflop, but simply to get more money in there.
But Ray points out what I was trying to get at--if the players are REALLY bad, A2 is better because when I do hit it (and don't get counterfeited, of course), I'll make a lot off of it. It's analogous to raising preflop with 66 in hold 'em after six loose limpers. You make the pot big so that if you hit your set you tie them on for more bets.
So we could put it this way: be more likely to raise with A2xx if: -no good/tight players in the pot. This makes it (a little) less likely you'll get quartered. -the limpers are REALLY loose (they'll call till the end with hopeless lows) -the whole table is in. Then quartering is less of a concern. -you have the ace suited with one of the Xs.
I just came from a friendly home game. Very low stakes: $2 max bet. A bunch of nice guys who play weekly. Very much like dozens of games I've played in with a similar group of decent but not great players.
But here's the thing. When we started talking about Paradise Poker, which they really like, they humorously and casually mentioned that they regularly collude. They do so in an inconspicuous way; n ot raising pots or anything that obvious. They just let each other know when they have good hands so that their friend can fold and save money.
They seemed to think it was OK because others do it.
I reacted visibly and verbally. Being new to their game and not knowing them well I didn't get on my high horse. But by asking them questions about the practice I let them know that it was the same as stealing in my book.
What's troubling is that it must be very common. These guys weren't out to make a lot of money at it. They play low stakes for the most part, from 2-4 to 10-20. But they do make some money this way to be sure, and it's at the expense of others.
There must be thousands of similar guys, who play in similar games on line, who do this all the time.
Interesting to note that they said they would not do this in a live gamef unless they knew they wouldn't get caught
I left the game shortly after finding out about this. Though they clearly would never cheat their fellow players at a home game, they felt is was OK to do so against strangers on line.
Too bad. They were nice guys.
Ashley
Doesn't surprise me in the least if it is true. Tough to really assess the truth unless the principles swear affidavids which is unlikely and really unnecessary.
My point is and always has been that cheating on-line is
(1) easy
(2) profitable
(3) undetectable if someone wanted it to be
(4) almost untracable
(5) stupid to invest in as a non-cheating player
Do people really cheat and act in partnerships? I do not know.
Can they? Absolutely yes.
Sorry Mike Caro, even your system can be beaten.
Let the "buyer" beware.
This is certainly cheating and this type of thing is a concern to all online players but I have to wonder how much of a concern it can be....if a guy "warns" his buddys when he has what he thinks is a good hand so the others get out of the pot, it is certainly collusion, but as a third player it isn't going to cost me anything. 1. How often is it going to happen 2. If anything it might save me money by reducing the odds the pot is paying me and thus causing me to fold out on his "good hand" when I might have otherwise payed for a draw 3. the good hand (if it is that good) is only costing himself money by reducing the $$$ going into his pot
what is troubling is the exchange of infomation which is prob. happening if they are communicating by some other means while online! None-the-less such activity should be brought to the attention of Paradise authorities just as cheating in ANY cardroom would be. Hate to be a prude but cheating is cheating...lets not get the guys in trouble but maybe a stern warning... or if they wont change there ways...exile.
Just for argument sake, say I have a DSL line with 3 friends connected to 3 different computers all going through proxy servers and different ISP's. We all sit around and can see each other's hands. We get people in the old sandwich, like raising with nothing to drive up the pot while we get you in themiddle of the old sandwich. I knew guys who made a living doing that in the Army. I do not play on-line, but to each his own.
If my partner and I cheat by ONLY folding the worst of our 2 hands preflop, we will be taking a lot of money away from our opponents. It will not be a minor thing.
Look at it this way. In some of the pots you win because you make your draw or flopped a set, you end up winning somewhere from 3-9 small bets from me. If my partner would have played also (as he would have if I hadn't told him I have AK so fold your AQ), you would have likewise won 3-9 small bets from him. If this happens just once every 3 hours, your win rate has dropped by 1-3 small bets per hour. That's significant.
Of course, there are other factors, and times that our collusion will make you money (he fold his AQ in favor of my AK, and you win with your KQ when the flop comes Q high). However, in the long run, we will likely win an extra 4 or so small bets/hour apiece, which means that each of our opponents is losing about 1 or so small bets/hour apiece. I have no real basis for these numbers, they are simply my best guess. However, if I had to bet the over/under on these numbers, I'd bet the over.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
I do not play on the Internet for exactly the type of things pointed out in this post and others.
However, especially if it is Hold'em, where the matching (and non-matching) of the first 2 cards and the flop are so important, it would seem like a supplemental cheating strategy to the one above (and one to be even more feared) would be if the 2 people were to both go in to the flop with decent but different types of hands (say one with AQ and the other with T9 suited). More bases are covered.
What do you think, Greg?
BTW, my name is also Greg, and I also play at Foxwoods, mostly Stud.
Sure, if their hands are both good for the situation, and are very different, they can both see the flop. However, after the flop, the lesser hand is still going to fold most of the time, even if he would have played on absent the knowledge gained by collusion. Thus, when you're in there with a draw and pot odds, you win a few bets less than you would have when you hit.
You can still have +EV in both cases, if the pot is big enough preflop. But, if you don't win an extra bet or 2 here and there throughout your session, your long-term average is going to decline, and maybe even become unprofitable.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Yesterday i was playing in a home game with four players. The Game was Lowball potlimit with two 1 blinds and a possible 2 stradle for those who like.
I´m in the last blind with A 2 6 7 8.
Round: Call, Fold , Call, I raise , Fold , Call.
It´s Me and the other blind whos up.
He trades 3 CARDS !!! I trade No cards.
HE Bets.
I Raise.
HE Call.
And Shows me A 2 3 4 7.
Did i do some thing wrong???
Your raise preflop is quite reasonable. Given that this pot was shorthanded, the limper likely showed weakness by not open-raising, and the sb did by not isolating him. Once he trades three cards, you are almost surely ahead. I wouldn't raise him on the river though. Given that you raised predraw and stood pat, you likely have an eight (maybe a smooth nine or rough seven). Monster pat hands are very unlikely, and anything weaker you wouldn't have raised with. So he's pretty sure what you have. He either caught a miracle draw, or he's just bluffing given that you probably have a medium-but-not-great-hand and might fold to a pot bet. So I would just call the bet after the draw.
Yes.
He trades 3 cards and bets into a guy who stayed pat. Guess what? He got 'em. He might have been lucky to get 'em, but he got 'em. He knows you're at least going to call. Sorry, not a good raise.
People will draw to A2, especially in pot limit where the implied odds are so great. He probably should have check-raised you.
As Dad used to say, "four aces only wins when no one else has a straight flush."
Ark
its an easy fold for you against anyone that isnt a cronic bluffer and even then it may be a fold. it is never a hand to raise with after the draw in this spot. you need to do some book work if you are going to play poker for any serious money. ytou will learn alot on these forums. good luck.
and the way the hand really should have worked is after the draw when you raised him in the real world of good players he should have folded his 74321 as he couldnt win with it after a raise in most games because your raise would be a good six or better. remember everyone we are talking pot limit poker. in limit the values would be less but not much if at all in this case.
A major point of your excerpt is right at the beginning where Chan says, "I figure he's trying to sell me on his hand. Make me think he has trips or a pair of hidden aces. But I peg him for two high diamonds in the hole, ace and queen." If he makes this call with 100% accuracy, then all of his other actions make sense. He probably feels very good about the read, especially (according to his knowledge of the player) after getting re-raised on 4th street. Frenchy has to know Chan has a better than a pair of Jacks, and since he has an A and a Q, might even have him on 3 6's or the Kings. Frenchy thought his actions on 4th would be interpreted one way, but he actually gave himself away to a rather genious read.
On 5th street, was the French player *really* a 2-1 favorite to win the hand? On two cards, he needs one of 8 (maybe fewer -- not enough info) diamonds or one of two aces (10 cards) to beat chan. The probabiliy of Frenchy *not* making aces up or a flush is >.58 (33/43 * 31/41) according to my calculations (lower if brunson's jack is a diamond or chan's 9 is a diamond), which is about 1.38:1 against. A value bet. calcs follow.
It all depends on how sure chan is of his 3rd st. read, which got even stronger on 4th street. That re-raise on 4th seemed to tell him all he needed to know.
Interesting hand. I think it comes down to Chan pushing a slight edge for all it is worth.
Ark.
Are my calculations about 5th street wrong? Chan has seen his 5 cards + Frenchy's 3 + Brunson's 1. so there are 43 unseen cards. Frenchy needs 10 cards (either A or the 8 diamonds). The probability of frenchy not making his hand on 6th st. is 33/43, and after seeing 6th st, you have 31/41 on 7th. The probability of both of these happening is .5803. Maybe it went to 2:1 if there were more players in the hand, or chan had some info you left out.
Note that the above is the chance of Frenchy improving to Aces up or a flush, not simply improving. If you calculate Frenchy's odds of improving to trip 10's, or 10's up, then you need to subtract the probability of chan improving to trip K's or K's up at the same time. I considered these events a wash when doing my calculations. It should be very close.
I think that there is a definate flaw in your calculations. I don't believe that it is correct to cosider the 10's or 3 10's outs vers Chans Kings up or 3 Kings a "wash" as you put it. Lets just look at this a simpler way. We know from the appendex for 7 card stud for advanced players that a 4 flush and a pair is a 60-40 favorite over an overpair on 5th. We also know that 22A is only a 44-55 dog to KK7 on 3rd showing the huge impact of the over card. So I'm saying the Frenchie must be at least 60-40 in front but probaby a few percent extra because of the over card ace. So I just gave the rough figure 2-1 which I'd bet is pretty close to the mark.
Chan knew his opponents hand and still couldn't play it right. It says a lot about his reading skills and shows how poor his fundamentals are. Its outrageous that he thinks he is a two-one favorite. In fact, I have him pegged worse than a 2-1 dog on fifth street. He needs to get the S&M Stud book and plug the leaks in his game. Johnny Chan the fishcake!
Ark your calculations are very wrong. Much of the equity in the Frenchy's hand comes from him making to pair while Chan doesn't. You can't simply cancel anything.
Well put JV. When you're raising and reraising on a street when you are more than a 2-1 dog. You are pissing away pretty hard. Esp at 2500 a raise. The game was 1200-2500 and acording to the artice Chan re raised. So I'm assuming a bet, raise, reraise by Frenchie and now a raise by Chan. Thats 10 G's on a 2-1 Dog. Johnny Chan the Master!!
HOW many "WSOP" braclets do you have??? zero ... 100% accurate reading skills, playing with the frenchman 5 days straight, knowing exactly every little "minute" tell frenchy has time after time... is whats separates amatuers like you from the pros. experience is what you need laddy.......................
Very interesting post.
I think nightstick completely missed the point, even though Chan had read his opponent he completely misplayed the hand assuming he was a 2-1 favorite when he was infact a 2-1 dog, and putting in too much action with his hand.
The fact he has won a number of bracelets makes his play(s) even more embarassing. had his read been more off his play (eg there was a chance the frenchman had trip 10's or A's up) makes his play even more odious.
Nice work SHip It.
Other Poker Games
November 2000 Digest is provided by Two Plus Two Publishing and ConJelCo