![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
I havent read the other posts yet but I posted a similar question a while back. In a 5-10 game I think this is a good strategy if you think you cannot get it heads up on fourth street by betting, but you think you can with a checkraise. My experience is that if you do give a free card on fourth street in low limit it is usually because your opponent has nothing and not because he was playing for a free card.
I assume that you are considering other factors in determining whether to try this play or not, i.e. agressiveness of other players, strength of your board etc. You do not want this to become a self-weighting strategy.
Good luck! Pat
IMMO, I am a biginner, in this situation the best play is to bet. If you don't, you are not getting a free card, but, you are "giving" a free card. Where I play an a case like this, if you check, they will never bet. I wouldn't, would you? This is a very strong hand, IMMO, and I will invest my money in it, no problem. And I wish I would have this kind of hands all the time. Then poker would be a pleasure to play.
Caddy - I'm not an Omaha expert either, but I'll take a stab at answering your question because I am interested in the game.
"The $50,000 question: Should I have raised and/or reraised the turn. I think the initial raise is close, but I do not claim to be an Omaha expert."
No, in my humble opinion you should not have raised and/or reraised the turn, and it is not even close. You have poor position to do anything but limit the field with a raise on the turn. You probably should have mixed feelings about limiting the field here. Is it possible that a raise by you would cause all players with a draw for high to fold and that your low set would end up winning for high? If so, a raise might be a good move. On the other hand, will a raise by you cause anyone chasing with a poor low (or a poor high) to fold, in which case you will lose profit on the hand? If so, a raise would be a poor move.
IMHO, a raise by you here would not buy the pot. Since there is a good chance of your getting quartered, you want to keep more than two opponents in the hand. You also must be vaguely worried about getting counterfeited for low here. Finally, since you are in the big blind, you will be out of position for the last round of betting.
You have to trust your read on your opponents. You indicated you thought the small blind also had a nut low and that you feared the woman to your right would fold to a double bet but might call a single bet. Those are good reasons to just call. Adding it all together, I think you made the correct decision, based on your perception of the situation.
Loudmouth is the one who cost you both (you and loudmouth) six dollars by foolishly raising here, but pointing that out to him would only make matters worse.
A natural tendency of gorillas and chimps is to bluster in an attempt to intimidate and dominate without actual physical contact. Loudmouth was trying to intimidate and dominate you with his blustering. If his antics upset you, you might unknowingly be thrown off your game.
I would imagine Loudmouth's antics have previously been called to the floor manager's attention. His behavior is not acceptable in most public cardrooms. You have several options, probably the best of which is take a short break when someone exhibits such behavior towards you. Even if you think you are not upset, being distracted by loudmouth's antics may cause you to not play your best game.
You need to play your own style, not the way Loudmouth wants you to play.
Just my opinion.
Buzz
By the way, where was the game?
Buzz, I'm no expert either but ...
It was the best possible card to hit. You now are best low and probable best high. You want to force out any low spade draws. In Omaha, you want to be the one scooping or taking 3/4.
By not raising you make it correct for nut spade to call. Non-nut spades need to fold here.
Make it incorrect for the nut spade draw to call. The weak draws you might like in but they very well may call anyway.
BetTheDraw - A quote from the original post:
"SB has nut flush and no low. He had top two pair on the turn."
Do you really think SB would have folded to a raise here?
Of course you don't know for certain what SB has (or what Loudmouth has either). Even so, when you are playing, don't you rely on your sense of what your opponents might do in response to your actions?
You wrote, "By not raising you make it correct for nut spade to call. Non-nut spades need to fold here."
I agree with your statement. Indeed, I agree with almost everything you have written in the above post.
Let me explain. This isn't Texas hold 'em. It is a common occurrance for players in Omaha high/low games to stay primarily because of one particular two card combination and then win because of another one (of the other five) two card combinations.
Low spade draws probably shouldn't be in this hand anyway, except coincidentally. The nut flush draw should also only coincidentally be in this hand, after the rainbow flop.
But, all right. You have made a good argument. Thank you. I can see the case for raising. (Can you see the case for not raising?)
Buzz
There certainly is merit in building a pot. There's a strong chance the set of 3's won't hold up and you want as many players in to make your possible 1/4 pot more profitable.
However, the pot may be even larger if the other players call 2 bets and a probable raise.
SB would not fold here. Nut flush and top 2 is enough to continue especially for only 1 bet.
I'm working on seeing why I might not raise. If the table was tougher I might not hoping to get more money in. If it was as weak as it sounds I raise because they might call anyway.
Thanks Buzz
Suspicious - I see your point. Against some fields I might raise myself on the turn. But, based on Caddy’s description of the circumstances, I disagree with raising here.
Caddy is “reading the table” and betting accordingly. What a player does in this situation (nut low plus a low set on the turn) depends partly on his assessment of the players at the table. Caddy seems to have a reasonable assessment of the players at the table. He may be correct, or he may be incorrect, but he has been sitting at the table with these players and/or knows them well enough to characterize them, rightly or wrongly. He tells us there are a couple of semi-maniacs, a couple of solid players and that the rest of the table is passive. He identifies the woman on his left as a calling station who would be likely to call one bet but not two bets. He identifies the SB as a solid player.
After the turn, Caddy has the nut low. However, when the “solid player” in the SB bets, Caddy has a hunch SB also has a nut low hand. It is very common for two players to have the same nut low (somewhere around a third of the time) in loose games such as this one. Caddy plays his hunch and just calls.
Perhaps Caddy should have raised, if he had a strong hunch SB also had the nut low, in order to try to eliminate everyone else and take 3/4 of the small pot. Instead he hedges on his hunch and decides to call, in an attempt to keep other players in the hand. He makes a reasonable decision based on his read of his opponents and also based upon a fair chance of further improving his hand on the river.
The question is: Would a raise by Caddy on the turn have eliminated all the other players but the player he thought also had the nut low, and thus given him 3/4 of the pot? Loudmouth thought Caddy should have raised, because, assuming the player with a better spade flush had folded to Caddy’s raise, then Loudmouth, as it turns out, would have won 3/4 of the pot. But would the player with the better spade flush draw have folded? Is it in Caddy’s best interests to have everyone with less than the nut flush draw fold, or is he better off keeping the poor draws in the hand? If Caddy could get all the possible spade draws and all the possible two pairs and all the possible sets out by raising here, raising would be more worthwhile than if not. But would a raise accomplish this here?
And Caddy still has a drawing hand. He needs one of three fives to catch a wheel on the river which will be a scooper unless someone else also has 24XX. The fourth three will give Caddy quads. Nine cards (aces, jacks and sevens) will give Caddy a full house, although probably a losing one. (Of couse a deuce would be a disaster here). The point is that Caddy has a fair chance catching an even better high hand on the river, which might be a scooper. This fair chance to improve on the river adds significance to Caddy’s decision to not limit the field by raising on the turn.
I did not get the impression from his post that Caddy, by not raising on the turn, was being cowardly. Caddy made a calculated, reasoned decision to simply call.
For me, as I indicated, the decision is not even close. Based upon my understanding of the players at the table, as provided by Caddy, I don’t think a raise on the turn would have enabled Caddy to get heads-up with SB and take down 3/4 of the pot.
Thus Caddy: (1) has a fair draw after the turn giving him good reason to try keep other players in the hand, (2) must doubt that a raise would scoop for him or even win 3/4 of the pot here, and (3) wisely considers the strong possibility of getting quartered here, giving him additional good reason to try keep other players in the hand.
Put it all together and it spells call.
Just my opinion.
Buzz
Suspicious - I can see the case for raising after the turn. I have taken the other side for purposes of discussion. I myself would raise some of the time but call most of the time in this situation, (because I like to mix up my play and think neither is unreasonable).
Thanks for the great responses and analyses.
I really did come extremely close to raising the turn at the time, but as discussed the specific table circumstances swayed me to just call. However, I agree that often a raise in this type of situation is correct.
Also, the loudmouth turned out to be an even worse player than I first thought, so in that sense he wasn't so bad to have at the table.
Funny hand that I wasn't invovled in happened later. Final board: 6 6 8 8 K, flush possible. Loudmouth bets, other player raises, loudmouth re-raises, other player re-raises. Loudmouth says, increduously, "You're f-in re-raising me"!!?? Other player calmly says, "I have to, you can't win." Loudmouth flips out, starts screaming, "How much you got in front of ya!" Argument breaks out, everyone says just play. Loudmouth raises again, other player just calls. Loudmouth has quad 8s, other player quad 6s. Unfortunately, no jackpot at this casino. I imagine loudmouth missed a few bets by giving his hand away so easily.
What a maroon! LOL
But you may raise and get callers who are making even bigger mistakes. Letting the others get away with making just correct or only slightly in-correct calls is wrong!
The results are meaningless. Only the NUT spade SHOULD stay but probably SHOULDN'T if the pot isn't big enough and a low is on board. Knock out the gutshot str8's and the 2 pairs. You'd hate to lose to AJ if a J hits the river.
Get the others to make the mistakes. Reduce your mistakes.
Good points.
Buzz
You are right that aces with a 3-flush on 4th street is very strong. However I dont think this is the type of hand that wants to let people in. The chances of a flush are actualy small. The main potential of this hand is the two aces which do better trying to win the pot outright.
- Joe in Connecticut
I agree with Joe from Ct.
What is the odds of the person holding an A to also have another card of that suit? In other words if U have Kx suited, what is the odds of someone else having Ax suited of same suite. I don`t know how to figger the math.
Coyote
Coyote - I think 0.39 (to two digits) is the pre-flop probability of another opponent (out of nine) having AX of spades if you have KX of spades plus two non-spades. If so, the odds against it are roughly 3 to 2.
This time I used (36/48)(8445/16215) = 0.3906106
Suspicious gave me an idea for the short-cut.
8445 is the total (from a chart) needed because your opponent can have 1, 2 or 3 other spades, along with the ace.
The result makes playing a king high suited flush seem a semi-risky proposition in a ten handed game, as Ray Zee (as I recall) has implied somewhere in his fine book. Two times out of five when you have a king high flush (and two non-flush cards) in a ten handed loose game of Omaha, someone else has an ace high flush.
Never a guarantee my math is correct.
Buzz
Judging by the comments here...
...If I told you what the showdown was you wouldnt even believe me.
- Joe in Connecticut
We must know. How does this story end?
in this game. If you have a holding that plays well headup but not well multiway and you raise, you are just making it very expensive for yourself and won't lose one customer. The only hands to play are premium lows that can scoop the whole pot and they don't come around that often. I forgot to mention it's a sixcard game with 2 optional buys that keeps everyone in against the odds but with so many in they hit alot against you.
If I get it right and you get the option of seeing 8 cards, then the paint rule can be sidestepped and you can also play some holdings that would be marginal in regular hi-lo stud.
G
you can trade one after your first 3 cards (for a buck), then turn up the one you want. Then 3 more up and you can trade another on the end. (for another buck), then a declare, and one last round of betting. So you have six total cards on the end. It's a tough game but I'm determined to learn it and learn it well.
While I'm still not keen on violating the paint rule much here, the declare on the end can really change your strategies as well. Knowing how your opponents play and putting them on hands is crucial (isn't it always) as well.
I would love to switch them to hi only holdem but they are diehard hi-lo players. When it's my turn to deal I play Omaha 8/better as I feel I have a greater edge on them in that game.
They play a little 7card hi-lo stud but it's with a declare as well and no qualifier for low so it changes from Ray Z's book as well.
To save image, I would be liberal with buying another after 3 cards, particularly if you have 2 premium cards and the cards you need are still live, eg you start with Ad5dTc. In my home game we play regular hi-lo stud w/ declare and it's often very easy to manipulate everyone to declare opposite to me - even if I have total junk. For example, if I catch 2 Q's on board, I'll just start pounding the pot as if it's a full house (as long as noone else looks threatening for hi). By the end I might even stay pat with my pair of Q's instead of buying one (in your game). Noone then wants to declare against me a lot of the time; and I don't show my hand if noone challenges me, allowing me to continue stealing half pots all the time.
G
Santa brought me Doyle's book for Christmas and of course the hi-lo section was the first I went to
I have been liberal in buying a card like you say but often have choices I'm not sure what to draw for. For example. If I have 732o I generally just say pat but what about 832o, then I pitch the 8 and try to improve but sometimes it trashes my hand.(which granted wasen't that great to begin with. If I have 552 I generally pitch the 5 and go for a low but often trash my hand as well. Also since high hands seem to do so poorly for example what about QQ2. Should I pitch the 2 and try to spike a A or Q or should I just say pat and turn up the 2 and represent a low but maybe give them a little surprise when I (if) a Q on forth or fifth st? (which if I don't hit fold to a bet)I would love to have some guidelines on this matter which I know would be hard without knowing the texture of the skills of the other players involved in the game but I think you know what I'm after here.
As far as making plays I'm with you and have had some success like you say and have made a few nice ones on my own. Of course sometimes they don't always work and I come off looking like a buffoon. (which IS good for a good laugh and helps your image) Last night I had a rock solid low board showing and bet it the whole way thru but was called down by the other low and lost as I had complete trash in the hole. I don't think I had a tell but maybe? I just said nice call to the fellow who beat me even tho I was representing I board locked him. Later on in the evening I tried it on another tricky player ( that is I called him down while he represented a board lock low and of course he had it :o( but I thought he might be trying to push me off my fairly good low)
While they know I'm pretty tight I think I make enough off the wall plays to keep them guessing ( How do they know what I'm doing if I don't know what I'm doing :o)
Well actually I must be doing something right as I just checked my diary and I've only had 3 losing sessions out of 15 and I'm up about 1400 in this game but I want to keep studying hard as I want to go and get my money back from that 10 dollar game.
Graham, thanks so much for your input and would love to hear more on this particular hi-lo game and strategies. Please you or anyone feel free to E-mail me or continue this thread as long as it's appropriate. Good luck to all you hi-lo'ers out there!
If you're going to continue in this game, DEFINITELY invest in Supersystem by Doyle Brunson, if only for the chapter on hi-lo split co-authored by DS. It has a section all about the declare version of the game which should help you.
I'm talking about 7-stud for advanced players of Malmuth-Sklansky.
I noted in several stud sessions that a very good suggestion found in that book is "Reraise a possible higher pair with a big pair". Very very good move when u have that big (lowest)pair with 2 suited cards or in a straight fashion (and...obvious when you can get to play heads up with that bigger pair
Your comments appreciated
Marco
Or, if you have a kicker that is higher than the orginal raiser's up card, and all of your cards live. It also helps if the original raiser's upcard is duplicated elsewhere on the board.
good punctualization mark
nj
I totally agree with Zee.
It is absurd attempting to beat the table with those (unbeliavable) taxes).
I also play in Europe and in Vienna the games are more more profitable.
I think you are playing in North Europa where the taxes and tips seems belonging to "Chemin de Fer or Baccarat" games.
Enjoy Vienna games (Concord Club, Pokerworld Club) you will find very good tables and a very low rake.
And, believe me, Vienna is the second place in the world to play a very good poker!!!
Marco
Thanks for all the answers, and yes it is in northern Europe I play. Now it seems to me that it is not worth playing at all.
Is there some other good places in Europe, you can prefer (nearly Denmark) ?
I appreciate any help
Thanks for all the answers.
It is in the northern Europe I play, and it seems to me that it is not worth playing at all.
Can you recommend other good places in Europe, near Denmark ?
I appreciate any help
The best book on manipulating home games is "Poker: A Guaranteed Income for Life" by Frank Wallace.
The best book on manipulating your image is "Play Poker, Quit Work and Sleep Till Noon!" by John Fox.
The best book on poker "The Theory of Poker" by David Sklansky.
Your tight casino style play will make you a very unpopular player in most home games as you've found out. When playing in one of these "social" games it is important to become one of the gang. Here are some suggestions. 1) You can significantly disguise your tight play by calling the first bet and then quickly folding. 2) Never complain about bad cards, bad beats, or losing. This will draw attention to your tight play. 3) Have fun. Don't sit there all poker faced and serious. 4) Don't make your opponents look foolish. 5) Never criticize a player or discuss poker strategy. 6) Conceal how much you're winning when possible.
The following suggestions apply only when you completely dominate your opponents. 1) Limit your wins. Remember that most of these small games have a limited number of players with limited resources. There is usually a fixed dollar figure that can be taken out of a game without fear of busting the game. 2) Protect the really bad players from going broke. You can take money from the better players and feed it to the poorer players.
Raked games played at pool halls or bars are different. These games should be played with your best game. The key to a positive image here is achieved by tipping the dealers and waitresses.
Cheating is a big problem in these private games as the stakes increase. I have not found any books that adequately address cheating.
Good Luck Zorro!!!
I found myself in a similar situation a few years back. I started bringing in chips and beer (for the others and not for me). I made enough to cover this limited expense. I would agree to be the banker- responsible for the pay-outs if the kitty were short. It never was as I strictly counted the chips. When the night was over, I was the only one who knew exactly how much I had won. I would then attempt to focus attention on the play of whoev er had a good night as well. This worked like a charm for years. In fact, on one occasion at a bar, the girlfriend of one of the regulars asked who was the best player in the game. This guy said "Well, Oz usually takes more money home than anyone else, but Slick is the best player in the game." As long as your sense of pride is not wounded by such feeble logic, you can enjoy a satisfying game. (As an aside- who in their right mind plays poker with a guy named Slick?)
I'm curious... nothing was said about the amount of money that went "all-in" on 3rd. How much are we talking here... who made the last raise?
Depending on how the hand went down, he might have played it correctly. If no aces were showing, and he made a large last raise that you called he might have played it right trying to make you think he had pocket aces. Although you would be making a "good call" on this hand, you better be right a large % of the time because if he does have aces then you are the dog.
I play pot-limit and no-limit hold'em. And I would certainly put my whole stack at risk anytime with aces preflop. But against any 2 random cards I have to still expect to lose about a 1/3 of the time. If I have KK and have to call a big raise preflop, against the indicated pocket aces, I would be correct in folding more often, depending on the player, etc.
In any PL or NL game the key is to play cheap earlyand get all-in when you have the nuts, ie: when there is little or no chance of getting outdrawn. Although you were clearly the favorite here, you must be willing to lose your whole stack more than 1 out of 3 times with this play.
Keep playing hard!
I agree with you glen about PL and NL problems but I insist to say that if he plays that hand 1000 times he will win a lot of money (don't forget his opponent was a little...loose!)
I play with Joe. He rarely whines this bad. I know the result (cuz he told me earlier) but I'll let him tell you. Yes, Joe it's long enough.
This was an exceptionally ugly hand but somewhat typical, even in $15-$30, here in CT.
That's why Joe and I both do very well here. But the swings can get to you when you're playing well.
Shake it off Joe, we'll get them in the end!
Keep playing hard!
At this point, I don't care who tells it -- let's hear it!
player 1 has some type of 4's and 5's full house.
player 2 has 9's over queens full house.
both were afraid to raise because of your aggressive betting. They might have figured you for trips, if not rolled, then with one of your board cards that would beat them if you made a boat on the river.
of course, the pot was quiet large, they may have taken a flyer on a runner runner flush.
a
I invite all of the players who post, or simply read here to join me in a New Year's Resolution:
"I will not whine anymore!" If someone plays bad and wins against me, that's o.k. That's what I want them to do! If they played correctly, then I made a mistake and I will learn from it!
"I will not blame dealers or others for my losses." The dealer has nothing to do with it...ever! They insure that the game I'm in is being run fair and honest. The bad players are what feed my bankroll. I want them in my game. I can not lose if I play well. Today maybe, but never in the long run.
"I will not ask for deck changes or new setups". This only slows down the games and cuts into my profit. All decks have the same 52 cards in them... nothing changes!
"I will tip all competent dealers for every hand I win". For most, this is their sole source of income. I win consistantly thanks in part to their hard work. They deserve my praise as well. If they are incompetant, I will tell the management, not berate them in front of others!
"I will not allow abusive players to ruin my game". If a player abuses a dealer, I will speak up. If a player abuses another player, I will try to pull that player aside and make him realize that a bad player is good for the game, don't send them off by abusing them. I will make it a point to make this game better for all.
"I will tell no more bad beat stories". I will greet all my fellow players with questions about their lives. After all, life is more important than poker. (But poker is a close 2nd) We've all seen it ALL before... no need to beat a dead horse!
"I will not talk about the play of a hand with anyone at the table". Why should I help educate my opponents?
"I will become that ONE player we all enjoy playing with". We all know that person. He/she is always pleasant. Fun to be around. Never has a bad thing to say about anybody.
Please join me in making this a part of your game. For that matter... make it a part of your everyday life! Happy New Year to all and Keep Playing Hard!
Very nice post Glen. I've never posted here but just thought I'd tell you that those are words to live by, in life and in poker.
What is the best approach playing Omaha/8 with the following structure:
4-8-16-16 whereby blinds are $2.00 and 4.00?
I am curious if you would advise substantially different playing strategy from, let's say, 8-8-16-16 Omaha/8 game considering the fact that in the above game you cannot as effectively protect your pre-flop hands as you can in a standard game.
Thanks!
Ivan, in omaho/8 there isnt alot to protect before the flop. so i like the lower bets early as you can get to have big two way hands with less loss and punish them the same. its more of a function of how many call you before the flop that determines how good those less than great hands do. with lots of callers the nuts tend to win the pots, with few anything can happen. i would be alittle looser with high hands and hands that can develop into two way drawing hands. but still play tight.
Thanks, Ray!
Such structures are great if the players in your game are bad. I would play more hands pre-flop if I can get in for 1 bet. Hands like As4sxy and KKxy become playable. After the flop is another story. Because there is less to pursue, I would play very tight on the flop, especially when the flop has 2 or 3 low cards.
However, if the players get more skillful, you wind up with one bet and 1 or 0 callers on the flop far too often to make the game good.
A 5-10 stud game. I have a pair of TT in the hole, I get another Ten on 5th street, I am high with A-10 on board, 3 players left, I check, next guy bets, the other calls, I raise. Original bettor calls, the other falls. Now is head to head. On 6th street he gets a 3rd flush card, I am still high with AT on board, but he bets first. Not thinking (I'm very excited about the hand) I call. Then "the move". He takes the chips back and raises me. I look at the dealer, and she tells me that I am high and should bet first, then he loudly says from the other end of the table: "You bet, Sir, and I raised you." I tought, OK., so I called hopping to make a full house. I didn't. He bets on the river and I fold. I know now this was a mistake, not to call, I mean. I will never know if he "really " had the flush. Comments please.
Yes, this is a move I see frequently when I deal. If you had stopped to call the floor they may have let you re-construct the street allowing you to check, then see what he did. But since you didn't, the raise is legal. Your hand was hard to read, for that reason, you must call on the river as he may have 2 pair or a busted flush draw.
Learn from it, pay attention and wait for dealers to call the action. Keep playing hard!
I believe it was a "reverse move" what I call a "cheese buyer's" move. In other words, he probably smells like cheese. If he bet out of turn like that, you should have checked to him. I know what Caro says, and 95% of the time he is corect. This was one of those 5%.
Be aware of these cheesey moves. I would spill a drink on him if I sat close to him; accidently of course. Or have him paged to the desk via your cell phone, and when he gets up put something sticky on his seat. Talk to him when he is in a hand. Ask him questions about his job at the massage parlor. I would tilt him pretty good. He would think twice before he does that to me again.
I would reraise him when he makes that move and then I'd bet out the river.I'd show him and the rest of the table I won't be muscled around. My table image has value.More vaule then 2 or even 3 big bets in any given hand.I'm also not convinced your beat at this piont his decission to raise may have been caused by your weak call after his smooth move.In either case you will have set a table image as a force to be rekconed with and you also wouldnt be asking if you had a move put on you you'd know! You'd also get info on your opponent which can be invaulable.
always call and get a ruling from the floorperson and never let the dealer tell you a rule. his bet stays and your call stays. as all you had to say was "i checked and he bet and i called" and the dealer wasnt watching. i would have called as the pot was too big and he could have had hands that you beat but that he thought were good.
Agree 100% here. The dealer should have called the floor. It is a trick, and a cheap one at that.
[..H]e loudly says from the other end of the table: "You bet, Sir, and I raised you."
Just as loudly you say "No, Sir. I checked, you bet, and I called you."
If he or the dealer protests just say "If I didn't check why were your/his chips out before mine."
If the dealer keeps protesting, then call the floor (if the dealer hasn't) and you should be ble to get it reconstructed.
Eric
To glen, Tilt-a-whirl boy, Drone, Ray Zee, Eric: thank you... I love this forum. n/t.
this forum. n/t.
If the dealer protests in such a case he is obviously in the pocket of the guy putting on the move.
If stuff like this is common where you play, you better become very friendly with the dealers or find somewhere else to play.
An good honest dealer shouldnt take sides in this matter at all. Any time he sees a move like this the floor should be notified. This kind of move is very bad for business. 7 people sat and watched a player take the control of the game away from the house.
Joe in Connecticut.
Joe where and what do you play in ct?
I am wondering if any of the pros here have researched Kelly Betting and if so what is the optimal bet (bankroll percentage) they have figured maximizes their bankroll growth rate.
as long as you have lots of possible bets to make the rule is to bet the fraction of your bankroll that corresponds with your edge. just make sure you are right about what your edge is. most people overstate it and go broke through fluctuations or by not lowering their bets when they get stuck.
I'm not sure exactly what that means. I send about 18 big bets an hour in action into the limit hold'em games around here. I am taking out 1.8 big bets per hour. This is over a 5+ year period. About 750 sessions totaling about 5000 hours.
I still feel its too small a sample :-)
Greetings,
Here's a hand where I think I might have went too far although this might have been an "expert" play. All comments appreciated.
10/20 stud game:
I limp w/ (6c7c) 9c two clubs are out (Kc 3d Jc also out) but no 8's 5's T's or 9's are. Behind the 2d.
4h (semi reasonable player) raises in late position a dead J cold calls ( a weak chaser who was getting annoyed w/ getting beaten), bring in folds and I call.
4th street: me 9c 9s, raiser 4h J(not a club), chaser J 5.
I check, raiser checks and says something about lets see if there's a raise in here, chaser bets 10 I raise to 30. All call.
5th: me 9c 9s 8s, raiser 4 J 6 ,chaser J 57.
I bet again (now Im openended) all call.
6th: me 9 9 8 A , raiser 4 J 6 6 , chaser J573. Bet call call.
River I catch a blank and bet. And they all fold!
I suspect I could not get away w/this heads up though I probably would have played almost every street the same.
Was this too much or a good play? I suspect the raiser thought I must know he has a big pair and made his two pair and I wouldn't have continued to bet into two people w.o trips in this situation. But I thought i had to keep my play consistent w/ trips 9's and I became opened ended on 5th (and thus a favorite against an over pair), and had to bet. ANd on 6th I picked up a few more outs.
The raiser said he had Q's and hadn't seen a single Q out, and was looking for it to call the river.
All comments appreciated.
Assuming that you knew the raiser well enough that he could fold an apparent two pair then it was a good play. If you thought he only had the open pair and perhaps a draw then it was definitely a good play. If he was a semireasonable player, as you describe him, then he may very well have been raising a draw or even a lower pair.
I dont know why you think that it may have been going too far. This type of steal bet should not be an infrequent play against the right players, especially when you pair your door card. Keep in mind that if you did not bet on 5 or 6 (as a weak player might not) then you should not bet on the end, as you will be called since you showed weakness. Whenever I pair my door card in a low limit game I usually play this way unless I have good reason not to.
Did you consider folding on third? If your opposition was tough then you should have considered this possibility. HOwever, once you paired your door you played it well.
Pat
I considering folding on 3rd but a)I was going to get a 3 way pot and not a heads up pot and if i catch a club i am even money to win the pot if the raiser only has a pair on 4th b) I not only had a 3 flush but a 3 straight (although a one gapper).
I find a hard time folding. Maybe if my hand was 9 6 2 w/ 2 clubs out then a fold was in order but with only 1 out I think I would even call here, no matter how tough the opponents were...
I think the reason I made some comments about going to far was in the end all i had was my board and most won't lay down (and shouldn't) two pair on the river in such a big pot.
Once you set up the check raise indicating trips, you gotta see it through. Many would think you can't bet river unless you filled so you have to bet. You only have to make this work about 1 out of 7 to be profitable. You played it well.
Keep playing hard!
On 3rd street you have three low cards, and you are headsup against an opponent that also has three low cards. There are no other upcards out. What are the odds of you catching good on 4th and him catching bad?
Specifically, what are the chances of you catching any one of the 26 remaining low cards (4 deuces, 4 treys, 4 fours, 4 fives, 4 sixes, 4 sevens, 4 eights, 4 aces, minus 6 low cards), while your opponent catches one of the 20 high only cards (4 nines, 4 tens, 4 jacks, 4 queens, 4 kings)?
Can someone please show me the technique for calculating this probability correctly? I think I'm doing it wrong. Thanks guys, sucker
Sucker - Make a chart. Here low cards are favorable while high cards are unfavorable. There are four ways the next two cards dealt to you and him may be distributed (your card is listed first):
ll
lh
hl
hh
ll....26*25 = 650 permutations
lh....26*20 = 520 permutations
hl....20*26 = 520 permutations
hh....20*19 = 380 permutations
total is 2070.
The probability of you catching good and him catching good is ll/total = 650/2070.
The probability of you catching good and him catching bad is lh/total = 520/2070.
The probability of you catching bad and him catching good is hl/total = 520/2070.
The probability of you catching bad and him catching bad is hh/total = 380/2070.
Note that the probabilities add up to 1.
The odds of you catching good and him catching bad are 520 to 1550, roughly one to three. Usually odds are stated as odds against an event occuring, so you might say the odds are three to one against you catching low and him catching high.
I think reading David Sklansky's classic book, The Theory Of Poker for more insight in this area might be well worth your while.
Just my opinion.
Buzz
.
Buzz,
I know this is what you meant. This is your statement which had been in bold. My corrections are in bold:
The odds of you catching good and him catching bad are 520 to 1550, roughly one in three. Usually odds are stated as odds against an event occuring, so you might say the odds are two to one against you catching low and him catching high.
I point this out not to shoot you down, but for the sake of clarity. I was going to show Sucker how to do the calculation, but your way is better than mine. :^)
Sucker, you will have seen several other upcards, depending how many players are in the game. You should take them into account when doing your calculations. I'm not going to take the time to do the calculations right now, but with more low cards showing, the chances of you improving worsen, of course, but so do the chances of your opponent. I'll guess that the chances of you improving but your opponent not improving won't be affected that much. I'm quite sure that lh and hl won't be impacted as much as hh and ll. See why? You might also take into account that you're not necessarily looking to catch any low card. If you have (64)2, you're not looking to catch a 2, and you're not really looking to catch a 4 either.
Thanks Andy.
low-low....26*25 = 650 permutations
low-high....26*20 = 520 permutations
high-low....20*26 = 520 permutations
high-high....20*19 = 380 permutations
total is 2070.
The total ways Sucker can catch good and his opponent can catch bad are 520. The total ways anything else can happen are 650 + 520 + 380 = 1550. I used this total (1550) to calculate the answer, thus should have shown the number 1550 in my original post.
Thus the odds against Sucker catching low and opponent catching high are 1550 to 520, or about 2.98 to 1, which is roughly 3 to 1 against.
As an aside, the probability of Sucker catching low and opponent catching high is 520/2070, or about 0.251. Thus Sucker will catch low and his opponent will catch high about one time in four. Doing it that way also translates to odds of about 3 to 1 against.
I should have made my method clearer in my original post. (The problem may be that I stored the number 1550 in my calculator memory as a sub-total and then used it to get the final result without ever writing the 1550. I'm not making excuses, just offering an explanation.)
However, the odds are about 3 to 1 against, rather than 2 to 1 against. I think. (Never a guarantee my math is correct, so thanks for checking it.)
Regards to you.
Buzz
its 520 divided by 2070 which = 25%, or one chance in four, or three to one.
You wrote:
"On 3rd street you have three low cards, and you are headsup against an opponent that also has three low cards. There are no other upcards out. What are the odds of you catching good on 4th and him catching bad?"
If that is what you meant then the odds of him improving are exactly the same as you improving. Calculating odds in this case is maaningless. More information is needed to access the odds.
26 good cards. 20 bad cards. 46 unseen cards. Probability of you getting good and him getting bad is:
(20*26)/(46*45) = .2512 => odds are 2.98:1 against.
That's the number of 2 card combinations possible for you to go low and him to go high (20*26), divided by the number of possible two card combinations (46*45).
In the heat of battle, you might just think of the 4 things that can happen (ll,lh,hl,hh) and since there are 20 bad and 26 good, you can weight them roughly equally, but DON'T TAKE THIS KIND OF THINKING TOO FAR. Weighting equally would tell you all 4 outcomes are equally probable so you have a .25 prob. of it happening, or odds of 3:1.
In terms of a poker game, I wouldn't necessarily call you catching low "good" and him catching high "bad" if you're playing heads up. That's a whole other topic though.
Ark
n/t.
"The better way to win at low limit stud tables is chasing with drawing hands." Is this a true statement, and if so, why? Thank you all for your comments.
This is a true statement, if you watch the board and remember folded cards well. Just remember drawing hands bring on more drawing hands, so on the river make sure your the highest drawing hand. If you have the highest drawing hand you can raise on the river multiple times as LL players will not be as aware as you are of the cards and will be raising with lower drawing hands. This is a great place to make extra money in LL hands as there really aren't that many places during the course of the hand to pump up the pot without getting called, except maybe third street and no callers. Gut shot catchers of drawing hands will raise with there 9 high straight since they have been praying for it for 3 cards coming.
Good Luck Beginner
Please help.
I play small stakes (6&12 stud poker)on a regular basis. For about a month now, I can not get a card if my life depended on it. And when I do, I get a bad beat. I consider myself a good player, but the cards are not comming. I keep waiting for my cards to change but it's not happening. My question is, should I keep waiting it out, or take some time off. I took about 2 weeks off but that did'nt seem to change anything. Thank you.
Dan,
Try learning another game O8 or HE play tight and take a break that way. You can play these on Paradise for free on play poker just to get the mechanics down. Buy a book and read it along with playing, that will keep you busy for a couple of weeks and then try it live at a poker room. Go back to 7cs or you may enjoy the other games more and stay with one of them. If you only have one game that you play it limits you. It can get frustrating in 7CS when your going bad or getting rivered.
paul
Dan,
I used to be exclusively a 7-stud player, and have had similar experiences as yours. I did as Paul has suggested to you - I studied and learned to play hold'em, starting at low limits. Now, if I am running bad in stud, I switch to hold'em and vice versa.
Also, getting away from stud for awhile (while learning hold'em) helped my stud game. When I went back to stud I started out by re-reading Sklansky's book on Stud, and Roy West's book also. I did some serious thinkng about my game also, and this helped me to plug some holes that I previously was unaware of. You have to be honest with yourself about how you really play.
Anyway, from a brother stud player, this is what helped me.
Dan, I feel you, I went through a similar thing this summer, for the last year and a half I've been playing every day in a 5/10 home game that I absolutely own, my worst month up until this August had been breaking even in March. Then I just started getting cracked every day, just show up, fold for 30 minutes and lose a hand, fold for 20 minutes, get rolled up with kings and lose, like that for 3 weeks. I was down about $2,200 and my bankroll was on life support. I had to get a fucking part-time job, to weather the storm. I took a break and started playing hold'em online, unfortunately for me I got pounded even worse. The first hold'em hand I was dealt was AA and I lost to Q4 offsuit on the river. But my stud luck got better after about 3 more weeks. They say you can run bad in stud for 2-3 months. The only thing you can do, is try to reduce your variance as much as possible, so you won't lose as much. And use this opportunity to try to find leaks in your game and plug them. But if you play poker this will happen to you sooner or later. Our regular home game has lost at least four people who this has happened to, over the last two years. I'm a better player now because of my experience, for one thing I don't go on tilt as quickly or for as long now, because I know how bad things can really get. Hang in there and whatever you do, DON'T start pressing and trying to make something happen, because you'll only make things worse. Hang in there.
"They say you can run bad in stud for 2-3 months."
That is a huge understatement.
Ask any pro whos been at it for 20 years.
Your experience is not unique and is part of the game. That is the way stud is,although at low limit the swings should not be as great as in higher ante games. You should not change games or play any differently--if you feel that you must play differently then you need to examine your play and your bankroll.
If you think that your run is bad, in one of Mason's books on Gambling theory(I believe) he shows that an expert lowball player can have a TWO YEAR losing streak purely by fluctuation!!
You should just keep playing through it, and you should always examine your play. Most of the time when players are losing they tend to play weaker and less aggressive,and this contributes heavily to their continued loss. If you fail to raise or reraise on third street and allow a player to stay in the pot and catch on the river, or if you fail to bluff on the end because you dont want to waste the bet, then it is not luck or bad cards that caused the loss.
If you are a winning player, and only you can answer that one if you keep track of your sessions, then you should just keep playing and you will get it back. It is a long run enterprise.
I dont agree with those that say you should change games merely because you are on a cold streak. The only way this makes sense is if you have a similar win rate at another game. You CERTAINLY should not play in a tougher holdem game merely becuase you are running bad at stud. If the games are easy and you have a similar win rate then by all means switch games. Otherwise it is a mistake.
Keep plugging away and be aggressive and you will do fine.
Pat
How long have you been running badly? And are you losing?
I ran badly for about 3 months a while back but I still scraped out a profit. Since then I have come back and have been on a great heater for 3 months now. Even with that cold streak I managed to make about 1.3 BB for the year.
Are you sure you are just running bad, and that you haven't lost your game? I found that after I ran bad for awhile my game had changed - for the worse. I made a CONSCIOUS DECISION to reevaluate my game from the ground up. I made some rules for myself. Then I played again.
Everything turned around when I did that. I tightened up again, realized that I had started 'chasing' a little, and got my game back.
I do think that an extended period of losing will effect your game. Usually for the worse. You must keep records during this time. Make notes about several key hands each session. Think about those hands and decide if you really did play them correctly.
-SmoothB-
I think your response is a good one. Often a re-evaluation of your game is a good thing when you are losing, as playing looser is usually a contributor. I find that as you win you get more confident and you play more hands; this leads to a loss until this leak is plugged.
Pat
Seems like its a concensus. You are pissing.
SmoothB,
I can't imagine you were running bad.
When you really do run bad, you'll know it!
;-)
This board is great. Glad to know i'm not alone out there.
Today was the first day I broke my losing streak, but I think it was just the cards I was getting (quad q's twice and aces full in less than an hour).
I think that my game has changed since my rut. I think I have to be more aggresive like some of you have said. It's hard when you get bad beat after bad beat to not get alittle gun shy, but I think this is 1 of my problems. I tried changing games, but that didn't work for me.
Again thanks alot for all your input.
Since many of you play in AC, I am curious as to peoples opinions of the best 10-20 stud games in AC. I guess we are talking about the Taj and the Trop here. Any comments are appreciated.
Pat
I find the 10/20 stud games at Trop pretty good. Weekdays are a bit better in the sense the crowd is more predictable making for less winnings/losses but better (smaller) variance. Weekends can be wonderful if you are at a good table. Variance can be high when the visitors chase you down. If you are even 5th best, you can win some money. Trop in my opinion is better. better dealers and floor people. Lower ceiling and quieter. Easy to get seated. Nice crowd (if any crowd in a casion can be nice). Taj is big and somewhat less personal. Dealers are uneven; some very good others terrible. More check raising at the Taj 10/20, but overall I find the games a slightly bit easier (I seldom loose at Taj). Actually the Sands has a nice 5-10-15 game on weekends. Not bad but very clicky. I am gradually moving over to Holdem.
I knew you'd respond and thanks for the input. Changing to Holdem??!! Sorry to hear it, although I was at Foxwoods this weekend and watched a friend of mine play in a 2-4 holdem game that was the weakest game I have ever seen, even worse than 1-5 stud.
Pat
Hi Marco,
And thank`s for your answer about poker in Europe.
You wrote about poker world and Concord club in Vienna. I`d like to know, if it is possible to make some money as a decent 7cs player at pokerworld or do you have to be an expert ?
Is the standard, loose games with bad players, or is it tight games with very good players ?
I appreciate any help
Hi Lance!
First u have to distinguish Pokerworld club with Concord Club. First is in Franzosengraben, second in Brehmstrasse (obvious in Vienna).
POkerworld Club:
If you read, read, read, study Roy West' book YOU CANNOT LOSE. In that club there are a lot of amateurs players, the limits are very low--about $2-$4 for the most popular 7 stud card game (they play almost only this low 7sc game). Players, there, are very symphatic and play a very happy game, the rake is ridicolous, the dealers are good. They spread dayly many interesting tournaments with very very low buy-in (about $8) and the action is good (even with these small investments). You play vs chinese people, austrian people, turkish people, german people, etc. THe world is complete in this club! VERY GOOD. By the way, the food is excellent at low prices.
CONCORD CLUB:
The talk changes. When they spread their superb tournaments, you can meet at your tournament table champs like Men the master Nguyen (I hope I write his name well) and the top european players in every kind of game (omaha, 7cs, HE). Obvious when you are eliminated from those tournaments AVOID to play cash games (but the limits discourage you). But, aside these events, you can found very good tables at 100-200 As 7 card (about $8-$16). The opponents are more skilled than in POkerworld but nothing that really can scare you (I suppose you are a average player). Most of them don't know and don't adopt the 4 flush in 4th card strategy of raising for a free-card (just for 1 example). Against them you can have an incredible reading hands as when they don't hit their hands you can easily read this fact in their faces. Also here, good players (a little less polite players than in Pokerworld---strange to say as the limits are higher----) Here, very good dealers, very good food and very good reception (and very good security like Pokerworld).
If you want some statistics, I played last november 8 days in a row (6 hours a day) and I won about $1500.
If you want some other suggestion, please contact me to my E-mail: trevixget@hotmail.com
Good luck, Marco
I have been playing 7 card stud lately and much to my surprise been doing real well. I stayed away from stud for some time and in retrospect, after playing the past few weeks, I'm starting to wonder why.
I know that I was influenced by the Hold'em thing I mean everyone was playing it and all the "Old People" were playing seven card. Also it's fun, playing Hold'em that is. (Also Omaha 8)
The thing is that I want to gear towards making more of my income by playing poker and I'm just wondering if some folks have gone back to Seven Stud as their game of choice and if so why. I find that after playing board games for so long, that when playing stud, I can almost see thru opponents hands. It's hard to explain but it just seems so damn easy that it's scary.
Please don't get me wrong and think I'm trying to make it sound like this game is a cinch. I've played deciplined and made few mistakes and of course that's the foundation to solid winning poker regardless of what game we're playing.
Any comments would be greatly appreciated.....CJC
Why do I have the feeling I sat across from you last night at a 5-10 game
Let me say first of all that I am no expert, but I do have a solid 7-stud game, and usually play $10-$20 or $15-$30. I have played Hold'em quite a bit during the past year ($10-$20), and feel that I have a solid game there also, although I don't have the familiarity with hold'em that I do with stud.
I find that at stud I am very good at reading the cards and putting players on their hands. At hold'em I am getting better, but I'm not as good at reading hands.
In my experience I find that the ability to read hands comes with familiarity with the game that you are playing. The games are structured different in the way the cards are dealt out, etc. and you use your knowledge of how people play within that structure to determine what their possible holdings are. In other words, just because I am good at reading hands in stud, doesn't make me as good at it in hold'em, because I am less familiar with the game. I would suspect that the converse would be true for hold'em players.
I know that this is not directly your point. Your point is, given that you already know stud, and then play lots of hold'em, when you go back to stud reading hands is much easier. But, given my comments above, I don't understand how learning to read hands in hold'em can help you to read hands better at stud.
Bruce K & CJC,
"Your point is, given that you already know stud, and then play lots of hold'em, when you go back to stud reading hands is much easier. But, given my comments above, I don't understand how learning to read hands in hold'em can help you to read hands better at stud."
I tend to play better when going back to a game I am better at due to the newness of the game again. My eye is sharper and able to pu things that I have learned over the years but had been deaden by overplaying one game. So I guess I'm agreeing with you both but in a different way. I may also pu things that are new that I had not seen before because I'm sharper due to the crossover effect of both games and combining knowledges that are common to both but were not observed by me playing just one.
paul
Paul,
Your response makes a lot of sense to me. Thanks for the insight.
Yea, I agree Paul, I think that I may get into a sorta take it for granted type of place in the other games and going back to stud I'm more observant and just flat out paying more attention. Although I beleive this to be true, I also feel that stud just may be a slightly easier game. Let me play for a lot longer again before I make that a statement and just leave it as a for now.
Bruce, just to clarify, I don't think that playing other games had anything to do with reading hands better but that I beleive I can read hands better in stud than hold'em and Om'8.
Thanks for the input guys, I hope some others will respond as well.....CJC
5-10 stud at foxwoods. Vwery weak players, including two old ladies who call virtually every hand, even to the river. On fourth street I have isolated both of them.
The hands on fourth are: me: 6s8s/AsKs- lady1 :xx/9c8d lady2: xx/4d10c. my flush was completely live, and even though I raised on third street I knew that lady 1 would bet if she had a pair, and lady2 would call. P.S. they were both friends who came to the casino together and frequently played together.
So I decided to check raise. I figured that either I could do so for value, as I knew I could get called all the way even if I made the flush and I had the best hand, or I could represent a pair.
I caught a flush card on the river after betting and getting called the whole way, and won the pot. Lady1 called with a pair of nines, and lady2 had two pair with a river ten. She called a raise onthird without even a pair or a three flush.
Was this a good play under the circumstances, or was I taking too much of a risk? What about if they were better players? Any comments are appreciated.
Pat
If they were better players you would loose value by trying to checkraise because they will often check behind you.
How can they will check him if he has the highest board? (Supposing no open pairs appears on next streets)
The point, in my opinion, is that a check-raise with 4 flush (with A-K exposed) is not a good move even vs weak opponents. You have to act first on every street and your improvements are visible to all. If you have those terrible players you can raise the pot in other many ways and overall when you have a semi-hidden hand. The power of check-raise with 4-flush is to have a free-card in 5th, but if you have a strong board like A-K showing, you lost almost all the value. Probably, if you have only 1 opponent the move was no bad as you can count on the value of your overcards.
Marco
Marco,
I don't think you understood my post and I didn't quite understand yours.
On 4th street you got a great draw. Great draw = $$$.
Get your money in this pot.
I think check raising is a good play against strong players in a 10/20 game. Against weak players, they always call. It's a toss-up here. You risked checking around to pick up another bet. You would have needed both to call to make it worth while. It worked. I guess it is good against those players. I would have preferred to have them fold. Only a player with trips or 2 live pais should have called.
I agree with last post
My opinion is, because you knew they were weak and they would call you down with almost anything a check raise semi-bluff probably wasnt right on fourth street. This is because you have no chance of winning the pot right there by making them fold. However I would have tried for a check raise on fifth street for two reasons. (one) You probably had around 15 outs counting your ace and king overcards, which if you paired one of them that hand would have positive expectation against the type of opponents the ladies were.(two) but the main reason I would have waited for fifth street is because you knew they would bet and call your raise, you get more value by hitting them with a big bet when the limit goes up, so you win an extra big bet by doing this on fifth street. By doing this you cut their pot odds drastically, they make a bad call and you win more in the long run.
Just an opinion,
Bishop
Bishop, I think you missed the entire purpose of his check raise. He was not semibluffing. He was check raising for value. With a hand that was a favorite to win (given what he knew about his opponents and the hands they would play), he right to do so.
Sounds like you played it ok; but don't expect my granny to ever invite you round for tea and cakes again.
One of those know-the-player things. What about checking on 6th to try and get in cheap; would they have checked too?
Thanks for the responses.
Firstly,my thoughts were that I could build a big pot. I was not semi-bluffing, and I knew they wouldn't fold. I had a completely live hand against two players who played anything, so it was a checkraise for value,if there is such a thing. I also knew that they would call the whole way if I led, even after I checkraised on fourth. But, If I caught a flush card on fifth, then I could not checkraise, as even they would check behind me.
So, I thought that I could get more bets if I made my flush. Basically,I could either bet on each street and have them call; I could checkraise on fourth and then bet and get called; or I could checkraise on fifth or later only if I didnt catch the flush card on the board.
Secondly, I also felt that if I paired the Ace or King I could win withjust the pair.
Clearly, this play is not worthwhile against better players, unless the intent was to semi-bluff. I just felt that I could tie them on with a guarantee of being called,and had an excellent chance to win the pot.
Pat
I think in this case your feel for the players, the game and your position was in favor. HAVING a high flush against two 2-pair hands or even trip is still a profitable, but you were still drawing to the flush. Your reasoning is clear since you thought pairing the high card would also give you the 5-6% extra chance you would need if you did not hit the flush. My books are at work, but I think your chances of loosing to a full house with 2 drawing hands against you is less than 1:3 and the pot was giving you the odds.
No, it's no good you sayed if you were against better players you couldn't do this check-raise. At the contrary, it was a good move. Why? If you check-raised on 4th with AK and 2 suited cards you can give the idea you have Aces in the hole (see my previous post on 4th check-raise, if you want) and in addiction you have the scare board of 2 suited cards. Very very good move in this spot against better players (let them trying to guess what you do have). But in my opinion, 4th check-raise with 4 flush is a good move only in 2 circumstances:
1) you have a 4 flush but you are SURE they check around you in 5th
2) you have 2 pair or better trips
Marco
I think that against better players you are better off betting as a semibluff,and not checkraising. But we can disagree, that is why poker is such a great game!
Pat
I don't see where the player knowledge is relevant here except to be NOT in your favor. Examine: 1) They are calling stations 2) They both have you beat
So, you know you need to improve to win (although your odds of doing so are good due to your live flush; I would not count the ace or king possibility too highly; that card might put you ahead of where they are NOW, but I doubt it will hold up). When you checkraise here, you must be doing so for value.
Based on that, your decision is not based on who you are playing against, since you have stated they will call you down all the way regardless. Your decision is based on the fact that you think you will improve to your flush. In fact, given your knowledge that you WILL have to show down, your decision seems a little stranger. I read your comment about "checkraising for value", and although I don't claim to be a great stud player, it seems weird to me; are you THAT sure you will make your flush?
I agree with the poster who said that your checkraise would be better against stronger players than against these two. These two are simply going to call more money into the pot where they are already ahead. A stronger player might be convinced and give you the pot, while even if he doesn't you may run him down with your flush.
David
Exact, David; this is what we sayed in previous answers and I continue to say that with (club-club)Ac-Kc vs strong opponence is a no bad idea to attempt a check-raise in 4th---if in 5th you catch another club you still can check the flush for deception and if you check even without the realized flush it's very hard for opponent to bet behind your check.
I'm not even certain about the rules. But I suspect it is like holdem with the community cards arranged in a cross pattern and outer cards revealed first by row, then by column, and then the final center card. Or perhaps the cards are revealed clockwise in five steps?
Anyway, Caro wrote this is an "unbalanced" and badly tuned game. Presumably it gives too much advantage to starting pairs or big cards that hit the "flop". This would make it unprofitable to continue with any drawing hands, making it a usually uninteresting contest. Is this right?
I'm not sure what your asking or saying but I will give you an answer to the way I play High Only Criss Cross.
Now you don't state whether 4 or 5 cards are dealt out to each person with 5 making the cross. I believe 3 is a better game but since most people play 4 or 5 I will base it on that.
For a starting hand with 5 cards a high pair is very important and a flush draw with an A is almost minimum. Two pair is a good hand as are trips, 4 flush, 4 straight ok, etc. I've probably left out a bunch but I'm not writing a book here.
Here's a hand I had not too long ago it's also Bet or Get Out rotating the bet.
AAJxx first card turned on top A, betting goes around I raise and three people call. Next card clockwise 5c, someone bets I raise two people call, next card down bottom J, someone bets I raise two call, next card 7c, I bet ptr raises, I raise, he raises, I raise, he calls. Middle card X, his bet I raise, he raises, I call.
He has quads 7's. I wouldn't call this game uninteresting. It's a good game, but I prefer playing it with 3 cards dealt or 4. HL crisscross is also a good game.
It's unbalanced more in the sense that if a 7 had been turned over first your more or less drawing dead IMO.
paul
I don't think it's unbalanced.I think most people that play it are. Dino
Bam Bam & Pebbles are all in.
HA!
Besides a better pair of aces (AKsAQd), is there a hand that is a heads-up, showdown-type favorite over AAxx (such as AsAh6c9d). For that matter, what is the worst hand in Omaha Hi that contains exactly 2 aces?
M.
Just basing this on intuition, but I would guess the worst hand with aces would be either AA66 or AA27, although there is always AAAA if you consider this OK. I would imagine there are many hands that are a favorite over AAAA, the best type of had I would imagine would be something like 6789 double suited.
An uncoordinated pair of aces is not a good Omaha Hi hand for limit games. The only potential is if you flop a set of aces, which normally will win only if the board also pairs. An ace on the board will normally guarantee at least a straight as the nuts.
The worst hand from the point of view of potential for money losses is AA22 with no suits. Both potential sets are in my opinion money losers in the long run. An ace set usually doesn't get a lot of action when the board pairs, and usually loses if it doesn't. A set of deuces usually can only win if the board doesn't pair and no straights or flushes come out. The only straight potential will be the lowest possible.
You have the worst AA in your second example, the only hand I would take over your first example would be AsAhKsKh, I know you eliminate a strait draw but the added KK will play out better over the long haul.
.. or is there anything better?
Is a good 4-card wrap a heads-up favorite over AA96? Something with minimal interference like JTs98d?
M.
This quiz is more complex than my previous of 12/21
7CS game, £20-$40, bring-in 10 (ante $5)6 players. all players are good except one (who obviously won this hand)
a 2 brings-in, 2 callers and late player complete the bet. All call.
4th card: bring-in (poor player) : 2c-6h PL2: J-7 PL3: K-8 PL4 (raiser) : A-2 off
PL4 bet, all players call.
5th card: bring-in: 2c-6h-10c PL2: J-7-J PL3: K-8-2 PL4: A-2-J
PL2 and PL3 checks, PL4 bet, bring-in call, PL2 call, PL3 fold, PL4 raise. Call, call.
6th street: bring-in: 2c-6h-10c-Ks PL2: J-7-J-Q PL4: A-2-J-2
PL2 checks, PL4 bet, bring-in call, PL2 raises, PL4 call, bring-in call.
Knowing PL2 has in the hole (10-K off) by which hand bring-in player won on the river, supposing 5 clubs in 6th were out?
Attention, I sayed bring-in was a poor player
How did player 4 re-raise himself on 5th, that's as far as I got.
Ditto
I did go back and read through the rest of your post. You wrote: "Knowing PL2 has in hole (10-K off) by which hand bring-in player won on the river, supposing 5 clubs in 6th were out?"
I say - Huh? If this is a quiz, what is the question?
..I wrong the report (I only remember this in my memory...I'm too old damn) And as I don't want to postulate fake things let's consider my post annullated. Sorry again
(However the hand was very very strange and for this reason I had to noted it in my booklet)
At the beginning of the books Seven Stud for advanced playeres and Hold em for advanced players in the sections titled "About David Sklansky" it says that he recently invented a new game called "Poker challenge" that is to appear in casinos soon. Has anybody heard about this. Does anybody know the rules, how it is played, and if it is spread anywhere?
Thanks,
Bishop
It should go on trial in Ballys in Las Vegas any day now.
so I guess the big question is weither or not it is beatable, and if so when is the book coming out
.. as one author so eloquently put it, if blackjack were invented today, even knowing the profits it would bring, they wouldn't market it.
With most modern table games having a nice fat 5%+ edge, good luck seeing anything even close to beatable evermore..
M.
QQQ
So, what is the game? Do you play against players or against the house?
DJ
This game was discussed some in the archives. If I remember correctly this is the basic premise:
Player makes a wager. Dealer deals three holdem hands face up. Player picks one to play against the other two. Then a board is dealt, if player has the winner he wins (even money I think) otherwise he loses. There are also some high hand bonuses if the player makes a big hand.
Something like that anyway, I'll let others elaborate ;).
You can double your bet if it is on a starting pair.
"Hey Elmer, LOOK, you have AA, double your bet", and a whole new crowd gets to to learn how much fun it is to have your Ace's cracked! :oD
Just kidding David, hope your game becomes more popular the caribean stud and your royalties immense.
I guess now there is a game where computer simulations can actually serve a meaningful purpose. haha
I really dont understand what a good omaha hi lo starting hand is. I played a few the other night and was operating under very basic principles. However, I was told that some of the hands I played were bad, eg:
4-6-6-8, double suited 7-8-9-10, double suited
I thought both of these hands provided a number of draws to play for (although the flush draws were mediocre), so I called preflop. Can anyone give me a starting hand chart similar to the hold em starting hand chart, or at least some guidance in case I get stuck at the Dealer's choice table while waiting for hold em again...
Buy Ray Zee's book. All responses to questions such as yours start this way. There's a good reason for this. You'll lose a lot more than the cover price if you keep playing hands like 4-6-6-8 double-suited, even if you don't play that much. :^)
Both of these hands are trash. This ain't hold'em. In Omaha, especially in loose games, you can expect to see the nuts or something close to it in both directions most of the time. Ideally, you want a hand with good scoop potential. You want a hand that is "coordinated", i.e., all of the cards work well together. A2 is great, but A23 is much better, as it is more counterfeit-proof. Ace-high suited combinations are good, but beware if the board pairs--you'll see a boat more often than not. High pairs are OK, but you'll usually need a full house to win with them. Sets don't win very often because a straight, flush, or full house will be possible something like 98% of the time. If a better hand is possible, someone's bound to have it.
Your 7-8-9-10 double-suited is coordinated. The problem with it is that it has no real scoop potential. The suitedness doesn't count for much--you're quite likely to be up against a better flush. Its straight potential isn't worth much either. If you make a high straight, you're likely to be on the ignorant end, meaning someone else will likely make a better straight. If it's a lower straight, someone's going to have a low, and you'll have to split. Middling cards are death in this game. For all I know, this is an OK hand in Omaha-high, but I don't envision myself ever getting mixed up in that game, so I don't care. :^)
Great post Andy,
I wish someone had posted this when I first tried O8.
David, just to help confirm what others are probably saying. Not only are these not opening hands, they are in the group of Worst Hands possible.
They have almost no chance of scooping and can easily make a hand beat by a better str8 or flush.
There are worse hands such as 777Q but few would consider playing them SO in your case they would be better hands for you to get (stop you from playing the other type).
Good Luck
Well, I started this, so the least I can do is contribute to the education of someone who is likely to use this edification to reduce my bankroll. And trust me, Dave, this advice will be what I feel to be sound. Honest. Really.
In O/8, you want to play hands where all the cards fit well together, give you chances for scooping the entire pot, give you draws for the nuts, and give you multiple chances of winning. Examples:
1. Cards all fit well together. Hands that are high only oriented like K-K-Q-J, or Q-J-T-9 give you multiple draws. Do not worry about the suited nature of these types of hands too much because you want to be drawing for nut flushes, not a J-high chip burner. They can make the nut straight and give you re-draws. If a low board flops, you are out cheaply. Do not play hands like K-K-6-4. YOu are putting all your eggs into flopping a King, and then hoping the board pairs, and you low is useless. Similarly, "3-legged" hands such as K-Q-J-2 are much weaker.
Your playing the T-9-8-7 hand would be reasonable in Omaha high, where you are hoping for a middle sized flop, but in O/8 you are rarely going to scoop the pot barring a miracle 9-9-7 type of board, and even then, you are vulnerable to overpairs, someone with a bigger kicker for their 9, and runner-runner low draws to erode your equity.
2. Scoopers.
Usually involve some sort of suited Ace. Hands like Ac-Ah-2c-4d, or Ac-2c-4h-6s. You can make the nut flush, and nut low, or extend your bike out to the six-high str8, for example.
3. Draws to the nuts.
You want to flop the nuts, or at the very least, have a draw to the nuts, with some backup. For example, the flop comes down Kc-8c-5s. You want to be competing with hands such as listed in #2 where while there is currently no low or flush, you are drawing to the nuts in both cases, barring something like the 5c hitting the board. Ideally, you would like something like an A-2-3 so you cannot be counterfeited. In other words, if any low card comes, you don't care which one. In fact, you often wish for an A or 2 to hit the board, counterfeiting those hands where the player limps in with just an A-2 and no re-draws.
Drawing to make Queen or Jack-high flushes is suicide. Watch those clowns at Baccarat, Dave, and see what kinds of trash they chase with. How do you think those pots get so big? They're all chasing dreams.
4. Multiple chances of winning.
Hands like that K-K-6-4 I commented on above severely restrict your chances. Not to say you can't make King's full, but I would much rather pay to see the flop with something like As-Qs-Jh-2d. I can make nut spades, Broadway, high full houses, and nut lows. Several chances. A hand like your 8-8-6-4 can only make the nuts for quad's, low full houses that are vulnerable and will likely split the pot with a low, or a miracle board such as A-2-3-5-7 or similar.
I read somewhere that in O/8, you cannot play any hand that doesn't contain an Ace, and you can't play any hand that contains an 8. That's a bit of an exaggeration, but not by much, IMO. You want hands with cards concentrated between A-6 on the low side, and A-T on the high, and some high-low types of hands that have nut low and nut-suited values. The rest is garbage. Expert 0/8 players state that they find the games boring, because you play so few hands. Were you paying attention to how many hands I played? It is nothing for me to sit through 2 or 3 complete laps without voluntarily putting money in. So you know the opportunities are there in that Baccarat game where 7-9 players routinely see the flop. They cannot possibly all have met the criteria for quality starting hands, can they? But, as residents of A4CT, they crave the action.
Now that you are armed and (semi)-dangerous, next time I sit down in that game, please go play HE. You can thank me later.
Thanks for the great poast. I'm going to print it up and put it in Ray's book as a short review of key points.
Read Ray Zee's book, found here.
Wow, great posts guys, yea and Ray's book for sure.
David:
I, too, will offer my suggestion to you to buy Ray Zee's book on Omaha/8. Study it aggressively. It will equip you superbly to play the game in a winning fashion. By the time you have had studied it well, you will be thankful, confident, and above all, winning player at the poker table.
Omaha Hi-Lo is a good game, typically action packed and relatively easier to beat than Hold'em poker is. I say this conditionally, though, provided you attained the proper skills to play it correctly. In my opinion, poor Omaha/8 players pay heavier price playing this game than Hold'em because the game certainly does discriminate more against weaker, uneducated players.
Good luck!
Zee's book is great and I highly recommend it, but I would also suggest you get another book that deals with more fundamental concepts. The Zee book might be a bit over your head at first. I thought the Shane Smith book on Omaha was pretty good, as it goes into more detail about what makes a good Omaha hand both preflop and on the flop.
To summarize: You want to play hands that can make the nuts. Garbage hands like 8664 and T987 look enticing but they're garbage because it's hard to make the nuts, and usually can't win for high without a low being present. Additionally, middle pairs suck. You would much rather have 2346 than 2366, for example. Dunc's advice is very good, and you should read it very carefully.
I find Omaha/8 to be painfully boring in cardrooms because it's so damn slow, but it's not so bad online, where the pots are split instantly and the action is fast. 35-40 hands/hr is routine for online O8, and sometimes even 45 is possible.
-Sean
That's something I hadn't thought about, Sean. I have never played HE online, but if I did venture into a virtual cardroom, perhaps O/8 might be the way to go. Assuming of course that the players are as poor as I see locally in 4/8. The biggest reason I don't play more O/8 here is that when you combine slow players with inexperienced dealers, we are often lucky to get in 20 hands an hour, never mind 45.
The two brilliant things about online O/8 (I have played many hours at Paradise and in LV) are:
1. The number of hands an hour is huge because the "dealers" act instantly and never make mistakes. Go to Paradise and look at the hands/hr in the lobby if you don't believe me.
2. The truly abominable quality of many of the players. To be sure, there are some (very) good ones as well, but it takes only a couple of rounds to note which are which and then one can play accordingly. What is more, the bad players tend to be immensely passive. They will hardly ever raise you except with nut-nut, but they will call and call and call.
I like to play sessions of a few hours of O/8. I have had only one losing session on Paradise (second time out, complacent, over-confident, trying to play two games at one, a little tipsy, not a good recipe for success!).
Oh no!! Not Again!!
At the lower limits, online O8 varies. I played some 4-8 for a while on Planet and the players were generally very weak. On Paradise, I've found more competent players than you'd find in a real cardroom, but by "competent," I mean only that they have a rough idea of what makes a decent starting hand. There are still plenty of "competent" players who'll do things like call 2 cold on the turn with a fairly weak 1 way draw. There are also some terrible players in the online Omaha games, particularly at 10-20.
There are also terrible Hold'em players, though. Some of them don't even seem to bother to put you on a hand, and they'll just raise, raise, raise, with no clue that you might actually have a hand that beats them. For example, you can play pocket pairs even when the implied odds don't seem like they call for it, because you can make so much when you flop a set. -Sean
Is there any kind of a formula for Omaha High starting hands? Is it possible to base it on the number of holdem hands that you would play or two have all the cards working together. Any help would be appreciated, the game here is very loose and very aggressive. 50% of the flops are capped (5-10)
Thanks
One thing I use for high only is that all the cards must be Ten or above, AND include two pair or a pair and two suited cards or two double suited cards, in high only this keeps me from getting too creative when I'm leaning towards "tilt". I, of course, loosen up a little in the blinds and on the button for cheap but this is a good rule of thumb....Good Luck
Bob Ciaffone has written a very good book on the subject. Generally, you want 4 very coordinated cards (bigger is better), and you play for the nuts.
I know some good players who say you should have four good hold'em hands to play an omaha high hand. I don't play the game much, but that's the rule of thumb I'm told. Good luck!
I regularly play in a stupid table full of high bankrolled players (bankrolls proportionally conversed at their skills).
After 2 months of playing (never played at all omaha high and never read Ciaffone book before) I noted that the most part of my winning hands are:
- A-x suited with 2 high cards (who works in a straight fashion)
- A pair who catches the miracle third card on the flop (highest or second card) but ONLY when there are no obvious flush draws and high open end straight draws.
- The key factor in my loose game is to not marry with the trips on the flop and to not give much faith in only one drawing hand
The times I play Omaha/8 at Hollywood Park, preflop raises seem to be ignored. Nobody folds, in fact, a lot of 3 and 4 bets are normal before the flop.
I feel like there isn't really a starting hand that is worth raising (maybe the top one or 2 hands, only). Am I giving up a lot here?
Well I would just keep raising with sound hands and then draw only to the nuts (or close). You will be playing better hands than everyone else, better than them. An incredibly boring and often frustrating but almost risk free way of making money.
Take an example. You raise with A23K suited ace, and no one folds, in fact they play 237Q, A39T, KQJ2 (suited king under your suited ace? Yum yum!), or even worse, despite your raise. Who cares? Let them all call!!
I mean maybe it piques your ego that they ignore your raise when the books say they should fold, but what could be better? Some low limit O8 players call your raise _and_ then chase for the low with A3 or A4 _and_ then whinge when you have - as advertised - A2. It's _fantastic_ that they're ignoring your raises _as well as calling them_!!!
The game actually gets more interesting when opponents note and respect your betting so that you can manipulate them, of course. Oh no!! Not again!
Yes, you're giving up a lot. If almost everyone is calling, they're playing complete garbage like KJ75, 8864, etc. When you have a strong hand, you can really punish them for playing that crap. Be careful not to tie yourself to the pot when you raise preflop, though, and you still need a draw to the nuts to continue. (Although in big pots, they can be backdoor draws.) So, sometimes you'll be raising before the flop and folding on the flop.
-Sean
What hands should U legimately raise with in any position?
Coyote
A23X, AAXX double suited, A2XX with suited ace and A34X with suited ace are strong candidates in a game where everyone ignores your pre-flop raises.
In a game where people respect your pre-flop raises you might limp with these hands before the flop, all depending, and you might raise with other hands when you want to limit the field.
Just my opinion.
Buzz
Just got through with my first read of High-Low-Split Pokef for Advanced Players. Maybe I'm missing something, but Ray seems to advocate few raises before the flop -- say with the only the "premium" hands (AA23 double suited, AK23 double suited, etc.) He makes mention often that starting hands do not differ greatly in value before the flop.
Because you have to abandon so many hands on the flop(which can come so many ways), I would think that you would be better served putting extra money in later, rather than earlier. I've gotten the firm impression that winning preflop 0/8 play is more passive than winning preflop hold'em play.
Just an opinion from a player with little 0/8 experience.
Jon I.
I like the no raise pre flop stragey. the good hands U can call a raise maybe. The all big cards I like because if U flop big there probly won`t be a low and U may have best of it to sweep the pot.
Coyote.
He does say that, but he is dealing with games where one has rational and reasonable savvy opponents. Also, I don't think either I or Sean Duffy suggested raising with other than good hands, but rather that one should not hold off from raising with a good hanf just because one does not expect anyone to fold.
Coyote also makes a good point about raising with hands which are all high cards, e.g. AKKQ or AKQJ (suited). I think this is very good advice against bad players, since they often seem to think that the game is all about having A2 or A3 and do not really know what to do when the flop is QT6 etc. (other than to draw for a backdoor low). You will likely scoop if you hit, of course.
Oh no!! Not again!
"Coyote also makes a good point about raising with hands which are all high cards, e.g. AKKQ or AKQJ (suited)."
I've gone back and forth on it. Whatever you have, if you catch the flop, you like your hand. You catch somewhere around one flop you like (can play) out of four or five with AKKQ or AKQJ. I'd rather get in as cheaply as possible, pre-flop, with hands where you are three or four to one to fold on the flop. In addition, with AKKQ or AKQJ, even when you like the flop you usually don't end up with the winning hand in a loose, low-limit high/low Omaha game. With AKKQ, for example, you like a flop that has a king, but trip kings are not usually a winner. You still want to improve and usually don't.
I agree with Coyote and Ray Zee about generally not raising pre-flop. But if you wanted to raise sometimes before the flop, there are more flops you like with a hand like A23X.
Just my opinion.
Buzz
The Zee book is great, but one complaint I have is that it can be hard to tell what kind of game he's talking about in the different sections. Some of the advice applies to low-limit games, and others apply to the tougher, higher stakes games. In a tougher game where most pots are contested shorthanded, the hands run closer together in value. A24K w/a suited ace is a monster in a multiway pot, but heads up, it's not necessarily favored by all that much over other hands that would be a lot weaker in a multiway pot. That's why Ray says that when a fish limps in, you don't necessarily want to raise to isolate him like you would in a Hold'em game.
But it's a huge mistake to think that Omaha starting hands run close together in a loose game. In a loose game, your opponents are playing all sorts of garbage, and a hand like A3JT is a monster compared to a lot of the crap your opponents are playing. I would gladly pay two bets to take a flop with that hand against a loose field.
Because you have to abandon so many hands on the flop(which can come so many ways), I would think that you would be better served putting extra money in later, rather than earlier.
Ideally, you want to do both. When your opponents are playing garbage, it's hugely profitable to raise with good hands to punish them for playing their trash, and the slight increase in fluctuations is worth it. Sure, you might have to dump when the flop completely misses you, but your A3JT is an absolute monster compared to the 8644, KT86 etc. type hands that your fishy opponents hold in a multiway pot.
Also, I've found that a lot of the Omaha games I play in tend to end up being pretty passive on the later streets because the people with the nut lows are afraid of being quartered, or in bad position to jam the pot. So it's not always possible to jam on a later street. (Plus a lot of times when someone will jam with me when I have a nut low it means I'm quartered, so I don't really profit much, if at all.)
-Sean
I have read Ray's book a few times and always thought he was primarily referring to higher limit games, at least 10-20. In a small game jammin your premium hands doesn't hurt as much as long as you're willing to drop it quick, if need be, since everyone calls anyway. You have to be getting the best of it otherwise you couldn't define a premium hand in the first place.
The thing that I see better players doing is not raising pre-flop but calling pre-flop and that has to be incorrect. (Since they're better than average they tend to fiqure this out but give up alot in the interim.)
I cannot imagnine not raising with As-2-3 or AsAs, etc. Now if everyone was folding that would be entirely different but the fact of the matter is that in most smaller games they don't.
I think Ray is talking about games where playaers generally have a clue. In loose games where players call with really bad hands even after a raise, you should raise more often than Ray suggests, especially in good position.
Scott V,
"I feel like there isn't really a starting hand that is worth raising (maybe the top one or 2 hands, only). Am I giving up a lot here?"
If raising doesn't limit the field then I would only raise with multiway hand nuts. A2sAxs or other variations of this hand otherwise just call. I would base my raise more on pos'n with these multiway hands btf. If most players hang around atf you can raise then, but if quite a few players drop atf then raising btf is beneficial to get the dead money in the pot.
paul
This last weekend at AC I had my best return (7cs) from the game since I returned playing in September of last year after an absence of about 14 years... Those were the days of 5 card draw @ the Bicycle Club in Bell Gardens.
The biggest reason that I have returned to the game is that the Poker Rooms of Taj and Trop have become non-smoking and this is by far the biggest factor. Before, the wheezing and coughing brought about by secondhand smoke was so detremental my health, which in turn would limit my playing time and hence the improvement of my game - that I just forgot about poker (sic).
The return has been thoroughly enjoyable. I started at 1-5 and now after this weekend's performance I feel comfortable @ 5-10. I have limited my playing time to about 2-3 hours and because of it I'm not tired nor am I going ballistic with poor card selection and then chasing.
Patience is the key... There is an article in Poker Digest(week Jan12-26) about this topic and it is definitely debateable.
Just a few observations from 5-10 games that I played this weekend.
I am amazed as to how my phish swim into these games. A couple of youngsters - probably just out of college or still in there but just legal enuff to get by security, seated with girlfriend in tow, blowing $200 in about 1 hour... Its amazing how much sweet talk there is given by this skool of swordphish, including free drinks etc. The funny thing is would some pay this much for an elective in university or even in a night time non-credit scenario. Poker Digest has a noted of some college class that teaches rudimentary elements of the game. I don't know how much mathematics - probability - statistics is given. If someone knows about this class and what it covers send me a response or a post on this BBS.
Second comment deals with a reaction to my activity in the game. Basically, in one of the 2 hour sessions I play 4 hands and ended up 4-0 and of course positively happy. Obviously this means I was throwing away most of the hands and watching the other players play it out. One woman who was MIA which I had won a couple of hands and was seated in S#8 whispered something to woman S#7 which I kind of figured out was something like "Does that guy in S#1 play any hands?" She nodded and confirmed my ROI%. I also got this kind of a reaction in the first session of the weekend, where I didn't play in the first 14 hands and I was getting sneers from 2 players across the table. First hand that I played was a JcQd Kd which turned into a straight on the river but was bamboozled by the sneering player in S#6 who was all in on his FH 6s over 4s. I didn't get discouraged... Played my game and left a winner after get some dream flops with quality cards!
Thirdly, deals with the noise factor at both the Taj and the Trop and I think this will currently limit my playing time. The noise is attributed to the multi action returns that the casino is looking for... Simulcasting Horse racing, and live NFL playoff action seem to be right in the midst of these cardrooms. Don't get me wrong... I've been involved in the horse racing game with ownership and punting etc and Sportsbetting online is another out for the punter, but poker is a game that should be played in silence - 4 walls. Sure the old image of the game was a smoke filled den with a couple of billiard table in the background but the game has its confines, rules and nuances that should lead for a discussion so that there can be an improvement in the noise level. I found that 2 hours was max and that anything longer would lead to a headache and an imbalance of the norm.
Fourthly, when seated in S#8, for the first time a lady dealer had a wonderful fragrance that had me out of my wits trying to concentrate on the game without leaning over to her side. I did comment to her about her scent and I got the best smile of the day.
Lastly, if you have lasted this long, I have to commend the Two-by-Two book - 7cs for AP which has me going back and back for referals, especially when I am in doubt. To tell you all the truth, I got this book more as a joke and a lark during the summer and now it rests closely next the Good News Bible for daily access.
Cheers and I welcome any comments!