![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
Don't know of any books entirely on 5CS, but Winning Poker Systems by Norman Zadeh has a chapter on it. This book was on sale at Barnes and Nomle for a couple of bucks recently.
Out of print, but may be available at a public library: Education of a Poker Player by Herbert Yardley. Has some info on 5CS and a frank exposition of the attitude it takes to win...
The game is almost dead, but I have fond memories of a lowball version where you rolled your own==and your hole card was wild.
Considering the price and the solid poker advice it contains, Norman Zadeh's book Winning Poker Systems is the best value, dollars per ounce, I've read. It deals mainly with PL draw, with an excellent short chapter on 5cs, and a rather outdated chapter on 7cs. Despite the absence of holdem and omaha, and the relatively poor chapter on 7cs, this book is well worth having around for when you get invited to a game of pl draw, or 5cs. (I've had several copies, but I keep giving them away, and it's a while since I've read it.)
There isn't a lot of theory associated with 5cs: the arithmetic is totally basic. It comes down to positional play, working your upcards, reading your opponents, and being able to put pressure on when you know what they've got, even if you know their hand is good: if you wait for winning cards all the time you'll go broke. Of course on your own part you should be unreadable, and be able to resist pressure. There was a game of HP 5cs which ran for a couple of years at the casino here (Perth, Australia) when it first opened in '87, and with Norman Zadehs's help I had a very good win rate right from the start. Admittedly a lot of the players knew very little about the game, or would say "All I know about five-card stud is that you shouldn't bet into an open pair". That's a really bad piece of poker misinformation! If you can't bet or bluff into an open pair reasonably often you won't win, except through luck. You must also be able to bet back at someone who is representing a big pair and you have good reason to disbelieve them, even when you have nothing and your highest upcard is small: backing your judgement with fearless betting is crucial to success. The HP 5cs game folded when HP 7cs was introduced, so I switched to PL draw and again, with Norman's help, beat the game, with a 5% uncapped rake too, hard as it may be to believe.
I couldn't beat the 5% rake playing HP 7cs against the same players who I took the money off at 5cs, and not because they played any better - if anything they played worse - which leads me to believe that in big-bet play 5cs has the biggest expert's edge of any game.
"which leads me to believe that in big-bet play 5cs has the biggest expert's edge of any game."
When no-limit 5-stud was spread at the World Series, the same player won it year after year, until nobody was willing to enter anymore!
Hi sir I want to aply with fun girls I mean sxe xxx girls Could you send to me full sex girls game .
3-6 Omaha/8
I'm in the BB with 2d4c7hJc. 5 players see the flop for one bet.
The flop comes Js7d5s. I check and there is a bet in middle position - I call with top two pair. Nobody folds. The turn comes 2s putting the 3rd spade on the board and making a low. UTG bets and the previous bettor raises. SB folds. I have 3-pair but am afraid of a flopped set - and with the flush and low out there even if I call now it may be capped back around to me. Is this worth a call to try to make a full house on the river?
Thanks,
~DjTj
DjTj - Your inital two pair (jacks and sevens) are so low that calling a bet after the flop seems marginal. I suppose the possibility of somehow winning low tipped the scales in favor of you calling.
Then a two appears, (1) ruining all hopes for a miracle low (ace, trey) for you, (2) enabling low for an opponent, (3) enabling a (probable) flush, and (4) giving you three pair. But what a horrid three pair! (jacks, sevens, and twos).
Did you take this all with equanimity, or did your agony show? Tough to take this calmly. I imagine you called time to think while some of the other players glared at you. At this point, low is "in," but not for you, so assuming you win for high you'll most likely end up with only half the pot. If the board pairs on the river you probably have a winner because your jack matches the highest card on the board. (Forget the possible flopped set. Your biggest worry is that someone has a spade flush and the board won't pair.) Lots of big bets to come. Only six outs.
Fold it.
The main reason to fold here, IMHO, is because you're playing for only one half the pot and you don't have anywhere near a cinch for that half. (In fact, IMHO, you're an under-dog for the high half).
So what happened?
Buzz
I play at a 4-8 $1 ante stud game, where $4 is being raked from the pot every hand and $3 if it is short handed. I figure I see 20-25 hands an hour. If the hands are short handed 25% of the time we are paying (3.75 * 22.5) roughly $85/hr for the table. Add in the $25 extra bucks thrown in for tips and the total is $110/hr or $13.75/hour/person. Can a non-expert player ever hope to beat this type of table?? Thanks for any input.
Chris
God, this game sounds horrible. The ultra-high ante means you can't offset some of the disadvantages of the high rake in the usual way, i.e., playing very few pots. If you could beat this game at all (which I doubt) your fluctuations would be tremendous in the process. Is this the only game available? Within 20 miles? 100? 3000? If so, I'd stay home and watch TV. (BTW, who ARE the greedy bastards spreading this game? They deserve a brick through the front window or something.)
T.J. Cloutier, in his Championship Omaha book, states, "The more people there are in the pot, the less important position becomes."
I disagree with his statement and believe that he undervalues the importance of position in limit games. For example, if your in last position you can save or get extra bets. If you are in the middle you could easily get trapped for extra bets.
Any comments welcome.
Mah - I think he means the more people in the game, the more likely someone is to have the nuts. If someone has the nuts, then the cards in your hand are obviously more important than your position.
Look at it this way. Would you rather have the nuts or the best position? Easy answer, isn't it!
If you were playing a game where you could get away with stealing, then position would increase in importance. However, in all the Omaha high/low games I have played, except for the final stages in a tournament, I have never seen anyone successfully pull off a steal. I have seen people try (usually Texas hold 'em folks) but it has always turned out to be a blunder.
Ray Zee keeps noting that he is able to steal. I wonder if he is talking about Omaha high/low. If so, must be a real tight game. If not, how about sharing your secret, Ray?
Buzz
I think he (T.J.Cloutier) means position is a lot less important then in other poker games.
On page 13 it reads "One of the most important things to understand about Omaha poker,is that all forms of Omaha are hand-value driven games.That is,the starting value of hands is usually paramount to position,which is far less important in Omaha then in limit or pot-limit hold'em." On a side note,the part of the book that helped my o/8 game the most,was when they talk about"The Danger of the Dangler" Good Luck, Howard
Howard - Yeah. Assuming the dangler is not suited to an ace, mostly danglers (IMHO) cut down on your chances of (1) hitting a playable flop and (2) making straights. As Badger has pointed out, the odds of making a full house are actually more favorable if you have four different cards than if you have a pair, so that danglers would not seem to make it more difficult to end up with a boat.
My current thinking is that hands with a low pair are even worse than hands with a dangler, at least in the loose games in which I play. It's dreadful to be trapped on the river when your pair matches the lowest unpaired card on the board. Hard for me to get away from such a hand by the time there are all those chips in the pot.
I don't generally play hands with low danglers. A hand with only one low card (and no ace) seems, in general, especially poor.
However, I voluntarily play A23X, A24X, A25X, A34X, and even A35X pre-flop in many situations, especially with a suited ace, dangler or not. (A45X no. You have to draw the line somewhere.)
Buzz
you can steal even in 0/hi lo. you mostly knock out a hand by raising that gives you a bigger part of the pot. this is in loose games. in tight games you can steal pots and antes at the higher stakes.
I get it. Somebody did it to me just this afternoon.
Thanks.
Buzz
There is a huge difference.
In any game, short-handed or not, you always have the ability to save or gain a bet or 2 from late position, as compared to early position. However, if a pot is being contested short-handed, then from late position you more often have a chance to steal the entire pot. Since this chance to gain multiple bets due to position disappears in a multiway pot, position becomes LESS important than in a short-handed pot.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Greg - All the authors I have read agree with you about the importance of position. Position. Position. Position.
However, if you mean that being on the button is the preferred position, I just don’t see it in Omaha high/low, at least not in evaluating hands before the flop, and only coincidentally after the flop. In nine handed Omaha high/low, the odds are that someone will have a good opening hand. If no one after the blinds has it, and if you don’t have it, guess who probably does? Right on! If you are on the button you may have “position” but at least one of the blinds probably has a better hand.
I’ll agree that I would rather be the last to play in any betting action, but that doesn’t necessarily mean being on the button. Not at all. On the end, if there are three players, I can be in the blind, under the gun or on the button - it doesn’t matter - if someone bets and there is someone to follow me in the betting order, someone who I suspect might possibly raise, I’ll sometimes quietly muck a marginal hand rather than get whipsawed - all depending (of course) on my hand, my opponents, and the history of action on this particular deal. I could be on the button in this situation and be “out of position” if the blind checked and the under the gun raised.
I have had some success post-flop in short-handed situations being in first position (what would be considered “out of position”). It will occasionally happen when I am in one of the blinds that someone raises pre-flop and all but one of the other players fold, including the other blind. In this situation if the flop has three high cards, I come out firing regardless of the cards in my hand because there’s a good chance that neither of my opponents will like the flop. (Most frequently the hand is over right there.) Even with only two high cards and a rainbow flop I come out firing, again expecting that neither of my opponents will like the flop. I have noticed some of my opponents employing the same tactic. Even when I suspect someone is using this tactic against me it’s hard for me to call when I have missed the flop. Remember we’re talking Omaha high/low here.
At the showdown, the advantage is frequently with whoever makes the first bet. Sometimes it’s harder to call than to bet. It’s even harder to overcall than to bet. If you bet in last position after everybody checks, everybody suspects you may be trying to steal the pot.
Thus I don’t see much value in being on the button in Omaha high/low.
If you don’t mean the button, then there surely is no other, more favorable position. Give me a good hand! Position be damned!
On the other hand, maybe I’m missing something here. You wrote, “In any game, short-handed or not, you always have the ability to save or gain a bet or 2 from late position, as compared to early position.” That is a very logical statement, one I can’t disagree with. However.....
However, Omaha high/low is a game of peddling the nuts. If you have the nuts, then bet the nuts. Screw position. If you don’t have the nuts, whatever your position is, then hope nobody else bets and you luck out (sometimes it happens). All right - that’s in general - of course you have to vary your game enough so that your opponents are not sure of what you’re doing.
FossilMan, no disrespect toward you is intended here. I have the greatest respect and appreciation for your viewpoint. And like I wrote above, maybe I’m missing something here. If so, perhaps you can point out the flaw in my argument.
Buzz
OK, how's this for an explanation.
The positional issues you mention (e.g., being next to act after someone bets, with potential callers/raisers behind) exist equally at all positions, no matter where the button is. So, these issues should even out over time, right?
However, the button is the only person who can give himself a free card. The button is the only person who gets to see everyone else do something before he has to act on every postflop betting round. These advantages will sometimes enable you to save a bet when you're beat, or get an extra bet when you're ahead, in any hand. Additionally, these advantages will sometimes allow you to win the entire pot when it's being contested short-handed. While it's true that early position players have the so-called "right of first bluff", this doesn't completely negate the button's edge, in that when the button bluffs, he can do it after everyone has indicated weakness by checking (or he can take that free card, see above). Also, the button can always raise when the early player uses his "right of first bluff", and can do this with a real hand or as a bluff resteal.
Admittedly, position is NOT as important in a full game with many players involved as it is in a short-handed game. And, position is NOT as important in omaha hi/lo as it is in HE. However, position is still VERY important in every poker game I've ever played.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Greg - Thanks. That’s as good an explanation of position as I have seen. However..... :-)
“The button is the only person who gets to see everyone else do something before he has to act on every postflop betting round. These advantages will sometimes enable you to save a bet when you're beat, or get an extra bet when you're ahead, in any hand.”
A main difference between hold ‘em and Omaha high/low is that someone is holding the nuts MUCH more frequently in Omaha high/low. Situations are common in Texas hold ‘em where it is proper to bet without the nuts. However, in a nine handed game of Omaha, unless the last two cards (the turn and the river) are both needed to make the nuts, someone is USUALLY holding the nuts. Good Omaha high/low players do some faking and will bet some hands without the nuts - but not much - and it’s usually for false advertising. At least that’s how it seems to me.
If you are out of position in a game of Omaha high/low where nine players were dealt cards (even if some have folded) and if you bet when you don’t have the nuts, then you probably will lose to someone holding the nuts. If some fool bets into you without the nuts, then it is true that you might get an extra bet if he called when you raised. Such a fool won’t last long before running out of money playing Omaha high/low. I think most of that particular species of fish became extinct before I started playing. (There may be some still left who visit gambling resort areas.)
“Additionally, these advantages will sometimes allow you to win the entire pot when it's being contested short-handed.”
I have to agree that it is more comforting to have the last position, better for your peace of mind, and that’s surely worth something (although it may take away from the thrill of the game for some). But I believe that the “right of first bluff” negates the buttons edge (see below). I will agree that the player in between is not in a good spot.
“While it's true that early position players have the so-called "right of first bluff", this doesn't completely negate the button's edge, in that when the button bluffs, he can do it after everyone has indicated weakness by checking (or he can take that free card, see above).”
All right. I’ll agree with you here, but only in part. Sometimes you can get a read on someone who acts before you. For me this is rare, and maybe that’s why I prefer Omaha high/low to Texas hold ‘em. I’m not very good at picking up “tells.” Sometimes I can read players but it doesn’t happen much. (Night before last there was a guy I had figured. In his case, I would have preferred him on my left, since I had a good read on what kind of hand he had, just because of his blatant pretending he held the opposite of what he actually held. I kept expecting him to spring the trap on me, but he apparently never caught on that I was reading him.)
When everybody checks to the button, it’s almost automatic for the button to bet, unless someone who checked is a known calling station. Everyone sees this bet by the button for what it is - a possible bluff. The button knows that he will be called by anyone with any kind of a hand for high and any kind of hand for low. But all right, on that 40% of Omaha-8 hands where low is not possible, it may be harder to call that (automatic) button bet. If you knew (or even were pretty sure) that the button would complacently make his automatic bet, you would sandbag. Right? Sometimes I sandbag in that situation with nothing, seemingly wasting a bet just to let the button (and everyone else) know that I’m capable of sandbagging. The fear of getting sand bagged takes away some of the advantage of being on the button in that situation. However, I’ll grant that being on the button is a slight edge in that particular situation. But very slight.
"Also, the button can always raise when the early player uses his "right of first bluff", and can do this with a real hand or as a bluff resteal."
Right of first bluff? Bluff resteal? Neat ideas. I like your style, FossilMan.
Thanks again for the very clear explanation, which I am unable to refute. I concede. Position matters. A little. But not NEARLY as much as in Texas hold ‘em.
:-)
Buzz
I'm thinking about trying out O8. I'm reading Ray Zee's book and comprehend the Basic Strategy. But I have no Hi-Lo experience and have what is probably a silly question. Which would be the best hand:
a) A-2-3-4-7 b) A-2-3-5-6
Thanks in advance and good cards
RA
Which hand would lose in regular highball poker, with the Ace being a "1", disregarding straights and flushes.
Red Aces,
If you are confused by my book i can see how you can get really turned around by seeing these guys advice. they have you playing 5 and 6 card omaha. stick with Badger's way as i have hired him to interpet my confusion. you can count on him being right at least 85% of the time he agrees with me.
Pot-Limit six card Omaha High is a fairly common variant of the game here in the UK. I've read that it's a game favoured by Dave 'Devilfish' Ulliot. I don't have the nerve or bankroll to play it myself and would be inclined to agree with Stewart Reuben that 'against the right opposition it can be an excellent money-spinner. It just isn't poker that you are playing.'
mike cunningham
There is such a thing as 5 card omaha.
Thanks for the info, Broncosaurus. I looked up Omaha in my Poker Talk book and the book states there are five and six card versions of Omaha.
This is the first I've heard of it. I promise never to mention it to anyone, but I'm mildly curious. Where is it played?
Buzz
Buzz, I'm not sure where five or six card Omaha is played,but there is a small chapter on just that,in "Pot-Limit & No-Limit Poker" by Reuben & Ciaffone.
Thanks, Howard. I have 30 or so poker books. However, I don't have "Pot-Limit & No-Limit Poker" by Reuben & Ciaffone.
I do have Bob Ciaffone's, millennium edition of "Omaha Holdem Poker" which I highly recommend for serious Omaha players. The one drawback, from my standpoint, to Ciaffone's "Omaha Holdem Poker" is that there is not enough space devoted specifically to limit Omaha high/low.
The reason is that I mostly play limit Omaha high/low in casinos, specifically limit Omaha-8.
Fossilman mentions (in this thread) that a five card version of Omaha is played in Indio. I've been through Indio many times, but have never gone TO Indio. The last time I drove through Indio was about twenty years ago. I remember Indio as a nice little town - kind of hot in the summer (an understatement if ever there was one), even at night. It must have changed a lot since I was last through there. Hard to imagine Indio (the way I remember it, as a sleepy little town) sustaining a poker casino.
When I read Fossilman's post, I thought of the days of the old west when gamblers were well armed and good shots. Imagine riding into some little town where there are a bunch of regulars who all know each other, sitting down to gamble with them, and playing a strange game for the first time. Kind of scary - and, at the same time, kind of intriguing. Dreams.
I'll probably never get to Indio again. Maybe it's better that I remember it the way it was, as a sleepy little town with posters about a date festival decorating the streets.
Thanks for the information.
Buzz
I haven't been there in quite a while, but last I heard the biggest regular game in the room is the 15-30 with a kill to 20-40, 5-card Omaha hi-lo. Lots of action for a regularly spread split game.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
(Badger said) "74321 is a bigger number than 65321.
The smaller the number your cards make, the better a low hand you have, with 54321 being the lowest possible number/hand. "
In 20 years of playing lowball and hi-lo split games, I've never heard it put so simply.
You da Man, Steve!
ps..I will still be holding "all the friggin' aces" Monday night at 7:15
Thank you Niels and Buzz. It was as I suspected, something in Ray Zee's book made me wonder if I had it straight.
Buzz, guess I should have been clearer, I meant final hand, not starting hand. At least it started an interesting tangent.
Club game. Eight players. Dealer ante's $5. Two sets of 5 in the middle. Stakes are $2 preflop, $2 flop, $4 turn, and $4 river. It's Omaha High with 5 cards to each player. Leaving only 2 not used in the deck. The Lock or Nuts wins most of the time.
Here's a somewhat typical hand. Rotating bet. Bet or get out. All 8 stay for the flops. The top 3 are 5s6cJd. The bottom 3 are 3sKs7c. No pairs two-flush on the bottom. 2 drop six left I have JcJhQcTd7c. Turn is 9d up top and 2s down below making flush possible. PTR(player to right) raises, I call, and PTL calls. Three way on the river. The river is 6h up top making a pair and 3c on the bottom making a pair of 3's. PTR starts the betting, I raise, PTL calls my raise, and PTR calls. I figure I'm a winner with J's over 6's. PTL a calling station says good, PTR a worse caller plus I put him on the A flush hesitates for a while and then says he has K's over 3's I almost died. He did have the A high flush. Just thought I would post this in case they wanted to try in a home game.
Paul
ive played with 2 flops but we had 2 winners . you played on with the flop you wanted and dropped out of the other if you didnt have anything. your game seems to be the best hand out of both flops wins all the money (one pot). thanks for the great post Paul.
I notice you had the 4th nuts for whatever that's worth.
With all the cards in your hand and DOUBLE the chances for full houses, I suggest the following rules: (1) There is no such thing as a straight draw (2) There is no such thing as a "straight" unless its the nuts on the river which may happen once a night (3) The ONLY flush DRAW is the MADE nut flush+face card on the Turn. (4) There is no such thing as a "flush" unless its the nuts+face card on the River (5) There is no such thing as a "under full house" except when it accidentally wins a showdown. (6) There is no such thing as a "draw-out".
The above realities lead to the following corralaries: (A) There is no such thing as a "suited" hand (B) There is no such thing as a "connected" hand (C) There is no card less than Ten (D) Raising hands have big pairs in them (E) QQ is much better if you also have an A or K. JJ is much better if you have two of the higher cards.
This is a game of big full houses.
Unless you act last next round if you open this round, this is a game of late position.
- Louie
Louie,
Your right in your assumption of this game. It just killed me the way he bet. He was raising the A flush, but didn't reraise me with the K's over. He had a great hand, but he is a calling station that doesn't bet right in most situations. He had AKKxs but didn't see the K's over until he layed them down and the person to his right pointed it out or they saw it simultaneously. It's a very frustrating game. There are just so many possibilities it helps in looking at the board, so when you go back to HE that seems easy. You can also play with three flops if you have seven players. It's a good game to develop skills for board games and what other players have if they bet correctly. As far as playing it exclusively I think suicide would be better.
Paul
I am a 19 year old who lives in Nebraska. The closest casino I can get into is 2 hours away. This place has a four table poker room, and the main games they play are $2-10 7Shl, $2-5S, and $4-8Ohl. About half of the people are loose passive, and the other half are loose aggresive. My question is how much money should I put into play in these game?
Are you a winning player? If so, which games can your bankroll afford?
If you're new and just trying out your game, I would recommend that you invest in educating yourself BEFORE you go to play in these games. Pick a game and buy some books from 2+2 or other authors. Really understand everything you can about the game first. Play with some friends in your hometown for very low stakes (nickel, dime, quarter) to get used to the flow and procedures of the game. Maybe purchase one of the turbo poker software games from Wilson Software (while far from perfect, I believe they are the best thing available by a significant margin).
Once you feel ready to enter, take a little notebook with you, and bring about $200-300 to play with (if this is too much for you to risk, then forget the whole thing until you can easily afford this amount). Play very tight early in each hand, doing a lot of folding on the first betting round. Take notes in your book about every issue that comes up where you're confused, either about the rules and procedures, or about the correct way to play a hand. Come back here and ask for more advice.
Generally, to get the most effective advice on this forum, you should ask a single highly-focussed question. If you have lots of questions, make a series of posts (each on the correct forum, please). No one will mind if you post a lot of questions.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
First of all,Thanks for the advice.
I have been playing for about a year in a very low limit($.50-$1.00) home game structured the same way as the casino, and in December I started playing in the casino. I have read books by Sklansky, Malmuth, Zee, Mike Caro, Lee Jones, and Andy Nelson. I am confident in my understanding of the game of poker.
My main question is would I be ok with about $150 in a $2-10 7Shl or a $2-5 S?
What casino can you play at being only 19yrs old
Probably all of them.
You still need to provide more details. What do you mean by OK?
I'm guessing that you mean, is this enough that I shouldn't have to worry about going broke very often. Even then, it's hard for us to know. If your style is very tight, then you need less money. If you play a lot of hands, even if you play them well, you need more.
If you want to guarantee not going broke early, I would bring much more than $150 for game with $10 bets. 5 betting rounds, at $10 per, you could go broke in 3 hands with no one even putting in a raise. Plus, there are quite a few busted draw situations in stud hi-lo, where you invest 1 or 2 bets early with a great low start, catch a brick or 2, and fold. I would want to have $500 in my pocket, or be willing to go home early some days. Half that amount, maybe less, for the stud hi game (half the betting limit, and fewer reasons to pay a bet on 3rd and fold on 4th street).
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Brian,
My sons name is Brian. He is 29 and has a masters degree in physics. He likes playing low limit poker. When he was 19 I literlly "persuaded" him to go to college. He spent a lot of years figuring out that Dad was right. If you have the time and energy to read and understand the material of the authors you've mentioned I suggest that you find yourself a nearby school and use that energy and intelligence in obtaining a college degree in a profession you can use for the rest of your life. Maybe you do that already? Like our Columbia wiz Scott and a few other college students here on the forum. Don't short change yourself and get the idea that a life playing poker is worthwhile and meaningful. Most of the authors you have mentioned earned a college education before becoming full timers at poker.
Of course that wasn't the advice you were looking for. But then again Fossilman and Badger gave you all the advice that you need to answer your question.
Vince
So basically what your saying is that these people wasted a bunch of time, and money, going to college and then decided to become professional poker players anyway. What is the point of going to college if your not going to use it to go to work for someone else. Vince college is not for everyone, there are alot of people who like to make their own money instead of making it for someone else, and since college only teaches you how to work for someone else maybe you should let the kid try and make some money, instead of asting it on college.
For what it's worth, Joshua
you ask (paraphrased) : why bother reading or writing or thinking if it doesn't translate into material gain?
i am sorry, but you have everything wrong.
by the way, i am not going to work for anyone else. if i can help it, i wont work for myself either.
college is more than job training. you also forgot the sex, alcohol, and drugs.
scott
Vince,
Actually, I am a student at the University of Nebraska. I have no serious plans of playing poker for a living. I think of it more as a hobby. I agree with you when you said if I can study and understand those authors, I should be using that same energy in school. I actually think that my poker hobby and my college study habits go hand in hand. I find that the more effort I put into poker, the more effort I put into school.
Normally, as HLSFAP writes, you should just limp with a strong low hand.
When there are many players in the hand with low cards up, a lot of them probably have razz hands or small pairs. In this case, would it become correct to raise with a premium low hand (three low cards to a live ace, a low 3-straight or a low 3-flush)? Let's say a king raises, there's no ace showing, and a three, seven and four call. You have (A4)5, (34)5, or (Ac7c)2c, and your cards are live. Assuming typical opponents and a moderate ante, how inclined should you be to raise here?
You're probably not getting anyone to fold - unless maybe the K re-raises and one of the low cards had a wired pair or something, so this raise is simply to put some more money into the pot.
I don't think there is much incentive to do this with the 3-card wheel (what would you do if you caught a high card on 4th street?). Also, the other low draws decrease your own odds of making a low.
Assuming the other low cards are going for low, there is a good chance that any low straight draw would be atleast partially dead, so I don't think raising with the 3-straight is a good play either - save it for when you're 4 to a straight/low and have much better odds.
There might be some incentive to reraise with the flush as you have a realistic chance to scoop the pot and building the pot could be potentially valuable. Still, I think its still better to wait until later - your low draw probably isn't much better than the others.
Your low is never secure until the last card falls, so follow Ray Zee's advice and take it a little slow.
~DjTj
there are many things to think about here. one is that by limping you may get to fold cheaply when you bust on four. while your opponents may still call so you make them make a mistake you dont. but once its raised already to you when you have a real premium hand you most likely wont fold with a bad card on four unless its double poped and you are facing strong looking hands. so their mistake is no longer available to you so getting more money in with a great hand deserves merit. actually by making the pot huge they may make a very bad fold later on with a hand that still has value. and your hand may be one that can go to sixth street without helping unless you are being charged too much. you have to judge your players.
Steve Badger hits the nail on the head. I agree that you should play in the smallest game (1-5 7CS). The 2-10 HL and the Omaha is best left to more experienced players. I would buy in initially for $100 and make sure I had another $150 in my pocket. I would play very tightly until I got the feel of the game. When you have a very strong hand, play agressively. Make sure you read at least 1 book on 7CS. For beginners in casino games, I like Roy West's low/medium limit poker. Next I would get Sklansky's green book. I did not even attempt Omaha or H/L for the 1st 3 years until I was able to win consistantly (>75%) in low/medium stud. I usually just play weekends.
I have recently moved from a very tough holdem game to a new city with only one Casino. The game here is 3-6-12 dealers choice, holdem, omaha, omaha hi/lo. The game is very loose, often 9-10 callers. A raise seems to do very little to discourage players, if anything more come in anticipating a big pot. They are for the most part very passive and it is extremely tough to put anyone on a hand before the river. I am struggling for an effective strategy. I recently check raised the nuts on the end and I was treated like the DEVIL. They were saying " There's no need for that is this game!" I don't know if it would be in best interest to become the villian in this game. Any suggestions would be appreciated.......
Thanx
If they play with home game customs then so be it.
I actually LIKE the no-check-raise rule since although I check-raise better than most typical opponents, THEY will have so many more opportunities than me since I respect position and they don't. I LIKE late position when the opponent's actions are generally real.
You don't need to start with "Power Houses", just hands that can make big hands. In holdem play every suited-connector and every pair and every Axs. Add more suited hands in late postiion. Trouble hands remain trouble or get even worse. In Omahaha you need combinations that make the "nuts", meaning any 8 or higher 4-straight, A or K or Q high 3-straights, AA, KK, QQ, or Axs.
Forget this notion of needing to peg certain players with certain hands. If you flop bottom two pair just about EVERY card CAN make someone else a bigger two pair. So what? You'll know your beat when raised. You'll win a high percentage of the pots you play but you will often not know which once until you win the showdown.
In holdem, flail away with your big draws on the flop if you really expect more than 3 callers.
- Louie
Amen!
Vince
Maybe you died and went to heaven -- to be in a game like that is great for your pocketbook/bankroll. Try to behave in a way such that you fit(are accepted) in with the game and enjoy the ride....
Hi! I'm pretty new to poker (about 50 hrs), playing mostly in small games here at school. I would like to get involved in better games to build experience, but in the mean time I'm going to San Juan soon, and was thinking it would be nice to play in casinos there. I am wondering, has anyone has played in San Juan before? Could you give me some idea as to what the game is like there? Any tips? Thanks a bunch.
-David
hi, blum. this belongs on the other topics forum. i am sure someone will tell you about san juan. reading this forum is a great way to learn strategy. i'll get you the books. bye.
scott
Was there for two afternoons and my pathetic search and inquires found no poker games. The harbor fort was very nice.
you should have directed this post to the exchange. dont let your interest in a particular post cloud your duties.
Thanks for the info (despite my wrong choice of forum).
-David
I play in friendly thursday night games with nice fellows. Stakes are 20/40, dealer choice, with any exotic variations and wild cards. Since I am not familiar with wild cards play + declarations, I often call regular games, especially Omaha8 or Omaha High. I feel more comfortable since I know those games better than any other games.
However I have won a couple of hands recently while dealing, getting a miracle river card in pots where I shouldn't have stayed from a odds point of view: straight flush wheel, backdoor straight and so on. A good friend in the table warned me that people are starting to be suspicious, thinking that I might be a mechanic. Since I have no way to prove my innocence, what do you think I should do?
I guess playing good poker and folding early is the best option. however, I sometimes stay in the pot in late position for the purpose of deception or when cards have been good for a while (well, i know i shouldn't...). Asking somebody to deal for me would totally clear the issue but like my friend said, this would generate an awkward atmosphere.
thank you for any suggestion
PS TKC, I know you read this page often. I didn't write this message to get an alibi!
My advice, for what its worth, would be not to hold the deck in a mechanics grip when you deal. Just leave it on the table and deal by slipping the cards of the top of the deck (wich means no second deal, no bottom deal..). Also, using burn cards would be a good idea. When you shuffle, use a clean standard riffle shuffle followed by a cut at a third of the deck.Do this 2 or 3 times. This is said to be the best shuffling method. And of course, have the deck cut, and once the cut is done, leave the deck on the table and dont pick it up.
ps: by the way, your on the wrong forum.
You can always forfeit when you win the hand or take your cards and go home.
A Beginner's Apprentice
?
It sounds as if someone is getting stung at the limit you are playing, then looking for an excuse to blame someone or something else for their loss. My experience is that either they will probably leave the game or you will, if things are not resolved. I would suggest getting things out in the open before the first hand of the next game is dealt. I have seen this before, and it can be uncomfortable, to the point of taking the enjoyment out of the game.
I don't think suspicions came from people who wanted to blame their losses on something. Again, the suspicions are rationnally understandable, if not legitimate. The most observant players at the table, those who can read cards and players (thus who play better in that matter than those who don't), are certainly the ones who got the suspicions, not the non-observants. I would have had the same doubts if somebody catches a miracle card too often.
Like you said, the situation is uncomfortable but only for me and the 'observants' for the time being. I first wanted to sort things out in the open like you suggested, but it would then put the non-observants in an uncomfortable situation as well: it might scare them away from a game where there is potential cheating. Since I hope the situation will be cleared fast, there is no use to involve them unnecessarily.
But you're totally right, things have to be resolved quickly.
Show up to the next game with a bandage on your hand. Claim an injury. State the injury will not allow you to deal. If you are concerned with giving up the positional advantages of dealing, ask the player next to you to deal for you or something like that. This should remove any issues for the time being.
Excellent advice. Will do. Thanks.
Screw them. let them think what they want. if they suck then it's their hard luck. if you aint a mechanic and they accuse you of it then learn to really be one and kick their asses. sound like your buddies are getting taken. maybe they should read more books on kookie card games. who plays those stupid games for 20/40. theses guys must have more money than they know what to do with . are they doctors and lawyers?
Set this up as a regular cut ritual with the players, should eliminate the suspicion:
Deck after deal (top to bottom) 4 sections ABCD
Placed on table by cutter: A B C D
Picked up by cutter: B D C A
Handed to dealer (you) BDCA
You deal this way, use burn cards in between rounds.
Note that this eliminates top card and bottom card issue (a mechanic could probably still get them, but degree of difficulty goes WAY up... especially if sections are different sizes.
It's obvious you have no friends in this game. You are probably the best player at the table by far and are getting sour grapes from some know-it-all who is jealous that you are winning so much money with inferior hands. You should challenge that asshole to a heads up game for serious money...let someone else deal...and prove that you are the best player anyway.
Fuck em, I say!
c
I have been playing, learning (and unfortunately getting my ass kicked) at 10-20 Omaha high on Paradise Poker. I am still wet behind the ears on Omaha strategy. [BTW, my thanks to Dan Hanson who has given me many valuable tips on Omaha play via E-mail]. However, here's a hand that I thought I would post on the Forum for feedback.
I get 5c6c7d9d UTg and call.
Question no. 1: Should I call?
7 way action with a raise from the button.
Flop: 2c4d8c
I bet.
Question No. 2: Do I bet?
One call. One raise. Button cold calls. I call.
Question No. 3: Do I possibly reraise?
Turn: Kd
I bet. Same guy raises. I 3 bet it when it gets back to me and he caps it. All 4 players are still in for the river card.
Question no. 4: Rate my turn play
River: Qd
I check-call the button. He shows the nut Dimaonds and takes the pot.
More help:
Are these hands playable under the gun?
KdQd9c7s
Ac8c4h3d.
9977
AdKc10s2h.
Thanks for the help.
The flop was 2c4d8s and not 2c4d8c as initially stated.
i can see why you are getting kicked. you dont understand the game. all the hands you showed are folding hands under the gun in a full game even if you improve their value alot. the hand you played should have been folded. after you hit the flop your hand was maybe about as strong as a straight draw in limit holdem at best. why you raised after 4th street when a blank came for your hand i dont know. the diamond kills alot of your straight draws and i hope you dont believe small flushes win anything in omaha except when you back into one headup. im sorry to be so forward but you need a kick in the axx quickly to get you going in the right direction. good luck.
1. Fold UTG. In limit Omaha high, that hand is marginal even in late position.
2/3. You have 13 nut outs on the next card, but if you hit one you'll lose to a flush or full house on the river a large fraction of the time. Also, someone else can easily have some of the same straight outs as you. Check and call.
4. With four players in, someone probably has a higher diamond draw. Assuming diamonds aren't good, you have 10 outs, and those might share with someone else if you hit. Check and call again.
Omaha High is a highly positional game, and very few hands are playable in early position.
I'll add my .02 to this one...
>>I get 5c6c7d9d UTg and call.
>>Question no. 1: Should I call?
Nope. You have no big card value, meaning you're not going to flop top set or top two pair. The gap on the top of the straight draw means any big straight draws you flop are probably not going to be to the nuts.
If you are playing hands that primarily build straights, then you want them to be able to flop BIG, nut straight draws, or multiple hands that can flop straight draws with two big pairs, etc. An open-ended straight alone isn't that great a draw in Omaha - you make them as often as in Holdem, but lose or split when you make them much more often.
Because the pots are generally much larger in Omaha, when you hit these straight draws you usually have to play them, but the variance is sky-high and the EV is pretty low.
>>7 way action with a raise from the button. >> >>Flop: 2c4d8c >> >>I bet. >> >>Question No. 2: Do I bet?
I don't like betting draws like this UTG, especially in agressive games.
In Holdem, the reasons to bet a draw are for value, or if there is some chance of winning the pot outright with your bet. In Omaha, the chance of winning the pot with seven callers and this flop is approximately zero, and someone is probably going to bet if you check anyway. If you bet, bad stuff can happen like an immediate raise which chokes off your action.
If the flop is rainbow and you have a 13-out draw to the nuts, you can check, and if there is a bet to your left and a bunch of callers you can consider raising for value. The hand is slightly better than an open-ended straight in Holdem, so your requirements for raising for value are similar.
>>One call. One raise. Button cold calls. I call.
>>Question No. 3: Do I possibly reraise?
No. Not enough callers to warrant a raise for value, and with this action on a low rainbow flop there's a chance that you're up against a set and maybe the same straight draw. You've gotta call, but your situation isn't as good as those 13 outs would indicate.
>>Turn: Kd
>>I bet. Same guy raises. I 3 bet it when it gets back >>to me and he caps it. All 4 players are still in for >>the river card.
>Question no. 4: Rate my turn play
What were you trying to accomplish with the bet? The King doesn't change the board, other than if you have two kings. But you aren't going to get a set to fold anyway. So you have zero chance of winning the pot.
The only good thing that can happen here is that your bet and a raise by the guy you've put on a set might force out larger diamond draws, giving you a few more outs. But I certainly wouldn't be playing the hand as if my diamond flush was going to be good if it came in - a running small flush with three people in the hand has maybe a 50% chance of being good if the diamonds come in.
I think you are still thinking like a Holdem player, trying to power your way through the hand and get your opponents to fold. In Omaha, especially with the action you got on the flop, it's highly unlikely. The more likely result is what happened - you got raised.
The re-raise was particularly bad here. You're losing money on every dollar you put in the pot against the probable cards you are up against.
>>River: Qd
>>I check-call the button. He shows the nut Dimaonds >>and takes the pot.
I'd play the river the same way, against one player.
>>Are these hands playable under the gun?
>>KdQd9c7s
No. Maybe on the button, but even that is pretty weak. The only way I'd play this hand is if the game was weak enough that I'd get lots of action from smaller flushes if I made my King-high flush.
>>Ac8c4h3d.
Hands with suited aces in them are usually playable, but this is just about the worst hand you can get with a suited Ace. If the game were absolutely passive and very loose I might play it, but in any normal game I'd fold it.
>>9977
Another marginal hand. Bottom set is a lousy hand in Omaha. Middle set is somewhat better. Same comments apply as the hand above. Fold it in your average Omaha game.
>>AdKc10s2h.
Fold. If the Ace was suited it's a call, except maybe if the Ace is suited with the King (in that case, if you make your flush it's hard to get action that you want). If the 2 was a card that connected with the ten I might raise with it in late position.
Ray, Dan, and Dan, thanks for the responses. While I don't doubt that you guys have got it right, I wanted to get some clarification. Let me try and offer my rationale for my play. I would appreciate it if you would tell me where *my thinking* is wrong so that I can avoid the same mistakes next time.
Pre-flop
I can understand the advice to fold here. 'Nuff said.
Flop
Now, I have got a 13 outer - all to the nuts. Of course, I need to worry about redraws and lockouts. I gather that's what you guys mean by saying that my 13 outer here is really no better than an 8 outer in Hold 'em. That I can understand. The reason why I bet was because although there is a much lower chance of the action checking to the preflop raiser in Omaha (as compared to Hold 'em), I wanted to ensure that there was a bet on the flop to "purify" the flop and get out some of the backdoor club draws and Diamond draws. I certainly realize that the object of Omaha is not to make a 6 high or 9 high flush (which were the backddor draws that I had) but I thought that the chances of having those flushes hold up would be much less if no one bet the flop. I did not want to have everyone check to the preflop raiser only to have him check his hand. If he raised with a big pocket pair, there was a good chance that he missed this flop completely and would check along. Now, if a Diamond or Club came off on the turn, I would wish that I had bet the flop.
Dan, I do take your point that by betting, I open myself to a raise from my immediate left which could choke off my own action.
Flop reraise?
I just called. I did not reraise. I think you guys came to the consensus that I finally did something right:) phew:)
Turn
The board now has 2 Diamonds. Once again, I was actually not very enamoured with my flush draw. Now, by this time, I certainly suspected that the guy who raised the flop had a set (probably a set of 8's). I also knew that I would probably get raised if I bet. However, my thinking was that if I bet, the guy to my immediate left (immediate right of the guy holding the set) may be forced to throw away a hand which included 2 diamonds bigger than mine because he has to fear that there will be a raise behind him and he may not want to proceed with a hand that may not be the best even if he hits. Of course, he proably is not going to fold Ace high Dimaonds but he might fold Queen or Jack high Diamonds. The same can be said about the button. Once 88xx puts in his raise, my hope would be that his raise knocks out the button.
Is the reasoning here correct?
Is it realistic to assume that this may happen?
Is it worth the price of paying 2 big bets instead of one.
The turn 3 bet:
In retrospect, this was a crazy play. In the heat of the moment, my thinking once again was to try and get the guy to my left to lay down at this point. As well, I thought that the fellow with the 88 would not cap it fearing KK in my hand. Wrong! Although I did not know the exact number during play, I felt that I had a whole bunch of nut outs still left. Am I safe in assuming that I had 10 outs to the nuts (i.e. with all the betting that is going on, is it reasonable to assume that if I catch a non-Diamond straight card, I would take the whole pot and not have to split with anyone)?
On the other four hands, actually the only one I played was AdKc10s2h. I folded the others. I thought it had sufficient high card strength. I gather what you guys are saying is that the deuce just messes up the hand big time. I understand that.
One final question:
On average, how many hands do you generally voluntarily play per round? Based on your response to the AdKc10s2h question, it would seem to me that a good player probably cannot voluntarily play more than 1 hand per round (outside the blinds). If this is true, it is pretty frightening because so many hands "look" playable in thi scrazy (but fun) game.
Thanks for the help.
If the questions are stupid, please excuse me. The game is a bit of a puzzler to me right now.
skp wrote: "On average, how many hands do you generally voluntarily play per round? Based on your response to the AdKc10s2h question, it would seem to me that a good player probably cannot voluntarily play more than 1 hand per round (outside the blinds). If this is true, it is pretty frightening because so many hands "look" playable in thi scrazy (but fun) game."
They only look good because you are a holdem player first and foremost. The same used to be true of me (and probably everyone else who moved from HE to omaha). If you play more hands than this, you had better be really good at outplaying your opponents postflop, or it will cost you.
BTW, outside the blinds, how many hands per round do you play in HE? I find I also average about 1 (up to 2 in a loose, passive, calling station game) in that game as well.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
In HE, I am probably at 5 voluntary entries every 3 rounds (I have to admit that I am guessing a bit here as I really haven't put my mind to the question before). Realize though that I play in games where you stand to get paid off pretty handsomely any time I flop well. The possibility of getting unreasonable action when I flop well gets me in there a lot more often than say games in Edmonton or Vegas (about the only 2 other cities that I have ever played poker in. I had one 5 hour session at the Commerce so that doesn't really count).
middle straights get drawn out on all too often to push and you didnt even have one yet. with lots of people in the pot any pair, flush card or higher straight card will make your hand dead if you hit it. thats what did happen to you. the game is not like holdem and you dont push hands with lots of opponents that arent big nut draws or made hands that are vunerable. all four cards should be working together unless you have good reason to play.
While I agree in general, I have to point out that the texture of his straight draw is very good in this case. Several of the cards that make his straight give him redraws to the bigger straight, and with three cards in the middle to make his straight, it's less likely that someone else will make the same straight. And, it's a rainbow flop.
The hand wasn't very good before the flop, but this is just about the best flop you can get.
I have not played any Omaha 8/better but I have played some omaha HIGH so here it goes even though I probably will get blast for it. But here is my 2 cents anyway. Omaha high right?!.
I really like this hand and dislike this hand. I dislike this hand in your situation with a 7 way action that you got under the gun. I would not like this hand much in late position with 7 way action either. But if I could get to play this hand 3 or 4 way (myself included) I would go for it almost everytime. The reason I like to play it short is because my straight draws will gain a lot of value short handed + my little flush may actually be good + with less people in the pot I will not run into a full house nearly as often as with 7 people + I may win with two small pair. I think I would gamble here and raise it under the gun trying to get 4 way action. If I thought this was not very likely I would think muck and then call (raise/muck/call)
P.S I would muck the other hands. I think they are total garbage.
skp,
5c6c7d9d UTG=Never
KdQd9c7s UTG=Flop Adxdx no pairs play on.
Ac8c4h3d. UTG= Flop ccx no pairs play on.
9977 UTG=Never
AdKc10s2h UTG=Never
The reason I would play the flop would only be in a passive game if there was raising I wouldn't even play those hands. There all trouble. This is not middle fiddle this is HIGH. If you were playing middle fiddle where 8's are the best, then 7's, then 9's, 6's, T's, 5's, J's, 4's, Q's, 3's, K's, 2's and finally A's in that order then you would have some playable hands.
Good luck paul
Well, it sounds like our Omaha games are at about the same place. I thought your turn play was pretty astute, which I guess just goes to show how little I know about the game... :) Anyway, re: starting hands. Bob Ciaffone's O high book has some great sections on this, so you may want to check it out. When I'm playing O high (which I like a lot better than O 8, although neither game gets me real giddy) I employ the following starting hand requirements. 1) four cards to a straight, where the lowest card is no smaller than a four. 2) four cards nine or higher. 3) Suited A's if the other two cards can make a nut straight together. 4) Big pocket pairs where both of the other cards are 8's or higher.
This is pretty rough, I know, but maybe it will help. (Then again, maybe I'm just completely on the wrong track). I'm sure there are a ton of other playable hands, but since I suck at the game I'm not real anxious to start playing marginal hands. Too, I tend to tighten up A LOT in early position, and get a little liberal with my calls when I'm cuddlin' with the button. Good luck to you, skp. If you're going to play that crazy game I'm afraid you're going to need it. :)
I've posted this stuff before, and elsewhere, but not here for a while:
7cs players have missed out on the NL action till now: here is a way for 7cs to be played at NL, and it's better for HP and PL than 7cs is too: Deal the cards 3-2-1-1 and turn the last card face up, instead of 3-1-1-1-1 and last card down. The game is called mississippi 7cs.
Mississippi also plays as a limit game, and it's more active and faster than 3-1-1-1-1 7cs. For limit betting you can turn the last card down if you prefer.
Anyone who runs tournaments or home games might like to try it out.
I thought I'd start this as a new thread so it doesn't get buried in SKP's thread below.
He wanted to know how many hands are playable in Omaha, as a general rule.
I find that I play significantly more hands in Omaha than I do in Holdem, but I don't think that's as much a reflection of the nature of the game as it is the quality of the typical games that seem to be going on right now. If I were continually getting the kind of action in Holdem games that I get in Omaha games, I'd probably play a similar number of hands.
I've been playing quite a bit of 3-6 and 5-10 Omaha on Paradise Poker. I won't step up in limits until I'm satisfied that the games are okay and no serious collusion is going on.
The quality of players in these games is currently very bad. And bad players in Omaha give the good players a much bigger advantage. In Holdem, having 8-9 callers in a hand presents all sorts of unique problems that can trip up a good player (Morton's law, implied collusion). But in Omaha, since you are building hands that make the nuts, you generally welcome as many players as you can get.
If you are playing in a game with sane players who won't draw to 2nd and 3rd nut straights, small flushes, or call raises with bottom two pair, then you have to play pretty tight. In games like this, you usually have 3-5 way action before the flop, and when you make nut hands it's hard to get action with them. So you want to play hands that have multiple nut potential, to raise the chances of hitting a flop that you can continue with.
But in these weak games where 7-9 players are seeing the flop and many of them will call to the river when drawing dead, it's acceptable to play many more hands, provided you don't make the same mistakes they do. The overlay you are getting after the flop is large.
For example, in a tough game a suited king is worth roughly half of what a suited ace is worth, partially because of the number of times you will lose to an ace-high flush, but also because if you make a king-high flush you'll get no action since good players won't draw to make a queen-high flush. But in these soft games that is not the case, so suited kings go up in value by maybe 20% before the flop.
The same can be said for straight draws. When you make a nut straight in a tough game, it's hard to get action that you want (you'll get action from nut flush draws and sets, but you'd generally wish they would fold). Where you DO get action against another player with the same straight, you really want to have a freeroll against him. So you play multi-way hands that can flop multiple draws.
In the weak games, if your nut straight will get action from three people with smaller straights, and from two people drawing to the same flush, the requirement for extra outs is not as important. However, your variance goes up quite a bit when you have no backup for your draws or made hands.
So, if you play much better than your opponents you can loosen up a fair bit in Omaha, especially in late position where you get lots of information to use with your superior judgement before you have to commit money.
It's true that if you play against morons as a rule then you can loosen up your starting requirements considerably. This is not only true of Omaha, but any other poker game as well. The trick is, as you imply, to play the potential second-best hands/draws very carefully after the flop. My starting-hand requirement is that of the six holdem hands that are contained in an Omaha hand, four or more (five/six in bad position) must be hands that I would call one bet with in Holdem. For example, QJ103 is unplayable because I would never call with Q3, J3, 103. Anyway, it seems to work for me.
What about AsAhKs9d? You wouldn't play any of the others with the nine.
In Response To: Re: General Comments on Omaha High Starting Hands (Kevin L) & In responce to Dan Rubenstein wrote:
What about AsAhKs9d? You wouldn't play any of the others with the nine.
Like we have all repeatly heard, there are no bad hands in Omaha -- only bad flops.
AsAhKs9d is not one of my premium starting hands. I would maybe(usually) call with it -- especially in good position. A hand like this very seldom wins big pots. If nuts (or high percentage nut draw) are not available on flop -- I would not chase with more money to win half the pot. The King kicker is very valuable if an Ace flops -- but many times a low develops when an Ace flops and the three Aces wins only half the pot. In a multiway pot(lots of players)I would rather play As Kh Ks 9d. If a King flops -- there is a lessor chance of a low developing and I might scoop.
In the later stages of a tournament when going one-on-one, the AsAhKs9d many times can be a very go hand.
Carl William James
I made a mistake thinking that the game was Omaha HiLo 8.
We're talking about Omaha High, and this is a premium hand. I'm playing it in any pot.
Actually, I do consider K9 and A9 offsuit worth a call of one bet in late position in Hold Em. Barely. So this AAK9 hand is playable...but I'm not all that thrilled with it. The 9 essentially IS a wasted card. I'm not one of those persons who orgasms every time they pick up a pair of Aces in Omaha-Hi.
I have used a system similar to Kevin's to play omaha high. One change that makes it closer to accurate is to count hands slightly differently. In your example of AsAhKs9d we would count AA, AK, AK again, and Axs. The AK twice just helps us count high pairs as good, but we also end up counting lower pairs like jacks as good sometimes, while they aren't that great so... It's a bit rough. But counting AK and Axs as different is actually fairly valid in Omaha high IMHO.
I am wondering in Hi/Lo Stud 8 or better if an open pair shows on 4th street whether you make a double bet like in regular Stud? Or is the Hi/Lo game different, and you can not make a double bet?
Thanks a lot.
depends on the casino I think, but in general, it stays a single bet.
~DjTj
I recently started playing poker in the casino, so I play at the $1-$3 stud at the casino here. I had a situation come up, and I think the dealer made the wrong call, but I'm not sure. This is what happened: It was just me and one other player, and the dealer dealt out the last card, and the other player bet $3. I threw my chips in to raise him, but apparently I only threw in $5 instead of $6, on accident. The dealer saw it, and said I needed to bet one more, so I did. Then the other player said that I couldn't raise because I didn't say "raise". The dealer said he was right, I could only call him. I didn't want to make a big deal because I wasn't sure of the rule.
What do you think? Did the dealer make the right decision? I guess now that I look back on it I probably should have called over the floorperson to make a decision, but I didn't think about that in the heat of the moment.
Thanks for your help
Gamblerbri
perhaps I'm not the greatest authority on these things, but I've heard it said that if you throw in more than half the amount required for a raise rather than a call, it should be treated as a raise.
~DjTj
Where I play this is the right decision. In other places it is not. Somehow I'm pretty sure the dealer made the right decision. Post a casino where it happened and someone will let you know for sure.
Good luck.
Depends on the casino and to some extent, the dealer. One does not have to say "raise" if he/she puts in an amount of money equal to doubling the initial bet. The double bet speaks for itself as long as it is put in all at one time (i.e. no string bet). However, if one throws in am amount less than 2 times the previous bet it becomes a judgement call by the dealer who has do decide if the raiser simply grabbed the wrong amount of chips by mistake and it was actually his/her intent to raise. The easy decision is to not allow the raise. The correct decision is in the eye of the dealer.
Consider this: a person means to call and picks up what he thinks is a single chip. The chips (which are always dirty) stick together and 2 chips are tossed in. Is it a raise? Probably not, and this happens often.
One last point: when a player bets and squawks about not allowing the caller to raise thus putting himself in a position to have to call the raise, he is usually weak. If it is not the river, the raiser should raise next card if the squaker gets a bad card and expect to take the pot.
The dealer new that it was my intent to raise, and that I had accidentaly grabbed one less chip. Everything was fine until the other player piped up and said I couldn't raise him. So the dealer sided with the other player(probably becasue I am only 18 and us kids never get any respect). I play in Arizona, and yes, I won the pot with a flush over a straight.
Live and Learn, I guess
Gamblerbri
In every Arizona casino I've played at (Gila River and Casino Arizona) the rule is that you must have all the chips out for a raise for it to be a raise, or must verbalize that you are raising. If you don't do either, an opponent, not the dealer, can call a string raise and force you to take it back.
I've already posted the rules of mississippi seven-card stud: (3-2-1-1 instead of 7cs's 3-1-1-1-1, with the river card face up for big-bet games, or optionally face down for limit games) The same game plays very well with an extra hole card: each player gets three hole cards and an upcard to start, then two more upcards, then a fourth, then a fifth upcard. (no comunal cards). A maximum of two hole cards may be used at the end. This game (called murrumbidgee stud) is a great short-handed game - it can only be dealt for six at a time: you get a lot of multi-way starting hands, like (3h,Kh,Ah)3h, or (Jh,Kc,Kh)Qh, or (8h,10c,Jc)9c. You can make trips or two pair on the flop, and have a straight and flush draw as well: you can make twenty-three way straight and flush draws. There is a lot more variety in possible hands in murrumbidgee than in a communal card game like omaha: highly recommended when the numbers drop in home game and you don't want to strip the deck. feedback welcome on play of the game.
3-6 Omaha/8 on Paradise Poker.
I'm holding Ah4h4cKc on the button. UTG is a new player, and is in with a posted blind. All folds to two off the button who calls. I call (playable hand?) and the small blind folds. 4 players see the flop:
AdAc5d
BB checks and UTG bets. I raise (good play?). BB folds and 2 off button calls. Turn is
Js
UTG bets again. 2 off button calls. I raise again (is this a good play?) and he reraises. 2 off button cold calls. I'm pretty sure I'm up against a full house now, but if not, I still have the best kicker to the trip aces and have 3 outs in a K. I call (should I have folded?). River is
3c
UTG bets again. 2 off button folds. I call (is this right?)
As expected, I lost to the AJ full house...should I have gotten out of this hand earlier - or played it less aggressively?
~DjTj
When he bets again on the jack, I think you can assume he has a boat. Call but don't raise. On the river consider folding since you can only win 1/2 the pot now and he would likely not bet without a boat. Although in these low limit games it is hard to tell.
Raise on the flop is good in order to get rid of other draws. Raising the UTG on the turn is good and should have told you to get out when he reraised at that point. Unless he's an idiot, he is not going to reraise you unless he has the current nuts.
Wouldn't you rather call a big bet on the turn and a big bet on the river than raise the turn and fold if reraised? If your king hits you'll make the same money most likely, and you can get out cheaper if you decide it is necessary for some reason.
It depends who I am up against. The UTG betting out only still tells me he has the other Ace. If you raise the UTG and that Jack did not help him he may fold and you could win the pot without seeing the river.
I think you could play it either way depending on your opponent.
DjTj - The pair of fours is a liability. If you hit a four on the flop and the board pairs, you will usually lose to a better full house in full a 3-6 game of O-8. I'm refering to a home game or a regular ring game in a casino. I don't know about Paradise Poker.
The best feature of your hand is the suited ace. However, a suited ace in Omaha is overestimated, in my opinion. I don't think it adds much value to the hand (only about 2%) partly because of the high/low split and partly because you get only get a board with three or more hearts and no pairs only about 3% of the time). Two per cent added equity is not much, but sometimes it tips the scales. However, I don't think it tips them enough here.
A-4 is not a good low hand. Not at all. It's fine for an incidental low, and, like a suited ace can be another scale tipper. You need to see a two, a three, and another low card on the board without an ace or a four. Pretty tall order. Odds are slim. You sometimes end up tempted to chase with a second or third rate low hand.
A-K is a nice combination, but the king has nothing much else to go with it. The suited king adds less value to the hand than a suited ace, only about 1%. In Texas hold 'em a suited king is MUCH better than in Omaha, but even there most of the equity of a suited king is due to the high card value of the king.
All you really have here is a mediocre hand. You played it and got in trouble. That's what happens all too frequently when you play mediocre cards. You hope to hit the flop and you end up catching just a piece of it but staying anyway, hoping for favorable cards on the turn and the river. Here you caught trip aces on the flop and felt obliged to stay hoping that your trip aces with a king kicker would stand up, or hoping to improve. Not a likely scenario. Not impossible. Just not likely.
Indeed, once you decide to see the flop you're stuck with this hand when you catch the trip aces. Pretty hard to fold trip aces after the flop (at least for me).
You want a small field for trip aces to stand up as a winning hand. Thus you correctly raise and induce the big blind to fold.
The raise on the turn, however, does not seem to me to be a good bet. Why? Simply because you don't have the nuts. This is low limit Omaha-8. Low limit Omaha-8 is a game of drawing for the nuts and peddling the nuts. You're not going to bully anyone out of the pot in this situation, and you're opening yourself to being re-raised (which is what happened) by the holder of the nuts.
The three on the river is ugly. Now you're probably only going to get half the pot even if your aces do hold up, and it doesn't look as though they will. Nonetheless, against unknown opponents, I think your call on the river is correct. You never know in Omaha.
Buzz
I agree that this is a mediocre hand (but on the good side of mediocre). However, given the situation, I think it is a clearly correct play.
This is apparently not a typical low limit Omaha8 game, since so few people are in the pot. The post indicated that there were the blinds, a post from a new player, and 1 caller before our hero on the button. Thus, he is only facing 1 player who is voluntarily playing, so the chances of being up against a bunch of A2, A3, and 23 low hands is much less likely than normal. Additionally, his suited K is now MUCH more likely to be the best flush if it hits. Finally, if a 4 flops, his biggest concern should be losing half the pot to low, not a higher set of trips (because he is facing only 3 opponents).
For a short-handed pot, and especially since only 1 player has a hand that was voluntarily played, I think this hand is completely playable, and mucking it preflop would have been a big mistake.
Let's get Ray Zee to post, and then we'll know the answer.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Greg,
Z has athritis in his joints (OMD) today raining in Montana he hasn't trained Coke to type yet.
A Fellow Duncer
Greg - Sometimes I wonder if maybe I'm playing too tight. This hand does not meet my standards, yet you seem to like it a lot. Moreover, much of your reasoning is compelling.
"....he is only facing 1 player who is voluntarily playing, so the chances of being up against a bunch of A2, A3, and 23 low hands is much less likely than normal."
Agreed. (However, with only two low cards he could be easily counterfeited and beaten by someone with a 78. One gets "rivered" a lot with only two low cards, including A2.)
"Additionally, his suited K is now MUCH more likely to be the best flush if it hits."
Agreed.
"Finally, if a 4 flops, his biggest concern should be losing half the pot to low, not a higher set of trips (because he is facing only 3 opponents)."
Perhaps.
I wasn't thinking about facing a higher set of trips. Rather, I was thinking about the danger, if there comes to be a pair on the board, of facing a higher full house. Low trips (with the pair in your hand) are playable if no one has a straight or a flush, but the danger here is catching a full house and being beaten by a better one. (Admittedly this is slight because there are only 3 opponents).
However, you have pointed out another liability of the hand. If a four hits, the chance is greater that DjTj will be gambling for only half of the pot.
".....especially since only 1 player has a hand that was voluntarily played"
Good point. A small field obviously makes any hand more likely to be a winner. Yet this particular hand would seem to do better with a larger field (not win as often, but win bigger when it does win).
As an aside, an aspect of my game that I feel needs attention is my play in small fields. That is to say, I tend to do better in full games.
"I think this hand is completely playable, and mucking it preflop would have been a big mistake."
Maybe a mistake. Certainly not a "big" mistake. And maybe not a mistake at all. The most likely scenario is that this hand would be a drawing hand, post flop. Since, in general, you want more opponents for a drawing hand, it seems unwise to me to enter the action with a mediocre drawing hand.
Lastly, Greg, I would not classify this hand as being on the "good side" of mediocre. Being on the button adds value here. Without that advantage, the hand is not even mediocre, at least in my opinion. (I would agree that the hand is generally playable in the blinds, pre-flop). But as already noted, maybe I'm playing too tight.
I do appreciate the clarity of your writing.
Buzz
its always tough to tell the right play without being there. but the hand plays ok headup and goes down fast from there. you were going to be at least 3 way so the hand is very marginal at best. raising to get headup would be the better try in a larger stakes game but in smaller games that doesnt work too much.
the raise on the flop is about even. if you want to play it headup against someone who has at least an ace and maybe full already and likely drawing at a low then go ahead. or just call and hope to win all or half and be able to get out cheap when the board gets bad(another low card).
4th street if you know the player at all you can fold as the king is your only hope here. if you dont know the player and can be at all convinced he is not a cronic bluffer then a fold is also in order. bad to bet and crazy to call the raise.
5th st. there is no reson to put money into the pot
Thanks for everyone's responses.
Omaha/8 just drives me nuts - 'cuz all the time you just know you're beat but sometimes it hard to act on it...
~DjTj
you have to be prepared to throw out your holdem hand values.
"Omaha/8 just drives me nuts - 'cuz all the time you just know you're beat but sometimes it hard to act on it... "
Omaha is the only game where I find it easy to act on it! Get used to throwing away non-nut hands.
Can anyone give me an overview of poker in the casinos around the Phoenix area, particularly size and availability of games, house rake, and general strength of opposition? I'm going down there for a week for baseball spring training (and to get out from under all this snow) and would like to make expenses--nothing more ambitious than that. Thanks in advance.
What do you do when you live in St Lucia and there are no poker games...You go to PARADISE POKER. I've been playing a lot..mostly the 8/16 stud but I've been dabbling in 8 or better stud since they started it.
I read Ray's book a long time ago and I will have to brush up but I remember that a Pair of Aces with a wheel card to start is a premium hand...here's an example of what can happen when you play it strong:
Transcript of last 2 games requested by James Mogal (RickG2) This email was computer generated and emailed to mogalj@hotmail.com ----------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- Game #3945369 - $8/$16 7-card stud Hi Lo - 2000/03/10-22:50:08 (CST)
Table "Moorea" (real money)
Seat 1: RickG2 ($681.25 in chips)
Seat 2: wheee ($209.75 in chips)
Seat 3: hogleg ($259 in chips)
Seat 4: smooth ($294 in chips)
Seat 5: Rambler ($189.50 in chips)
Seat 6: JAMax ($621 in chips)
Seat 7: goliath ($704 in chips)
Seat 8: Casper ($366 in chips)
RickG2 : Ante ($1) wheee : Ante ($1) hogleg : Ante ($1) smooth : Ante ($1) Rambler : Ante ($1) JAMax : Ante ($1) goliath : Ante ($1) Casper : Ante ($1)
Dealt to RickG2 [ Ah ]
Dealt to RickG2 [ Ad ]
Dealt to RickG2 [ 5s ]
Dealt to wheee [ Qc ]
Dealt to hogleg [ 2d ]
Dealt to smooth [ 3s ]
Dealt to Rambler [ 9d ]
Dealt to JAMax [ Ac ]
Dealt to goliath [ 5c ]
Dealt to Casper [ 8c ]
hogleg : Bet ($8) smooth : Call ($8) Rambler : Fold JAMax : Fold goliath : Fold Casper : Fold RickG2 : Raise ($16) wheee : Fold hogleg : Call ($8) smooth : Call ($8)
Dealt to RickG2 [ Tc ] Dealt to hogleg [ 3h ] Dealt to smooth [ 6h ]
RickG2 : Bet ($8) hogleg : Raise ($16) smooth : Call ($16) RickG2 : Raise ($16) hogleg : Call ($8) smooth : Call ($8)
Dealt to RickG2 [ 5d ] Dealt to hogleg [ Kd ] Dealt to smooth [ Jd ]
RickG2 : Bet ($16) hogleg : Call ($16) smooth : Call ($16)
Dealt to RickG2 [ 9h ] Dealt to hogleg [ 4h ] Dealt to smooth [ 7h ]
RickG2 : Bet ($16) hogleg : Call ($16) smooth : Call ($16)
Dealt to RickG2 [ 7s ] RickG2 : Bet ($16) hogleg : Call ($16) smooth : Call ($16)
*** SUMMARY *** Pot: $269 | Rake: $3 RickG2 bet $89, collected $269, net +$180 (showed hand) [ Ah Ad 5s Tc 5d 9h 7s ]
HI: two pairs, aces and fives wheee lost $1 (folded) Qc ] hogleg lost $89 [ 2s 3c 2d 3h Kd 4h Jc ]
HI: two pairs, threes and twos smooth lost $89 [ 3d 6d 3s 6h Jd 7h 7d ]
HI: two pairs, sevens and sixes Rambler lost $1 (folded) 9d ] JAMax lost $1 (folded) Ac ] goliath lost $1 (folded) 5c ] Casper lost $1 (folded) 8c ]
first move away and save yourself from skin cancer. 2nd keep playing well and get rich. reread the book good luck
with aces slow way down at 5th st. when facing 3 low cards
But I already had Aces up by 5th street! Did you see the hand summary at the bottom?
yes i just added a point worth pointing out.
The other great thing about Paradise Poker...it keeps me out of the tropical sun
Situation: Weekly Country Club game; I'd been playing infrequently last few years as invited guest; just joined the club; dealers choice, mostly HE and Omaha, with a little 5-card stud; one $5 blind, table stakes no-limit, with the average player having about $1,000 by 2 hours into the game. There are only about 12-14 "regulars", 8 seats in the game.
Problem: I am normally a relatively quiet, tight but selectively aggressive player. I'm "afraid" I may be winning "too much" (nice problem to have). The guy who runs the game, has been commenting on how tight I play, and how much I've been winning.
Question: How can I "improve" my image without damaging my (long run) profitablity?
Take Care, ~Gare
Gare - Two suggestions.
(1) My grandfather had a well (water) in his yard. He always "primed the pump" (poured water down the pump shaft) to get more water from below.
(2) Try to neutralize your enemies and make friends of those who are neutral.
Good luck.
Buzz
Depends on what you mean by long run profitability- if you are booted from the game, how profitable would that be? Take some flyer bets/raises (4 flush on turn, middle pair with overcard, etc) every once in a while when you were going to call anyway.
Bluff raise on the river once in a blue moon, then show the hand if prompted.
Show some (only once in a while!) of your losing river hands when you were calling down with a higher draw or when you doubted the strength of the winning hand.
In short, give a looser image without loosening too much or too often. Hopefully that should help. If the play is as weak as I'm inferring from your note, would be worth giving up some % expectation to continue in the game...
Just my 1 1/2 cents
How is your demeanor during the game? If everyone else is talking and joking, and you're sitting there quietly concentrating, this might hurt you more than playing tightly. Try to stay involved socially throughout the game, whether you're in the hand or not. This will give the impression of full participation on your part, while you still are folding a lot of hands. Also, try to avoid the long-think if possible. Even when you have a tough decision, try to make it at least as quickly as everyone else in the game.
later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Need opinions on the BEST book to improve my Omaha/8 game. Forget Bob C. he played here a few times and the local yokels spanked him bad. Thanks!
John
John - I like Ray Zee's Omaha high/low book (but I also like Bob Ciaffone's book and several others).
Any great player can have a bad session or even several bad sessions. I don't know if Bob Ciaffone is a great player or not, but it doesn't even necessarily matter.
Sometimes strong writers and strong teachers are also strong players, but not always. Writing, teaching and playing skills do not necessarily go hand in hand.
I imagine you can think of a number of great coaches in sports who were not great players.
Good luck to you.
Buzz
Something which Sklansky, Malmuth and Zee agree on (if I understand it correctly) is that it is correct to reraise a probable higher pair - of queens say - to thin the field if you have an underpair with a king/ace kicker. Sklansky said in a recent post that it was better to reraise with (7,K)7 into probable (75%) queens, especially to knock out pairs between 7's and queens. This seems counterintuitive, since you are investing extra bets to get head to head in a situation where you are only going to break even, at best. Can anyone explain why it should be true?
Given the ante, your kicker, and the times you have the best hand, you will show a profit if you get it head up.
David,
Would it be fair to say, however that if you KNOW he has a pair of queens, (for this example lets say you saw his hole cards) then the 7K7 is not playable for a raise if you have nothing invested in the pot.
Jim Mogal
Jim Mogal wrote that if you knew for sure that he had queens then you wouldn't play for a raise: that's what I think too Jim, but it is not the view of the authors mentioned, as far as I know.
He says in his post that you are also considering that sometimes you have the current best hand.
I am pretty sure that Dave will agree with you to fold if it is 100% sure thing that the opponent has a higher pair, especially if we are left to doubt whether it is a pair of Qs (i.e., the Q up with a Q in the hole), or a pocket pair of Ks or As.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
From the sims shown in MM's post it seems that it is worth playing even if you are sure (which is never possible in a real game) that your opponent has an overpair smaller than your kicker. I'm not sure that makes it correct to raise, however.
You reraise to make it a very likely heads-up pot. If it is not heads up, you lose out a lot. If you can be sure no others will join, it is obviously correct to just call. But this is not very often (if you are the bring in, or duplicated low upcards are the only remaining hands and their owners are tight, etc.).
That would depend on (1) how large the ante is, (2) whether your opponent is the passive type who will slow down if he doesn't improve, (3) whether you are last to act or are there more players who could potentially enter, and (4) whether you have a 2-flush.
David Sklansky wrote: "given the antes, your kicker, and the times you have the best hand, you will show a profit if you get it heads up."
Niels put the view that putting in extra raises in an atttempt to thin out the field would increase your win rate with marginal hands like (7,K)7, 2,2, which would tend to lose in multi-way pots.
(7,K)7 is essentially a drawing hand, because it most probably has to improve to win: the rule concerning drawing hands is that they should be played as cheaply as possible, and that more players in the pot increase your profitability by improving your pot odds when you do improve. The idea that in this case the opposite strategy is true needs some backing up with evidence: The fact that the three authors Sklansky, Zee and Malmuth agree gives the view some authority, but is there any evidence?
Has anyone done any methodical simulations on this question? I've run a few very basic ones and got results which varied enormously according to the strategy followed, with amulti-way pot being more profitable than a heads-up pot in many cases.
More players in the pot increase your profit when you are drawing to a hand that is better than the hand they are drawing to but usually not otherwise. As to whether it is right to call if you KNEW he had two queens, the answer is close but I think yes, mainly because of the bets you save when you lose and the money you make when you don't. (but ony if you are head up and your kicker is higher)
In the back of our book SCSFAP-21 there are lots of simulations. Here are two of them.
9. KsKc8h (55,804) versus QhQdAd (44,196) Dead Cards: none Comment: An overcard kicker does make a difference. Also, the two-flush is of some help. Now you must play.
44. KcKh3s (41,511) (versus) QdQs2c (26,591) versus JhAcJs (31,898) Dead Cards: none Comment: The small pair with the big overcard kicker is playable in this three way confrontation. The pair in the middle has the worst of it.
Notice that in the second example even though you have the third pair, your hand is playable.
Now here's a simulation for: 7cKh7s (41,964) versus Qd6hQd (58,036). Notice that because of the ante if each of you were to put in a bet regardless of the cards that come you should break about even on the hand. However, since you can play better than that, unless you are in a game with a very small ante, you should show a profit heads-up.
Also notice that this simulation did not account for any other cards. If your hand is even a little dead, it might be wrong toplay. If your opponent's hand is a little dead that changes things. Also, two flushes and/or two straights add value to your hand.
That was the best use of simulation numbers I've seen in a while.
- Andrew
Thanks a lot MM for the details of the sims. 7cs played with limit betting is very rare in australia - it's played with HP betting out here, as are most open poker games, with manila the most widespread limit game. So my view is coloured by an aversion for playing a hand as poor as (7,K)7 beyond fifth street if there has been no improvement, if you even bother to take it that far against some solid HP action.
The point in question is whether it is better to reraise a player with an overpair card showing if you have a kicker higher than his overcard in order to drive out other overpairs and to try to get head to heaad.
There are a number of things which affect the answer to the question:
1. putting more money into the pot with the inferior hand will reduce its profitability - you will probably be raised again by the queen so it's two extra bets you are committing.
2. the reraise may not drive out the other pairs anyway.
3. the raw win-rates don't show (as far as I can see) that putting in a re-raise and calling the probable third raise and all subsequent bets (raising if you improve), head-to-head, is more profitable than simply calling till 5th street in a multi-way pot, and then folding if there is no improvement.
also, it seems to beg the question if expert play is inserted into the equation on the side of the inferior pair: one might be able to play better than the computer, but the player with the overcard showing might be a better player than one - especially since the book is aimed at students. (One never knows, do one?)
I'm not saying that you (and the other authors who concur) aren't correct, but I don't see that the raw win-rates, show that you are. The simulation required to prove the point is much more complex.
DS says "More players in the pot increase your profit if you are drawing to a hand which is better than the hand you are drawing to"
Is this consistent with your view that it is better to raise in order to try to force such players out? It would appear that a raise would force out players who would otherwise improve your profitability, and leave only those who were probable favourites against you. (BTW, this is an illustration of the point I tried to make in the FTOP discussion, about playing in order to keep inferior hands in the pot, and to force superior hands out: it is possible to do either, but not both at the same time. I presume that you never meant to imply that it was possible to do both at the same time, but your phrasing inadvertantly suggested that it was, hence my remark "that would be a good trick".)
DS says: "as to whether it is correct to call if you KNEW he had to queens, the answer is close, but I believe yes." The sims seem to bear you out in this, but it depends on the strategy followed: (calling till fifth then folding if you don't improve, raising when you do, seems to work best, which loses to bluffs: calling till the end even without improvement might be more profitable if we factor in bluffs.)
Whether it is also profitable if you have put in two extra bets on 3rd street (your reraise and the queen's third raise) is another question: I don't think it would be, yet that is the strategy you suggest.
If you define a drawing hand as one that probably need s to improve to win the pot, then you would have to consider all hands on 3rd drawing hands except rolled up trips. Which means, by extention, that you would never raise with something like QQT, since it's unlikely that the Q's will be enough to drag it. This, clearly, is wrong.
GD: QQ isn't a drawing hand against an inferior hand,though of course you hope to improve it. If you are leading you should raise to make the drawing hands (which I define as those hands which almost certainly have to improve to win) pay more for the privilige of playing, and to increase your profits in a hand which you will win more often without improving if there are fewer opposing hands: QQ wins pretty often heads-up, but rarely multi-way, and that's the main reason for raising. (these threads get long when individual replies are given, don't they?)
If you can get it heads up you might take the pot with two small pair (say, 7's & 2's) which wouldn't have held up if you let other players in. You are investing the extra bets in order to improve your odds of winning the pot.
Yes. One of your ways of winning with the smaller pair is if you make two pair while the higher pair does not improve. So, if you leave the pot say 3-way with another opponent with 9's, if you make two pair with your 7's,(I don't mean K's up.) you now must hope that the 9's do not make two pair, along with the K's. 9's up beat 7's up, allowing the dark-horse to win.
(above), I meant to say that you must hope the 9's do not make two pair, if say the Q's do not pair up(not K's). It's getting late.
neils and Michael M suggest that by knocking out the middle pair you increase your win rate, whichis undoubtedly true: it doesn't increase your profits though, as the sims quoted by MM above show: when you are in the 3-way pot you win about 30% of the time, in the 2-way pot you win about 60% of the time, which is less profitable. Also you must improve to win, and when you improve you beat each of the the other hands a majority of the time evn when they also improve: this makes the small pair/big kicker combination a drawing hand which should be played as such.
"This seems counterintuitive, "
This is certainly not counterintuitive. S&M&Z explain this type of situation in 7CSFAP. When you understand the "how and why" this "PLAY" can be profitable you will begin to move away from the pure mathematical side of winning poker. When you make this play you will usually find yourself faced with a critical decision on each of the remaining streets. Your judgement in applying the correct tactic for the situation will determine if this play is a winner or loser. The bottom line is that you need at least two pair to win this type of hand, although I have gotten good players to fold big pairs on board strength alone when in this situation. Since you need two pair you want to start with a big kicker. Bigger than your opponents probable pair. In fact I normally prefer an Ace kicker and if I feel the situation is just a little out of whack I will not play the King kicker. By reraising on third street and betting to a check on fourth street you may get free cards from there on out. See any profit in that? Well enough is enough.
Vince.
Hi vince: the crucial point is the one you made: you need to make two pair to win. That makes a small pair/big kicker a drawing hand, and it should be treated like other drawing hands, ie, get in cheap, and don't try to knock out hands which improve your profitability when you improve: higher pairs improve your profitability in this situation, as the sims prove. See a fuller discussion of this point in the later post on scsfap sims above. Most of the time when you raise you are decreasing your profitability by committing extra money to a pot in which you are an underdog, and by knocking out players you will beat when you improve. Tap dancing on the way might help a little, but you're still a dog in this pot.
"That makes a small pair/big kicker a drawing hand, and it should be treated like other drawing hands, ie"
"What we have here is failure to communicate"
Small pair/ big kicker is not a drawing hand. It is a playing hand. Because you normally need to improve to win does not in any way, shape or form make it less playable heads up. In fact it is normally a poor playing hand multi way (against 2 or 3 opponents it's horrible, more than 3 opponents, it's not too bad).
Vince.
I started with three Jacks and built a big post which I scooped when noone hit a low...Nice payoff for 8/16
I think the initial frenzy for the high low game at Paradise is begining to fade. Last night after there were three full tables early the game actually broke up while the 8/16 stud high went all night. I played till 7:00 AM EST
by James Mogal (RickG2) This email was computer generated and emailed to mogalj@hotmail.com ----------------------------------------------------- Game #4006123 - $8/$16 7-card stud Hi Lo - 2000/03/11-22:36:28 (CST) Dealing... Dealt to RickG2 [ Jd ] Dealt to RickG2 [ Jh ] Dealt to xzmoo [ 6d ] Dealt to RickG2 [ Js ] Dealt to Riverrat [ 7d ] Dealt to JAMax [ Qh ] Dealt to tevad [ Tc ] Dealt to budheiser [ 2h ] Dealt to 3betr [ Kd ] Dealt to HOLMES99 [ 3d ]
budheiser: Bring-in ($4) 3betr : Raise ($8) HOLMES99: Call ($8) xzmoo : Fold RickG2 : Call ($8) Riverrat: Raise ($16) JAMax : Fold tevad : Fold budheiser: Call ($12) 3betr : Raise ($16) HOLMES99: Call ($16) RickG2 : Call ($16) Riverrat: Raise ($16) budheiser: Call ($16) 3betr : Call ($8) HOLMES99: Call ($8) RickG2 : Call ($8)
NOTICE HOW I DID NOT RAISE AND ITS STILL CAPPED
Dealt to RickG2 [ 9c ] Dealt to Riverrat [ Jc ] Dealt to budheiser [ 5s ] Dealt to 3betr [ Ah ] Dealt to HOLMES99 [ Qs ]
3betr : Bet ($8) HOLMES99: Call ($8) RickG2 : Call ($8) Riverrat: Raise ($16) budheiser: Call ($16) 3betr : Raise ($16) HOLMES99: Fold RickG2 : Raise ($24) Riverrat: Call ($16) budheiser: Call ($16) 3betr : Call ($8)
Dealt to RickG2 [ 7c ] Dealt to Riverrat [ 3c ] Dealt to budheiser [ Td ] Dealt to 3betr [ As ]
3betr : Bet ($16) RickG2 : Raise ($32) Riverrat: Call ($32) budheiser: Call ($32) 3betr : Call ($16)
Dealt to RickG2 [ 9h ] Dealt to Riverrat [ 7s ] Dealt to budheiser [ 5c ] Dealt to 3betr [ 7h ]
3betr : Bet ($16) RickG2 : Raise ($32) Riverrat: Fold budheiser: Fold 3betr : Call ($16)
Dealt to RickG2 [ 4h ] 3betr : Check RickG2 : Bet ($16) 3betr : Call ($16)
*** SUMMARY *** Pot: $525 | Rake: $3 xzmoo lost $1 (folded) 6d ]
RickG2 bet $145, collected $525, net +$380 (showed hand) [ Jd Jh Js 9c 7c 9h 4h] HI: a full house, jacks full of nines
Riverrat lost $97 (folded) 7d Jc 3c 7s ]
JAMax lost $1 (folded) Qh ] tevad lost $1 (folded) Tc ]
budheiser lost $97 (folded) 2h 5s Td 5c ]
3betr lost $145 [ 9d Kh Kd Ah As 7h 6c ]
HI: two pairs, aces and kings
HOLMES99 lost $41 (folded) 3d Qs ]
Who's that 3betr idiot and why did he give you so much money?
Brett
I have no idea..must be one of those typical Paradise Poker dummies ;-)
=
Do you mean r.g.p.?
The other night I was waiting for a seat in a 9/18 holdem game at the Bike and killed some time in what turned out to be a great 3/6 kill Crazy Pineapple High Low game. I've hardly ever played but seem to run well when I do and the games are often very good and a lot of fun.
After scooping a nice pot, I posted a kill in mid position and was dealt a Qc 5c 5d. About six players called so I got a free play with this piece of cheese. The flop comes Kc Jc, 5h. I bet the flop and get called in four places. I discard the Qc and play my small set. As it turns out, I get ironed out by a set of jacks who waited until the river to come to life.
My question is, should I throw away the 5d and play my second nut flush draw combined with a small pair?
Regards,
Rick
I think that playing the set of 5's is what 99.9% of all players I know -- would do. What happened is just one of the reasons they call the game crazy. Not many players would slow play the three jacks -- some would wait for the turn to raise. It is very hard if not impossible to read other players(in Crazy Pineapple). I think you did the right thing. When faced with a decision in Crazy Pineapple -- Good players probably make the better decision 90% of the; but I estimate that about 20 percent of the time -- the result would have been better if the poorer decision was made. For fun -- I will do some analysis on your question and get back to you -- maybe later today or tomorrow.
Regards Carl
Rick -- I agree with Greg Raymer (FossilMan) 100%. I did some quick calculations using the probability hypergeometric distribution (which is probably about 90% accurate for your crazy pineapple situation). Monte Carlo analysis would give 99.9% accuracy but would be very time comsuming since i don't have a canned Crazy Pineapple computer program and it would take me about eight hours to set up(and document the results for) a program to analyze your question using monte carlo analysis. My estimates for the your problem using the hypergeometric distribution and some linear estimates are(for a nine handed game are):
Odds for another player to have set of Kings or Jack are about 7.3:1 (over 85% of time the set of 5's are safe on flop).
Odds for at least one other player having a flush draw is about 55 to 59%. That is only a little over half the time will another player have a flush draw. And if they have a flush draw they will make it only about 26% of the time (because you had two clubs leaving only 7 in the deck). Your chance of making the flush(other things being equal) is about 32%. Also the odds against another player making a back door flush is about 36:1 against.
As all of you already know -- Players who probably or might give you action other than the flush draw are those with:
AA, Straight draws(including gut shots); Kx; Jx; A with baby; or two unpaired babies or whatever. I would estimate that your set would win at least half the time and be very profitable in the long run.
regards Carl (please forgive my wordiness)
No way. The only way you can toss the set is if you KNOW that another player has the higher set. If there is any noteworthy room for doubt, then keep the set.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
ditto... in addition, if i know the person has a higher set, I would also fold Q5c since I have a good chance of facing a full house or a higher flush even if I get there.
hope i'm never drawing dead,
albert
Thanks all for your input and responses. This game is only played 3/6 kill in Los Angeles but I have enjoyed it every time I play it. Sometimes I am having so much fun that I pass on my bigger holdem game.
I feel fairly clueless as to what to do but it seems that most of the table is playing much worse than me so on a relative basis I may be OK (although running good may disguise my weaknesses). I try to combine some of what I know from holdem and some of what I know from Omaha into a semi-coherent strategy.
It goes without saying that I am among the tightest players at the table and know enough not to get excited by hands such as a pair of kings with a wasted third card. I do tend to pump it up a bit with hands such as KQJ suited, KKQ suited, and obviously AA2 suited or not. Generally though, others are doing the raising with hands that do not warrant it before the flop.
Because it is faster than Omaha H/L (thus better for the house and less boring for the players), I wonder if this isn't a game we will see more of in the future. In an old thread (if memory serves me) Badger indicates that the standard deviation is super high on this game and one would have to be insane to play it. But if there is some skill involved this should be good for the game as it would allow poor players to book a win now and then. If anyone has any thoughts on this they would be appreciated.
Regards,
Rick
For a while (maybe 1 year) this game took over the poker room in Oceanside, removing HE from its position of dominance. For most of that year it was a great game, as all of the regulars loved the action and had no idea how to play it well. I used to eat the game up.
Omaha8 gets frustrating when you patiently wait for nut draws and don't complete. Loose low-limit HE games get frustrating when you seem to get sucked out on constantly. Crazy Pineapple gives you the best of both worlds. ;-)
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Back in the old days of the Soaring Eagle the big game was a 5-10 Dealers Choice (usually Hi-Low split). Sometimes we played crazy. Badger is right. The variance on this game is huge. You just are going to have some big swings. This game is much better Hi-Low and even better as regular pineaplle hi-low (Discard before the flop)
The reason that this game doesn't succeed on the higher limits is that you can't put people on a hand. Set over set in holdem is somewhat rare. In pineaplle it's slightly rare, but does occur. In Crazy, I'd suspect this would have to be a regular worry. Remember discarding after the flop makes everyones hand much stronger.
Regarding your post - Its a no brainer. You keep your set. The only flush draw worth going for in this game is the nut flush draw. If you play second nut draw's you'll go broke almost as fast as you would in a omaha -8 game.
Another thought is to discard your hand after the turn. I know it sounds crazy, but if your playing with rational players with a flop of K J 5 and get some serious action with it what could they be calling you with? Either K J , a set, an open end straight draw or a flush draw.
The set of Jacks in the hand played it quite well. He probobly isn't afraid of kings, (because most players raise with a good king hand) and waited until all the draws missed and came alive on the river. He trapped you for some extra bets and maybe some more people who stayed with one pair hands.
The two most important things to remember in this game are)
1) Play only good quality connected hands, preferably that can make the nuts. 2) Remember that crazy really emphasizes the "Hold'em is a high card game truism".
Good luck, Tom B.
Tom,
Thanks for the advice. I forgot just how many forms of Pineapple there are. Crazy or not regarding when you discard, and also high low or just high. This was Crazy Pineapple High Low which is pretty much the only type I've seen around Los Angeles and Oceanside. I am aware that this game was once big in the Northwest.
Believe it or not, I have a couple old books on the older forms that are now probably out of print. I have learned to look for the new game in town as the first year or so the game is always great. But in Los Angeles, no one is talking about playing this any bigger anyway.
Regards,
Rick
Rick wrote:
"Because it is faster than Omaha H/L (thus better for the house and less boring for the players), I wonder if this isn't a game we will see more of in the future. In an old thread (if memory serves me) Badger indicates that the standard deviation is super high on this game and one would have to be insane to play it. But if there is some skill involved this should be good for the game as it would allow poor players to book a win now and then. If anyone has any thoughts on this they would be appreciated"
Rick:
I occassionally play Crazy Pineapple at the Bike while waiting for Omaha. I wouldn't say it's the 'game of the future' but, despite *big* fluctuations, sometimes the game is so juicy.....ya gotta take a shot. Your set o' fives is a monster in that game...you just happened to run into the 1 or 2%er who would even *consider* a slowplay. Most of the players in that game overplay the sh*t out of their hands and will gladly pay you off with bottom two or, even, top and a kicker.
Now I've got another one that came up...curious what you guys think
Same loose, crazy game: I've got Ah, 4c, 4s. Flop comes 2, 4, 7....all hearts.
Keep the set or the heart draw (and a possible one-card back-door low)?
TIA for your opinions
Marc
ps..in answer to someone's earlier post, a promo raise is akin to a semi-bluff.
.
Marc,
I'm not sure I would play that hand pre flop unless it was suited and I could get in cheaply or free. If I did I would tend to go with the Ah 4x since the ace might give me a piece of a low since so many lows get counterfeited in this game and at least I am drawing to a nut high.
Regards,
Rick
"Marc,
I'm not sure I would play that hand pre flop unless it was suited and I could get in cheaply or free. If I did I would tend to go with the Ah 4x since the ace might give me a piece of a low since so many lows get counterfeited in this game and at least I am drawing to a nut high.
Regards,
Rick "
Was cheaply, Rick.
Omaha h/l 10/20 w/ halfkill...
The game is loose passive with only 1 or 2 decent players.
I'm in middle position and there is a late poster for makeup blinds. A couple of limpers
I hold QQJ8, hearts and clubs.
I know, I know, piece of cheese, but the players are relatively weak. A couple of callers and I call more callers and sb raises, bb reraises, call to me.
I know, I know, pitch it, but I am possessed and I call. sb punishes me by capping. We see the flop 7 handed.
Flop: T93 two hearts one club.
This is about as good as I can legitemately hope for, wrap and two weak flush draws.
Checked to me and I bet. one caller behind me and both blinds and early calls.
Turn is a 3c not exactly a dream card.
I now add my second flush draw to a paired board. sb checks and bb bets, early folds. Now surely bb would have bet two pair on the flop. I put him most likely on a 3 from all the preflop raising.
I get inspired and RAISE.... On what... a wrap, two Q high flush draws and an over pair. All fold to the sb who also folds. bb calls. My thoughts at the time was to make more of my draws good since the pot was big. I most wanted to get out higher flush draws and hands like AKQJ. I wanted heads up with the likely trips.
River is an offsuit K. Makes me a nut straight. We check down. sb had only AA and I take down a good size pot as sb has a cow. He folded a 3 and also had a K. He must have had something like A23Ks since he is a fairly strong prop. He said he put me on TT. I look at him and say quietly "promo raise" , he looks at me and sarcastically says" ...if that is what you call it" I correct myself and say, "you're right, I'm a maniac!"
It's rare to have the opportunity in loose Omaha games to make dramatic promo raises.
The question: Besides the fishy preflop calls, did I make any -EV plays?
I don't like value betting the river here to give him a chance to check raise bluff.
Folding and calling are possible actions on the turn. As it turns out, raising was the only way I could win.
hope i'm never drawing dead,
albert
albert,
Forgetting the pre flop play, I think you played it well. The flop/turn action seems to indicate that the raisers were probably in there with big low draws and wanted to see the turn cheaply in order to go for runner runner low on a big pot.
BTW you wrote: "He must have had something like A23Ks since he is a fairly strong prop." - just a nit but this would have filled him up. Certainly A23Q was likely.
One question. Where was this game played if it was in a casino? It seems it can't be the Bellagio game since the cap was at three raises and I know of no other mid limit casino game (unless it is one of those part time games near Palm Springs or up in Northern California).
Regards,
Rick
Rick,
"BTW you wrote: "He must have had something like A23Ks since he is a fairly strong prop." - just a nit but this would have filled him up. Certainly A23Q was likely."
That was the small blind who folded. He laid down a three to my raise on the turn and the K filled him up. That is why he was so upset. hence my "promo" raise as I increased my outs to over half of the deck.
It was the bb that had only AA. Notice the bb loved my raise if he only could see my hand. He went from one card to almost half the deck. It's sb that really lost out to an aggressive bet and an aggressive promo raise. Hand #2 bets and #3 raises #1 out.
I don't know what i would have done if I had missed. Obviously a bet on the river would be best if I knew bb only had AA.
The game is in NorCal.
hope I'm never drawing dead,
albert
I'm a new player.
I take it from your tone that normally the smart play is to fold with the hand that you had. I would probably play that hand, with 2 queens, two possible flushes, and the 8 J Q combination, if it cost me only one bet to see the flop. Is that normally not a smart hand to play?
Here's another question. If the flop would have given you another Q, under what circumstances would you call a bet after the flop?
One more question.
What is a promo raise?
promo is short for promotional.
The concept is to raise with a hand that you know isn't the best, but where there is a good chance of making the better hand(s) fold, thereby promoting your hand to being the best hand.
This concept tends to apply more often in split games than in hi only games. A good example would be where you fail to make your high draw, but have a bad low. You put the bettor on a high hand, and think the player behind you was also on the high draw, but might have a better low than you. You should consider a raise to drive out the better low, so you can still get half the pot.
later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
The game I play at the local casino is a very loose 3-6-12 or 5-10 dealers choice, holdem, omaha hi/lo and omaha hi. There are generally 6-9 callers per flop. I am farely new to Omaha, as I learned playing holdem and reading holdem books, and I have a few questions about this game.
1.What is the most advantageous game to choose with the button? It almost seems as though position plays less of a roll in Omaha b/c someone is always showing the nuts.
2.Is breaking an Omaha hand down into the six holdem hands a good basis for a starting hand? I've tried this using 3 holdem hands as a starting Omaha hand.
3.How valuable are one way hands in Hi/Lo? And is a hand like A-2-8-J with unsuited ace worth playing in split?
Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Thanx
1. Omaha High. Holdem only if both games are tight.
2. No. It's more important to have hands that can make the nuts - suited aces are worth more than in holdem, while the combinations KJo and 55 are worth next to nothing.
3. Strong one-way hands are marginal in high/low. The hand you mention is almost always playable, but you shouldn't get much weaker than that.
Choppy -
3......And is a hand like A-2-8-J with unsuited ace worth playing in split?
Good question. Here I presume you are writing about Omaha high/low, since 7-stud-high/low is not included in the games of choice you have listed.
I think any hand with A-2 is probably playable (has a positive expectation) in a loose game of Omaha high/low split. See the last paragraph below for my reasoning regarding playing the hand if someone raises pre-flop.
A-2-8-J is not a raising hand, at least for me. I have gotten burned with A-2 a lot (either counterfeited, quartered, or no low possible) and am presently very cautious with a bare A-2. Here the 8 is an escape valve, but not a very good one. I wonder if Steve Badger would raise with this hand.
Any non-paired hand has added expectation due to a possible full house of about 4% in Omaha high/low. That's what I figure anyhow. I'd be very interested in somebody else's reasoning here.
The ace and jack are good cards for a full house, because you're more likely to have a WINNING full house with high cards than with low cards. In a loose nine player game MORE than one hand is likely to have a full house if there is a pair on the board. (That's as I calculate it).
I think a suited ace does not add much value (about 2% in a full game) to a hand in Omaha high/low. My reasoning takes into account the likelihood of catching two or three flush cards on the flop, the possibility of ending up with a board enabling a flush but not a full house, and the likelihood of splitting with low. I'd be very interested in somebody else's reasoning here.
When you consider that any hand with better than an expectation of about 11.1% in a nine player game has a posititve expectation, 2% adds enough to make many marginal hands playable (but losing 2% doesn't detract much). My observation is that many players will call pre-flop with any hand having a suited ace. Their (possibly incorrect) play sharply decreases the value of a suited king, but that's another story. I'd also be very interested in somebody else's reasoning here.
A-2-8-J does not have a good chance of hitting a straight (not that hitting a straight, unless it is the nut straight and there is neither a pair nor a possible flush on the board, is all that great in a loose nine handed game). Here KQT and T97 both make nut straights while QT9, and 345 make non-nut straights. I don't know what value that adds - maybe a little, but probably less than 2%. Still it's something.
All in all, most of the value of this particular hand, in a loose nine-handed game, comes from the value of A-2, with a minor contribution for a possible full house, a still lower contribution for the high cards (AJ) for possible sets or even lesser hands, a slight contribution for possible straights, and a still lower escape valve contribution for A-8 and 2-8. The lack of a suited ace is not a reason to avoid playing a hand, although it would be nice to have that extra 2% for a suited ace.
In a low limit game a raised pot usually means someone has a low hand, very possibly A-2-3-X or A-2-4-X. Thus in a raised pot the hand loses value because of the danger of getting quartered. It would be ugly to play the hand in a raised pot, half expecting to get quartered, only to be counterfeited on the river by an ace or a deuce. Thus I might throw the hand away in a raised pot, maybe depending on who did the raising.
Buzz
Choppy -
1.....It almost seems as though position plays less of a roll in Omaha b/c someone is always showing the nuts.
As Omaha high/low becomes tighter it would seem as though position would increase in importance, partly because in a tighter game, with fewer players seeing the flop, someone is not always showing the nuts.
As the game becomes tighter it would seem that you yourself would have to play tighter in order to survive.
Paradoxically, if you yourself are playing tight (one or two hands per round or less, exclusive of the blinds) position seems to decrease in importance, since, although obviously you would always like to be last to act, your position doesn't matter if you are not in the hand.
Hmmm.
However, I believe Omaha high-only is a different story. My understanding, mostly from reading Omaha books (my wife thinks I have them all) and posts here on the 2+2 forum, is that Omaha high-only is a very positional game.
All in all, if you are looking to choose a game with a positional advantage when it is your turn to be "dealer," I don't think Omaha high/low should be your game of choice. Texas hold 'em is clearly a highly positional game and my understanding is that high-only-Omaha is even more positional.
All of my experience in Omaha high/low is in loose games, such as the one you have described (except at later stages of tournaments where the game becomes very tight). I have never played in a ring game of Omaha high/low where at least five out of other eight players did not usually see the flop, making it six or more when I stayed. (I love Omaha high/low, and don't find observing the other players while waiting for a good hand boring at all. It's much more fun for me than watching paint dry.)
Hope this helps.
Buzz
Thanks for all the advice, Buzz
I find this forum very informative, unfortunately I can only contribute with questions and not answers, as I am farely new to both forms of Omaha.
How do you feel about playing mid pairs in straight high. It seems to me that even if you hit trips they rarely hold up and if the board pairs you may have the second or third best FH. I find that I generally call with any pocket pair, I think b/c of my holdem background, and I'm finding it to be very unprofitable.
Thanks for the help guys......
I just want to share what happened to me yesterday.
10-20 stud in AC. I am heads up on the river with QQQ8AJ against an opponent with xxK53K. He was raising from the start and I put him on three kings. When river card is dealt he bets. I know that I will not raise even if I get the full house because of his possible 3 kings so I call without even looking at my river card (stupidity, I know). He shows KKKK. I turn my river card and everyone sees... the fourth Queen. I had about $500 on the table and I would lose it in in about 30 seconds if I looked.
You shouldn't lose $500 even if you had looked. Going 25 bets on the river is crazy unless you hold the stone cold nuts. I'd lose 6-7 bets, then I'd stop fearing quad Kings.
If you are an above average player -- not looking at the last card will cost you money in the long run. You were lucky this time. I have probably showed down, that is (1) not looking at the last card or (2) passing blind on maybe ten occasions over the years where I had the best hand. And I know, on balance that it cost me some bucks. Try to take fear of losing out of your general play. But like Vike commented, if you looked on the river --you should not have lost over five big bets. On important plays like this -- slow down and think things out....
80-160 stud game at the Commerce, full game.
First off, let me say that this was my first time playing in California, so I'll start off with something of a trip report. I went for the weekend to the tournaments at the Bike. There wasn't much I liked about the Bike. The dealers were horrible in general, they didn't control the game at all and they argued with the players. The players were rude to the dealers, and the floor people didn't do anything to control any of this. The games there were great, I played 20-40 and 40-80 stud 8 or better, and 30-60 stud.
Then we went play at the Commerce. A very impressive, well run club from what I could tell, especially considering its size. The only thing I disliked is the $12 per half hour time charge in the 80-160 stud game. Although, they did give us plenty of breaks on the time charge while we were playing shorthanded, which was nice.
Ok, now for the 80-160 stud hand...the game was generally loose and aggressive, which was probably not far from optimal considering the $20 ante. I had just moved from the shorthanded must-move game so I didn't really have any reads on the players yet.
I'm in seat 5.
3rd street:
Seat 2, (xx)3h: brings it in for 20. Seat 3, (xx)3s: calls. Seat 4, (xx)6s: raises. Me, (KcQc)4c: reraises. Seat 6, (xx)5h: calls. Seat 7 and seat 8 fold. I forget their doorcards, but I do know that all K's Q's, and clubs were live. Seat 1, (xx)9h: 3-bets it. Seat 2 and seat 3 fold. Seat 4 and I call.
Like I said, the game was loose and aggressive. I had raised to hopefully get it heads up, but obviously that didn't work. Although, I didn't mind my 2 big cards and 3-flush in a 4 way pot, since if I made a hand, most of the others would probably be stuck with their high pairs or whatever they had.
4th street:
Seat 1: (xx)9h2d Seat 4: (xx)6s6c Me: (KcQc)4cAc Seat 6: (xx)5hJs
Seat 4 bets $160 with an open pair, I call, as does seat 6 and seat 1. I like my overlay here, but I am unsure about Seat 4's open 6's. Not sure whether to put him on 2 pair or trips.
5th street:
Seat 1: (xx)9h2cJd Seat 4: (xx)6s6cTd Me: (KcQc)4cAc2c Seat 6: (xx)5hJsTc
Seat 4 bets, I call, and seat 6 and seat 1 overcall. I had thought about raising, but it really made no sense at the time to try and knock out seat 6 and seat 1, since each of them probably needed miracles to beat me. I was mostly worried about seat 4.
6th street:
Seat 1: (xx)9h2cJdJh Seat 4: (xx)6s6cTd5d Me: (KcQc)4cAc2cQs Seat 6: (xx)5hJsTc7d
Seat 4 bets, I call (I had thought about raising again, but decided not to for the same reason as on 5th street...maybe this was wrong), seat 6 raised (!?!?) seat 1 called 2 bets cold, seat 4 called, I reraised (obviously knowing I had seat 6 beat) and everyone called.
Question to think about: What does each player have at this point?
River:
Seat 1 checks, seat 4 checks, I check (I strongly considered betting here) seat 6 bets, seat 1 folds, seat 4 calls, and I call (I also considered checkraising here).
Again, what hand does each player have at this point?
Where would any of you have gone differently in the play of the hand? The way it turned out, I built the biggest pot possible (except for possibly checkraising the river), but I left myself vulnerable to many people to draw out on me.
I don't see anything wrong with just smooth calling the bet on 5. However on 6 I would have liked to raise. It appears that the player with 9 for a door card has two pair and I would want him out because the pot is huge. It looks like you are looking on 6 street at two pair from the guy with a 9, probably trip 6's and the other guy is probably rolled up or hit trip tens on 5th. Overall I like the value you got on a hand.
Why didn't you raise 6's street when the sixes led into you?
My reasoning for not raising initially on 6th street is that I figured to have seat 6 drawing dead with an overpair, and there was no reason to try to knock him out. After he raised I figured him for trips higher than 6's, and since the guy with the open 6's didn't 3-bet 6th street he obviously wasn't full yet (which was my main concern here). Obviously the best possible turn of events ended up happening on 6th street, in that the only guy I knew for sure I could beat was the one raising.
How about the river, would you check to the guy who raised on 6th street, or bet out, or checkraise once he bet and there was a caller behind???
I'm not exactly sure but it looks like you should check and just call. I think they have too many outs together against your flush. I gave the guy with a 9 - 3 outs. I gave the guy with open 6's only 4 outs and I gave the guy who raised 7 outs. All of them are drawing to the full house and their combined chances based on these assumptions would be around 46%. I think you should check and call. (I'm assuming you are getting checkraised)
On 6 street I like how it played out but I think you almost tried to loose the pot to these guys. (unless you thought the guy with 6's was full). Let's say the guy behind is drawing dead. This would only give you 1 extra bet now and another one if he calls the river. If you raise you drop him but you charge everybody else. Hopefully you can drop one of the other two because they are getting huge odds from the pot. I counted about 32 bets when it was up to you on 6's. If you just call the guy behind you will get 32+2 = 34 small bets or 17 to 1. If he has 3 outs which he should he is only about 9 to 1 dog to you at this point.(a lot of cards are out) Even if you raise he still should call. I'm not even sure if it is better to drop one of them or collect 3 bets from each. Maybe someone else can elaborate. I think it's better to drop somebody.
George,
You definitely played it for the most money. You tried to get it heads-up on third. I would of continued that with a raise on 4th against the 6's. When I play these hands passively I always get burned by someone catching on 7th street. A flush is very vulnerable against two pair or trips going into 7th street especially with three opponents.
paul
"When I play these hands passively I always get burned"
"Paranoia runs deep"
Vince.
Hey missa PF. Why u play passively if u getta boineded alwaysda time. I butt don't unnersand dat! Ob courst I be jussa 4 yar old BEGINNER! :) donnta youse be mad at Missa vince now!
BEGINNER
I like the way you played the hand from start to finish except that I would have bet right out on the end and maybe even considered folding if raised (depending on who did the raising). There is no way I would have raised again on 4 as I want more players in. The natural tendancy is that these players love to call and you want to encourage them to. The way they get involved in such big pots there is no way they will fold a high pair so you want to let this type of hand stay in. I probably would have raised on 6 but you were at the table and obviously had a better feel for the game and you were correct in not raising. Just look at all the action you got with the raise coming behind you. If you blew the pot, that doesn't mean you played it wrong. The only possible wrong analysis would be if everyone would have played and even reraised on 6 if you took every raise. You never know in that game at Commerce.
Seat 1: (xx)9h2cJdJh Seat 4: (xx)6s6cTd5d Me: (KcQc)4cAc2cQs Seat 6: (xx)5hJsTc7d
I liked the way you played the hand. 2-betting 3rd street with a 3-flush I only do to players I know I can control well, i.e. I know there is a good chance I can bet them off the hand on 5th street in case I don't catch anything. Depending on the player I might just call.
4th and 5th no doubt I would have just called. 6th I would have raised. Pot is big at that point. I don't want seat 1 with 2 pairs to get a cheap card. There is a decent chance he'll call anyway, although it did work out real well for you by call-raising. Seat 1 is not likely to be rolled since he would have popped it on 4th or 5th street.
7th street I might have bet out and called 1 raise but likely fold to a double raise before it gets back to me. I would not check raise 7th after seat 6 bets. Your hand screams at minimun trip Queens due to your double bet on 3rd. Could be trip Aces or a flush also. Seat 6th is telling you he can beat any of those hands and likely filled. He can't be bluffing, the pot isn't for sale. Call him down and hope for the best.
Seat 6 showed trip 7's, seat 4 mucked without showing, and my flush stood up. I still think I could have checkraised the river as I figured he'd bet any trips after I checked to him, which, of course, he did.
George,
If you couldn't get these clowns out on third why not raise 4th you got your perfect card for a multiway game?? At worst you will end up head to head with the 6's. I think you should play multiway hands aggressively especially against these type of players. They know you have nothing on 4th so they will stay anyway. If you hit on 5th so be it they will probably check to you and you bet. Everyone else seems to agree with calling on 4th but I don't.
Great Hand Paul
Raising on 4 would be the worst possible play because the 6's most likely hand is trips (he was the first raiser in a game where many people raise any pair) or two pair. The 6's makes a double bet, why do you want to make a 4x bet on fourth and possibly drive people out and get heads up with probably at least two pair when you have a drawing hand? Let them play and hope for the best. You have to assume you will win with a flush and lose otherwise (this is not exactly accurate but close enough). Plus, a third open six will cause you to release, so why pay more now?
Russ,
The last time I played it George's way I lost to a Full house. It looks like I played it right I just lost. Thank you for confirming it. It still amazes me the way these players hang in there with a paired door card and a three flush on the board.
paul
Out here in the sticks in Kansas, the 7CS is 1-5, or 2-10 but no ante, low card brings it in, and anyone can raise the limit, (ie. 5 in 1-5, or 10 in 2-10) on any street. What are a few of the changes in strategy one should employ, with no ante, as opposed to having an ante?
Only get involved on 3rd street if you are sure you have the best hand, OR you can see 4th street for just the bring-in and you might catch a great card. Don't ever call a raise on 3rd street with a mediocre hand or a drawing hand, as it will rarely be a profitable play.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Make sure you do not enter the hand with junk. With no ante, why should you take a chance on playing with 3 weak cards. You should however vary your style and call with some junk if you are not getting called. Once in the hand, play agressively if you think you have the best hand.
In any game, not just this one, you should enter the pot with a degree of looseness proportionate to the size of the ante relative to later bets. In this example, there IS an "ante"---if seven-handed, then your "ante" is 1/7 of the bring-in, in this case about $0.14. Since the top bet is $5 (or $10), this is an extremely high bet/ante ratio and therefore you should play VERY tightly on the first three cards---I suggest any pair of Aces or Kings; any pair of 9s-Qs if the pair is completely live; any pair 5s-8s if the pair is live AND contains a live higher kicker; any pair 2s-4s if the pair is in the hole, AND your kicker is live; any three-flush that contains two cards 10 or higher, or is also a straight-flush draw; any three-straight, no gaps, 4-5-6 or higher; any three high cards, ten or higher, that don't otherwise meet the above criteria. You may nod off waiting for a hand, but it makes no sense to enter the pot with marginal holdings when there's nothing in there to go after.
But don't forget ...
If you can call on 3rd street for just the bring-in ($1), and can reasonably expect to get paid off if you catch great on 4th, then you should come in with most of your pairs, especially pocket pairs.
For example, if you're first to act after the bring-in, have (55)9, and know that it's unlikely that there will be a raise behind you (based upon experience with this table), then you definitely should call here. You are playing almost entirely to catch a 5 on 4th street. If you do, you can start betting $5 per round. This play will only work if the table is passive (there is unlikely to be a raise on 3rd street) and loose (there are typically 1 or more players who will call your maximum bets on 4th street and beyond). Fortunately, a lot of low limit spread limit stud games are loose and passive.
later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
>>For example, if you're first to act after the bring-in, have (55)9, ....then you definitely should call here. You are playing almost entirely to catch a 5 on 4th street.>>
I play a lot of low-limit stud with no ante, and I don't think this works. It's 20 to 1 against getting that 5, so to break even, you'd have to make $20 every time you hit and never loose another dollar when you don't. It's often not possible to get $20 into the pot in these games. You might be better off to raise with this hand and take $2 or $3. What's more likely to happen is you'll pick up a 9 or a suited face card and lose two more bets. I would much rather start with three faces, or an Ace up.
I tend to play pretty agressively if I think I have the high pair and there is one or less over-card on board, but I tend to fold pairs that I can't play this way, even if they are Ts or higher.
DJ
Thank you for response. It is helpful. What do you mean there is an ante, ie $0.14?
With a small or medium pair, why is it slightly better to have the two flush in the hole, as opposed to having a "split two flush"? Is it because, that if you do in fact make the flush, that it is less readable? That is, the flush would not be in the door card suit then?
That sounds about right to me. remember when someone makes a flush it is almost always in the door card.
Consider, with the suited cards split (not both in the hole), if you did make the flush by 6th street your entire board would be one-suited. Not a lot of deceptive value there :)
Perfect example from the TOC last year: Clueless grandma on my left shows the Ace of spades and makes the initial raise. We have multiway action until 5th, where I make a heart flush, King-high. Grandma catches a diamond on 4th, then catches a spade on 5th, and a diamond on 6th street, all the while taking all the abuse from a made hand. On the river, she comes out of the hole with a diamond flush. With the initial upcards and the sequence of play, there's no logical way to put her or any player on that hand. Yes, the hidden 2-flush has some value -- not to mention its tilt value.
Thank you for responses. I see that with a two flush in the hole one can make a flush with 3 cardds up by sixth street but that would be with 4th,5th, and 6th cards being flush cards, but with a split two flush, in order to make a flush by 6th, all 4 upcards would need to be flush cards. Having the two flush in the hole comes more into play when one makes a flush on the river, that is with only two flush cards showing, and those two are on either 4th, 5th or 6th. This flush is fairly unreadable. Whereas with a split two flush, and you make it by the river, you still must have 3 flush cards showing, including the doorcard. This looks like a flush or flush draw, readable. I'm flushed out now.
Where can I get info on playing Caribbean poker and wht are the odds in that game.
Caribbean poker is actually not a poker game, as such. You should ask this question in the Other Gambling Games forum.
To answer your question anyway, Caribbean Poker is a real bad game to play. The house edge is huge as far as I know. You're much better off playing blackjack or craps (stick to the pass or don't pass bets).
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
FossilMan,
I must thank you for coming to my aid. Perhaps I let down my vigilant guard. I saw this post and grimaced. I said to myself, "Well, WFM, the game does have the WORD poker in it..." I chose to pass. You showed me the light.
One question FossilMan -- why do you intentionally divulge your secret identity in every post!
WFM
The best info I can give you is not to play. Just watch..It is a real house game. My dealer friends have discouraged me from playing. they are correct.
You can find some information on Caribbean Stud (along with the odds) and other house games at The Wizard of Odds website:
http://www.thewizardofodds.com/
As stated by others, this is a real money maker for the casino, as you'll see when you visit the website above.
Bruce K.
In a recent post MM quoted some simulations from scsfap21 which throw light on the question of whether it is better to raise with a hand like (7,K)7 when a player showing a queen raises. the hands quoted were 9. KsKc8h(55,804) v QhQdAd (44,196)
44.KcKh3s(41,511) v QdQs2c(26,591) v JhAcJs (31,898)
7cKh7s(41,964) v Qd6hQd(sic)(58,036). There are no dead cards in any of the examples.
How do these examples support the view that it is better to raise to try to knock out players with other pairs higher than yours, when by doing so you appear to reduce your profitability? In the second example you are about a ~60/40 underdog in a two way pot: in the third example you are a ~70/30 underdog in a three-way pot, which is significantly better. You have to put in two extra bets (your reraise, and the third bet from the overpair) to try to get to the apparently inferior head-to-head situation, which makes the relative profitability even worse. Of course in real life the player with the queen will be bluffing sometimes, which affects the situation, but that still mightn't make it better to raise than to call.
If you KNEW that the raiser has a bigger pair, it would probably better to merely call if you also knew that your calling would let in only a hand with an in between pair with a smaller kicker. Even here it would be close because you hurt yourself when you make two small pair and the in between hand does too. However if there is a decent chance that the high card doesn't have the hand he is representing, it is a disaster to let in that higher pair. Secondly if your raise drives out a drawing hand, even when you truly are against a higher pair that is the preferred play, especially in high ante games. I do commend you however for reading carefully and noticing that the simulations Mason chose did not obviously prove his point.
I'm going to Vegas for five days on the 24th. I've built up a bankroll playing 5-10HE around Chicago. I'm thinking about giving a shot or two to the Bellagio 8-16 or the Mirage 10-20. Any comments on which is likely to be the better place to find a soft game? I'm not sure if this is the right post for this question, so I apologize in advance if it isn't
Thanks
DS says: "it is a disaster to let in that higher pair" ie, a pair between 7K7 and xQQ. But as you noted earlier, and the SCSFAP sims show, having extra hands in the pot which you usually beat when you improve your drawing hand (ie, 7k7), INCREASES your profitability. Reraising to force out the middle pair only improves your profitability when the ??Q raiser is bluffing, which is in a minority of cases, and in which case you are only going to win a small pot anyway, because if he has a complete bust he will probably fold immediately: if he plays or reraises you are an underdog until you improve.
It really looks to me as if 7K7 should be treated as drawing hand, because it can only win occasional small pots if it doesn't improve. While it might be said that I haven't proven my case, I don't think I have to: the burden of proof lies with the view that it is better to reraise with a hand which is an underdog and in effect a drawing hand, when basic principles, and the admittedly limited evidence at hand, indicate that it is better to simply call.
PS for DS, I don't know if you saw my earlier note on this, but in the FTOP discussion I made the comment that it would be good trick to be able to make inferior hands call and good hands fold: of course you can do one or the other, but you can't do both at the same time: I guess you never meant to say it was possible, but your phrasing inadvertantly suggested it was. No big deal.
Yes, you can make inferior hands call and superior hands fold at the same time. I believe there's an essay in Sklansky on Poker discussing this.
Here's an example from a hand I played last year at Bellagio 4-8. I am in BB, flop a straight, but 2 flush is out. I bet, early limper folds, thinking late limper calls (TLL), clueless player (CPB) on button calls.
I bet turn, non-flush card. Call, call.
River is flush card. I bet, TLL folds. CPB calls with 2 pair. TLL says unrepeatable things and storms off, which (to me) indicates a small flush.
Of course, as DS points out in his essay, one might make the same bet against a single opponent, hoping for similar results.
My general rule has been that if I have an Ace and another card suited, I'll always call one bet, and ususally two bets before the flop, even if I don't have a decent low or anything else to work with, solely hoping for the nut flush.
Also, if I get two suited cards to go along with my flush, I'll usually call one or two bets (as long as the board isn't paired up) hoping for my third suited card.
Any thoughts on this strategy? Is this too loose? Would you fold if you were in weak position and didn't have much else other than the possible flush?
Thanks.
you really need to read a book that gives you some guidelines on starting hands and play after the flop. your starting hands are even too loose for holdem if what im reading into your post is accurate.
Ray Zee's response is accurate-not unsurprisingly.
In it he tries to sell you his book. Buy it: it will save you the outrageously high price in one or two sessions.
To give some more fleshed out guidelines: No Omaha hand should be played for one thing, and one thing only. A flush draw is not enough, two aces are not enough, A-2 is not enough. Actually, sometimes, A-2 and AA are not playable with nothing else going for it: i.e. against a tight raiser you should throw away Ah2s9c7d or a worse hand like Ah2s6d6c, and in some cases AA79 totally offsuit should be tossed.
You want multiple draws and redraws in Omaha.
From playing a lot of Omaha 8 HiLo -- I think many experienced players will somewhat agree on the following guidelines.
Axioms in general:
(1) before the flop -- if your hand contains: A4xx or A45x with Ax suited(in both cases), this hand should be played very carefully and sometimes mucked. To call, the hand should generally contain other redeeming values such as AKJ4 with A suited. In a ring game (eight or nine players), other things such as position, player makeup, and number of players calling should also be considered. If I play a hand of this type, I like to limp in with reasonable good position and essentially little chance of being raised, i.e., I want to see a cheap flop. Calling before the flop with A4xx(Ace suited) is usually very costly if pot is preflop capped.
(2) immediately after the flop -- if your hand contains Kx suited with a flush draw and essentially no other(or very few) outs -- I think it is best to muck if another player agressively bets into the flop. My experience indicates that the agressive bettor usually has the nut flush draw. In situations like this, good judgement must be applied. Things like: pot odds, possibility of low getting there, pot being capped, .... should be taken into careful consideration.
Any comments on these thoughts of mine. It is probably "elementary Watson" to experienced OM8 players; but maybe these comments can help some new players improve OM8 skills????
Regards Carl
A4xx is not worth playing, unless the xx part is very strong. Are you hoping to hit a perfect 23x flop? Or are you planning to draw to the non-nut low if, say, the flop is 27x?
The king-high flush draw is a tricky hand to play, and your understanding of the bettor is important, as is the texture of the flop. When you flop a king-high flush draw in Omaha in a full game, you'll be up against an Ace-high flush draw something like 35% of the time. So with no other information, you're a 2-1 favorite to have the best flush draw. You can refine that number based on the action you see on the flop, adjusting it either up or down based on your knowledge of the players. Now, if there are two low cards on the flop you have to consider that some of your flush outs put a low on the board, and you rarely want to be drawing to half a pot.
After evaluating all of those possibilities, decide whether or not to continue based on other factors like the size of the pot, secondary outs in your hand like ragged low draws and 3-straights and 3-flushes, and your position relative to the original bettor (i.e. will it get raised behind you?). Sometimes it'll be correct to peel off a card on the flop if the pot is big, because the turn card can define your hand a lot better, and/or you may get a free card if your opponent was betting a straight draw or two pair.
I have Ray's book and it has helped me a great deal. Nevertheless I tend to play a bit looser than he advises for the following reasons.
I play at a low stakes game (3/6 or 6/12, full kill) where people generally play very loose, much, much looser than I play. Also, for some reason, in the games I play there are hardly ever any preflop raises so it usually just costs me three dollars to see the flop. There are usually only one or two people at the table who ever raise preflop, so often I am in the situation where I can be relatively confident that people betting behind me won't raise and I can see the flop for only three bucks.
Having said that, my experience is starting to tell me that even in an ideal position, a suited A without a good shot for low, and without some high cards, is a hand to muck, even if it will only cost me one bet to see the flop.
One complaint I have about Ray's book, and the Andy Nelson books I've read too, is that they're short on statistics. I don't know how to do the math, and it would help me to know some general statistical probabilities for situations that come up a lot. I've only seen a few, like a low comes up about 70% of the time, or if you still need a spade after the flop, the chances of one coming in the next two cards are generally about 40%.
I know there are many variables that change the statistics, but I think it would be helpful to have in my head about 10 or 15 general statistics for common situations.
Example: what are the chances that the board will be paired after the flop, if you have A-2, what are the chances that somebody else does too, stuff like that.
I'm still new to this game (obviously) and would appreciate any tips. Thanks
"I've only seen a few, like a low comes up about 70% of the time"
Cory - I presume you want to know when you are using erroneous figures. If so, the 70% is in error. (If not, the 70% is still in error).
1,561,728/2,598,960 = 0.6009 = probability low will be made possible by the cards on the board (before the cards are dealt).
Thus a low comes up about 60% of the time, if you have not seen your hand yet.
Of course once you have seen your hand, depending on the number of low cards in your hand, the number becomes a little different. (For example, if you are looking at KQJT in your hand, then the probability of low (alas!) increases to 1,174,656/1,712,304 = 0.686. At least that's how I figured it.
"if you have A-2, what are the chances that somebody else does too"
The answer depends on the numbers of opponents. For 8 handed (7 opponents who stay to the bitter end - and you can count on them staying in a loose low level game if they have the best low) the best low hand gets quartered a whopping 32.24 % of the time. That's according to my own calculations. (Ask and I'll approximate it for nine handed, or whatever, for you).
I agree with you about the dearth of statistics in Omaha books. One book I have, Michael Barry's Omaha Express, is chuck full of statistics, but they're all about Omaha-high-only. Bummer.
Regards,
Buzz
Dan - I always enjoy reading your posts. Lots of wisdom there. I learn from you. Thanks.
This is a small thing, and maybe I'm wrong.
You wrote, "When you flop a king-high flush draw in Omaha in a full game, you'll be up against an Ace-high flush draw something like 35% of the time. So with no other information, you're a 2-1 favorite to have the best flush draw."
I wonder if you're just a bit high with the 35%.
My figures are for being beaten by an ace high flush:
4935/123410 = 0.0400 is the probability of any one individual opponent having an ace high flush if you hold KXYY, with KX suited and YY of other suits.
Then, approximately 25% of the time in eight handed (seven opponents) your king high flush is beaten by an ace high flush.
In nine handed (eight opponents) your king high flush is beaten by an ace high flush, also approximately, 30-31% of the time.
I've seen the 35% figure before - can't remember where - and wondered about it then too. I'd be interested in knowing it's origin. Maybe the slight difference is between flop odds and river odds. (I did river odds. Maybe I'll do flop odds next Saturday afternoon. It was a tedious calculation. My wife thinks I am nuts.)
Of course 25% changes you from a 2:1 favorite to a 3:1 favorite for an eight handed game (someone sitting out a hand in a full game). Seems not a big deal for the 30-31% (maybe a tad more favorable than a 2:1 favorite).
Thanks again for sharing your wisdom.
a questioning duffer,
Buzz
Are you confusing a flush draw with a flush? When you flop a king-high four flush, you'll be up against the ace 35% the of the time. Your numbers are for situations where you both make the flush. The 35% number is mine, from some math I did a while ago, so maybe I made a small error somewhere, but it sounds like your numbers are in agreement with mine, with just a slightly different set of assumptions off the top. Also, my numbers would have assumed a 10-handed game.
Dan
Dan - Thanks.
"Are you confusing a flush draw with a flush?"
Yes, I was. My numbers were for being on the river with a completed king high flush (worried about the possibility of an ace high flush).
However, in this case it turns out not to make a lot of difference (at least as I figured it).
Recalculating for a flush draw,
6104/148995 = 0.0409678 is probability of your king high flush draw being topped by an ace high flush draw if you have one opponent.
Thus I get as the per cent chance of being on a king high flush draw against an opponent on an ace high flush draw approximately
34% ten handed,
31% nine handed, and
28% eight handed.
regards,
Buzz
34% sounds good to me. I originally said, "Around 35%".
I would hate to sit at a table with all of you. The pots would never be more than $10.
For what it's worth, Joshua
I've never played Pineapple before. Do any of you know where I can get the lowdown on basic strategy for Pineapple?
Thanks.
I've just started playing a lot of 8/16 7 stud eight or better on Paradise POker.
Here's a situation that puzzled me. I am dealt 9T/8 and the board is 2 Q 5 3 3 2 8 K.
The first 2 brings it in for the minimum $4.00 and is called by the 3, the other 3 and the other 2. Its only $4.00 for me to see fourth street unless the K raises which is unlkely.
Am I looking for trouble by giving up $4.00 here?
Ray Z are you out there in cyberspace?
Regards from St. Lucia
Jim Mogal
ive only played 8,9,10, only as an ante steal. right now im having trouble coming up with any three worse cards. id seriously consider giving the dealer the $4 not to give me the fourth street card.
Thats what i wanted to hear! I did fold it.
I saved the transcripts from about ten hands from my 7 stud eight or better session on Paradise Poker last night, 8/16 with $4. bring in.
Some may be instructive to beginers like me I'll try to put one on every day for comments.
I'll begin a new thread with each one.
Thanks again Ray for your input...it's pure gold and the main reason why I participate in this forum.
Best Regards
Jim Mogal
T98 is marginal even in high-only stud. In stud-8, this hand does especially poorly multiway, since (1) when your straight does come through you'll only get half the pot, and (2) when you make one pair you'll often lose to two small pair or a pair of aces. If you're on a steal, you have the equity of the times you'll win uncontested, plus you may win without the best hand if the bring-in catches bad. If your steal is called and you aren't against a "Razz hand", your hand is in terrible shape, even against a weak hand like a small pair-small kicker. Since the $4 bring-in is half a bet (as opposed to a small fraction), you have to play fairly tight with respect to coming in for the bring-in. Also, limping in with a ten or nine makes you a target - players can see you don't have anything.
I'd only play the A4xx in a loose game if the players were also very bad after the flop. Bad enough that they would chase worse lows than mine. I suppose that describes a lot of the loose games, but I'm still not really comfortable with an A4 low.
However, I see your point. The other two cards (other than 98) either give you straight draws and additional low outs, or give you lots of big cards and big straight outs. I'd play the hand based on those cards if the game were loose, but the A4 low still wouldn't get me very excited, especially since in a very loose game there's virtually no chance that it's the best low without a perfect flop, and even if you make a nut low with a miracle flop there's a good chance of getting quartered.
if you are going to be playing these hands alot, you definitly need to be a good player at the game and well experienced. i dont feel im an experienced enough player to fool too much with them yet. especially out of position. my opinion is that most of the money is won with starting hands that have all four cards hooked up or real good multiway possibilities even against fools.
A huge part of one's advantage against fools is that they play like fools in comparison to you.
Playing an A-4 with nothing else going but the Ace being suited with one of your cards is pretty foolish.
I would play AKQ4 if the Ace was suited and the King was suited. but if the flop comes with a probable low, i may be getting out even if it also comes with a flush draw, if the low doesn't include a 2 or three.
I have been playing 1-5 7CS for a couple of years and am breaking about even (losing about $100 total in those years, playing about twice a month for a couple of hours, starting with about $50 each time). Just recently had a mental breakthrough about why position is important. Still foggy on most of it but can tell pot odds by looking at how high the pile is (not very, usually). Am 56 years old (female), a perfect Alzheimers candidate, and as long as it's taken me to get this far cannot see getting a whole lot better before I kick off. Question: Are there any RULES I can follow to be a winner. Not a big winner, just a slight winner. Instead of a loser. My previous strategy (before I learned to try to steal pots etc) of checking and calling was good enough to keep me from losing mbut not enough to let me win. Thanks - C. T.
its hard to teach old dogs new tricks. but try a few of the books you can order off this website and if you have the mind to study i suspect you will be jumping thru the hoops. good luck.
Well I have read a lot but it confuses me, different people say different things. Or they will say the same thing and then when I get to the table the other people don't do what they are supposed to do! OK I will quit complaining now and just study harder. Thank you Ray, I know you know what you are talking about. CT
CT wrote: >Question: Are there any RULES I can follow to be a >winner. Not a big winner, just a slight winner. >Instead of a loser.
Sorry. If it were that easy to do, everyone would be doing it, right? You just have to work at the game, just like you would a job or any other serious hobby. You don't expect to become a significantly better than average golfer (bowler, tennis player, take your pick) by learning 1 or 2 simple rules, right? You know you need to be out there regularly practicing. Same for poker. You have to study and think about it in place of practice.
later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
"General advice is not very helpful in Omaha. If you are commonly playing pots with three players, one style of play is called for. If on the other hand you are playing the game you suugest, loosey multiway, your starting hands are right. AsXsxx, A3xx, A4 and most any two cards except 98, these are all playable and profitable."
AsXsxx???
AXs doesn't hit much and it doesn't always win when it does. Are you sure? (I don't mean to be insulting here; I truly appreciate your advice.)
A4 and most any two cards except 98??? Really?
I don't like 23XX much. A4XX?? A2XX, where at least one X is not 3,4, or 5, or where XX are not two nicely matched high cards, like KK or JT, is a dangerous hand.
Even with 234X, if I don't see an ace on the flop, (or maybe a 2 and two other low cards on the flop with the pre-flop raiser checking post-flop) I'm generally folding to any post-flop bets.
Perhaps trying to follow your previous general guidelines (and also Ray Zee's advice) has gotten me to playing too tight.
regards,
Buzz
I don't really agree. Yes, if you hit a 2 or a 3, your draw is the same as an A3 before the flop. But if I play an A3 before the flop, I'm really hoping to flop a 2. If I don't flop a 2, I have to have a pretty good reason to continue with the hand. In the case of A4, I don't think much money can be made playing a hand where you need a parlay that has a 2 or 3 land on the flop, has your loose opponents fold their A2 or A3 hands, has no one else chase with an A4, has a low come in, AND doesn't get your hand counterfeited. That's too much wishful thinking for me.
I understand the logic of wanting to play many hands when your opponents are making tons of post-flop mistakes, because you can't benefit from them unless you are in the pot. I apply that theory quite liberally in Omaha High. I just don't think it works as well for Omaha/8, especially when talking about longshot draws for low.
I should have said "wanting to play *more hands when your opponents make post-flop mistakes. "Many" is a relative term. Anyway, that principle doesn't apply as much in a split poker game as opposed to something like Omaha High, in my opinion.
As I understand your point, a hand like A4 may be playable simply because those two cards are probably going to work with the other two cards you get, with the exception of the worst middle cards, to give you some reasonable draws profitable in a loose game. That, in combination with the chance of sometimes making a low with the A4, makes the hand playable. I said something similar, but with more emphasis on the other two cards. I said that an A4 was playable IF the other two cards were very strong. I'd have a hard time playing Ah4c7sJd in just about any game, but suit up the Ace or make the 7 another wheel card or another card above a 9 and I'd be in there in good position.
.
I'm finally convinced that KKQ2 is occasionally playable outside the blinds in the softest games.
But dry suited aces?! A4xy?! Clearly these combinations do increase in value in the loosest games. I just can't see how they increase *enough* in value to become profitable. As more players call, much of the gain in expectation will accrue to premium hands. A2 low draws receive the primary benefit from additional callers, as will strong nut draws for high. But suited aces connect too infrequently to seem to have sufficient value alone (while they make an A2xy or A3xy much stronger). And A4 while it is clearly better than 23xy will rarely be the best low, especially in a game where opponents play 23. Your point is that the "x" and "y" cards almost always add enough to the A4 to make it +EV. I will sometimes limp on the button with A4xy when "x" and "y" are Broadway cards and the ace is suited. But I'm not convinced that you can play A4J7, A4T6, A4Q8, A477, and similar hands, let alone AcJd8h5c or Ac8d8h5c.
"But dry suited aces?! A4xy?! Clearly these combinations do increase in value in the loosest games. I just can't see how they increase *enough* in value to become profitable...."
I'm not saying that two cards are enough to fall in love with a hand but, the way I see it, the point in this thread (pay attention here!) is if you're playing in a game with an average of 6-8 players seeing the flop, there are enough bad players at your table to make a lot of *marginal* hands playable as long as you outplay them after the flop.
The one thing about a suited ace...if it gets there, you *won't* get quartered.
In a game where all the pots are capped preflop 5-7 handed, how would that affect your hand selection.
In other words, which normally playable hands require high implied odds to be profitable against a field, and which can be played for several bets preflop?
HLSFAP does mention in a few places that hands like 2346 prefer to get in cheaply. But would the same apply to (1) paint pairs with two connected cards, (2) high straight runs like KQJT, (3) A3xy type hands, (4) AA with nothing else, or (5) A2 with nothing else?
any time you have a hand where all four cards are not closely interelated id want to get in cheap in a multiway pot. and any hands that really need a perfect flop to have a chance get it all. even if they are playing far too loose you need great hands to play in capped pots.
What kind of changes should be made when going for hi at the h/l 8 or better game. Perhaps only play Ks or better. I find that a lot of times I make Js or Qs up I easily get rivered.
the changes need to be in your reading habits away from the table.
Not to be on the suck=up commitee but I agree with Badger because I play in a game where 6-8 take the flop and find you can win with these hands hitting the flop.
paul
Here's the first in my series of hands I promised to write about.. I decided to just lay out the entire hand and betting but am only interested in critiques of my own play.
Game is 8/16 with $1. ante and $4.00 bring in on Paradise Poker, Maximum of three raises (four bets total) allowed. Game # 4447673 in case you're a Paradise player and want to look it up yourself. This game was 7 handed.
Obviously I did not know what the other players had in the hole until it was over.
Player A (xx)/Ks Folds on third
Player B (xx/ 3d Kh Folds on 4th
Player C (5s,4s)/8c 3s 2s Ad Th Scooped at the river
Player D (xx)/6d Folds on third
Me......(7h,5c)/3c Ah Js Qs 5h Folded on the river
PLayer E (7d,9d)/ 7s 8d 4h Kd Tc Goes all in $14 on river (frustrated I guess)
Player F (2h,4c)/3h Jd As 6h 2d Very unlucky..went all the way
3rd street Betting: I bring in for 4,E calls ,F raises to 8,A folds,B calls 8, C calls 8, D folds,I raise to 16 all call--five handed
4th street: I bet 8, all call except player B who folds now four handed
5th street: I check, E checks, F bets 16, C raises to 32, all call raise.
6th street: I check,E checks, F checks (trapping), C bets 16, I call(could I have given it up here?),E calls,F raises to 32, C raises to 48, I call, E calls,F raises to 64, all call.
River: I check, E checks,F checks (poor guy is still trapping) C bets 16, I fold my pair of fives!, E throws away his last $14, F raises to 32, C makes it 48 and F calls.
Result, Wheel collects $610 pot, I was drawing dead on 6th street!
Comments welcome
Third street: Call, don't raise. This is a marginal hand, and after there is already a raise and callers you are almost definitely against better low hands. Your hand is rough, and only slightly connected, and the only reason it's a call rather than fold are: (1) it's only another half-bet to complete, (2) sixes and fours are live, and (3) you have a 2-flush. You want to get in cheaply and then bail if you don't catch a good card on fourth.
Sixth street: A lot depends on your read of players C and F. C called a full bet on third with an 8 up. Good players will rarely do that, especially in a multiway pot. You can be fairly sure he had a made low on fifth, but you don't know that the ace didn't pair him. If he's a good player and he did call on third, he probably has an ace or something like (76)8. The pot is large, although as happened here it's easy to be caught in the middle for several bets in this game. As for player F, would he complete on third with a seven or eight in the hole (and a 3 up)? Unless he had (A7)3 or a 3-flush that's unlikely, and most players wouldn't complete with the 3-flush and players left to act. So in the best-case scenario, C has 87632A, and F has a pair of aces or aces up. More likely, one of them has a made low that has you drawing dead. And keep in mind that you're almost certainly drawing to half the pot and that the cost to reach the river might be high.
Thanks Dan,
I'm a seven stud hi only player and it's hard to get used to the difference on sixth street...where you hardly ever lay anything down.
I'm enjoying the game and Paradise has been esay pickings so far.
If done more bluffing on the river in this game in one week than I do in Hi stud in a year.
I'm actually playing right now, I'll post another hand soon
no raise for you on 3rd. average hand here
4th bet okay.
5th fold if you didnt raise on 3rd. crazy to call double bet
6th i dont know youve gotten yourself in too deep. unless you read the possible low hands for high hands you might want to go out.
7th you played it perfectly.
k
I play in a 1-5 7cs game in which there is a 3 dollar ante button and most players chase providing tons of multi-way action and nicely sized pots. i have two problems... one- i enter the game with 60 dollars which i think is making it hard for me to play tight and aggresive since the ante button keeps sucking away at my roll and i make 5 big bets and half my starting cash is gone. do i need a much much bigger bankroll? also what hands should i start with in this generally loose game, should i play tighter(since the players are loose in the sense that they call often yet rarely raise or reraise) or should i play looser (since there is always at least one shmuck who goes for flush draw with 2 suited cards providing they get another suit on 4 street) What type of hands should i be starting with in late mid and early pos. i really have no idea? please help, Low Roller
Personally, I buy in with $100 or $120 and try to sit to the left of the big stacks. Depending on the "flavor" of the game, I will adjust my starting hands to fit. Position is not a major factor in 7CS simply because it can change. It is good to use it when you can like getting a free next card when you are on a draw or to try to control that dude in front of you who raises with nothing. Read the green book by Sklansky and Roy West's blue book and adjust your game accordingly. The books provide excellent guidelines but no absolute rules. There is no substitute to live games. Everyone is just a little different. Overall, I feel 7CS (1-5) is a trapping game. Limp in more times than raise. Raising often will not get you head up in a low limit game. In these games I like to raise to get money in the pot and tie the draws to straights and flushes in. Since the overhead is low, you can afford to chase a little if your cards are live since your implied odds are favorable. You will have to maximize your wins when there is a lot of multiway action. That means having a good starting hand and some draws to flushes and boats with a lot of people in the hands. I find almost no reason to try to steal antes unless I am sure of the players' styles will let me do or if I am not getting called on my good hands. So if I have to showdown a bad hand, I'll get calls when I have the nuts.br Your decision whether to play or fold on 3rd st is clearly the most important decision you will make. There are no absolute rules, but there are a lot of good guidelines.
the ante is quite cheap. you should be playing the best live pair and big draw hands.
The Roy West book will help you a lot. I would recommend reading it first. The book by Sklansky on 7CS for advanced players is mainly for higher limit, but it also has some interesting additional tips for lower limit(ie raising to get a free card, horse-race concept etc.)
The problem with starting with say 60 dollars is, that should you dump 30 or 40, realize that some players will figure you are on "short money" and may bluff at you. Having at least one tall stack in front of you (even 1 dollar chips), can be intimidating to many players. You must have at least 50 in front of you at all times in this game. And believe it or not, if you are playing regularly, you need a bankroll of at least a thousand. If you lose over 100 in any one session, it is time to get up and wait for the sun to come up tomorrow. And if you make over a hundred in any one session, that ain't bad, IMO. 7CS is a very difficult game. And by the way, if there is a maniac in the game, you must have him on your right, or leave the table.
My 1/5 experience is somewhat outdated, but my records indicate that I had commonly had 50$ or better swings in 1 hour sessions, in much tighter games than you are describing. I would never buy in to a 1/5 game for less than 100$, and be prepared for a 100$ rebuy if my stack got too short.
"The hands are clearly playable in a game with 6 to 8 players commonly taking the flop."
The problem with Poker Probe here is that you aren't facing 5-7 random hands. You're facing *all* the good hands that are dealt in a field of 10, plus a few more basically random hands. So these hands will do worse than it appears, since an A2 or A3 is more likely to be lurking in this field of 6-8 than in a truly random field of that size.
"But you are stubborn."
Hey, I changed my mind about KKQ2!
"You don't like A477???????"
Middle pairs in Omaha-8 are close to worthless. If you flop middle set, you put a low card on board (specifically one that significantly increases the board's straight potential), your hand is difficult to play accurately even though it sometimes will be best, and even if you did flop the best hand you are vulnerable to being outdrawn almost no matter what hits.
I may be playing too tight in loose games. I'm just not sure how much to loosen up, and am suprised to hear you and Ray Zee say that *so* many more hands are playable. I was under the impression that (1) in the loosest games you hardly changed your hand selection at all, except maybe being more likely to play a dry A3 in early position, and that (2) playable high hands *must* have all four cards connected. :)
"Feel like I'm gonna drown..."
-Juliana Hatfield
I think you misunderstood Ray. He said that maybe you could make a profit with A4xx if you had a lot of experience vs your opponents, but he felt that HE didn't have that kind of experience. He was basically saying, "If you can make a profit with that hand, you're a better player than I am, sparky."
Dan H is my offical spokesperson for the translation of my posts. thanks.
I understood him. Ray frequently mentions situations where you can loosen up slightly from HLSFAP, but doesn't take it as far as Badger.
I'm reasonably new to this game and don't understand how to play the bring in. The structure is 1 chip ante, 4 bring in and first raise to 8, 8-16 limit.
Your bring in is raised in a loose game by xxK and there are a couple other callers say a 6 and a 4. What hands now become playable for 1/2 a bet that would otherwise be mucked for a full bet. Could you continue with two low cards and a brick? A medium pair? All of it seems to lead to trouble.
The answer is probably in Ray's (excellent) book but I haven't read it all yet. Thanks for any help.
Well, offhand I'dsay that the K raiser has a pair of kings so I wouldn't want to play with a smaller pair.
It's true that the price is small to see the fourth card, but I'd still be looking for a low pair with an ace kicker or a three card low(preferably) with a hidden ace.
I , like you, am a beginer in this game and look forward to replies from Ray Z and Dan Rubenstein on this question
Two low cards and a brick is worth next to nothing, as is a medium pair in a multiway pot. Even for a half bet, you have to consider what you could catch on fourth street to make your hand worth continuing with. You want to be wary of the situation where you catch just enough to get you tied on to the hand and then get trapped in the middle for several bets on later streets with only a small chance of winning half the pot. An important point in the example you gave is that there are two other callers with low hands. If you are heads-up with the high hand, "Razz hands" are out of the question even for a half-bet, regardless of how smooth they are. The $1 ante is moderate, and does not justify chasing to half the pot. In a multiway pot, small pairs (except those with ace kickers) need to catch trips to have real strength on fourth (which is only about 5% even if your hand is totally live). Two low pair or a 3-low and a pair are quite marginal holdings on fourth that will easily lose both sides against a high raiser and multiple low opponents. So I would loosen up very little in this spot as compared to the analogous situation outside the bring-in.
I'll start playing A4xy and suited aces in loose games. Come to think of it, it's not that many hands - A2, A3, A4, 234, AA, KK, and high straight runs add up to only about 25% of the hands you're dealt.
I posted earlier on this subject and thanks for responses, they are helpful. Specifically, I am speaking of 7CS, with no ante, a $2 low card bring in, and $5 limit. On 3rd you can raise $5 to make it $7 to go. The bets do not double on 5th, but limit is $5 all the way. This is a game my girlfriend plays, so I decided to stick my neck in there to try to help her. Yikes. The structure of this game can at times seem like a no win situation to me. I am very much aware of starting hands on third. So, this is what I've come up with. This game seems like one of attempting to trap bets. That is limp in early position(no ante), then re-raise a bet from my right with hands that play best heads-up(ie big pair, or small, medium pair/overcard kicker). If everyone limps, I'm screwed with my big pair, on 4th. No option but to attempt a check-raise on 4th (bet from right) to limit field. If I ever do get heads up, I just as well slow down then, because opponent has proper odds to call, as I am usually not that big a favorite. So, bet verses someone who might run, but wait until either I improve or he doesn't on 5th and 6th. The "ante" is the $2 bets that folded for a raise on 3rd, or 4th. Make sense? Or is the structure of this game unplayable? By that I mean, with all the work and bets to get the pot heads up(I made the pot bigger on either 3rd or 4th), it is always now correct for my lone opponent to chase.
Are these games in Colorado by chance?
The zero ante, combined with the possibility of a full bet or raise, allows you to play a bit tighter on 3rd.
The ability to tailor your raise to the situation gives you a degree of control that you don't have in a structured game. You don't want to win only $2 with pocket aces, and you don't want six callers. Often you can raise an amount that will drop players to your left, but still get a call or two from players with $2 already in the pot.
The "Fundamental Theorem" states that you benefit when your opponent makes a mistake. You may also benefit when he makes the proper play. If you have someone with an under-pair trapped on 5th with a $30 pot, it may well be proper for him to call. While you'd rather he'd fold, you still will win 2 times out of 3 and are making on average about $1.66 every time he calls another $5 bet.
DJ
Thanks for response. Just lately, I've been realizing that I do not always need to bump it 5 in order to get players to fold, on third street. The max raise can get the pot to big going into 4th street. The size of my raise or check-raise is the one thing I can control in this game. I know that with this structure there is a fine line between letting players in to make a mistake, yet not having too many players. Must learn to dump fast on 4th also.
FossilMan, you are absolutely right, like I told Ray Z, I have read stuff, am reading stuff, practice on the computer, play live as often as possible, but the more time that goes by the more confused I get. For instance, when I first started playing I just hid in the bushes till showdown and won a lot of pots, some small, some big. Then I started reading and my husband started coaching me and now I'm dizzy and losing. Could it be that the wimpy style is best for SOME people? CT
There is little chance that you will be a long-term winning player without investing a lot of time learning and thinking about the game. Right now you may at a point where you've learned a bunch of new concepts, but in the heat of battle you can't figure out which of these often conflicting concepts should be applied. As such, you sit there all confused about whether you should use your late position to take a free card, or use it to try and put pressure on everyone else and steal the pot.
If this is the case, all I can say is keep thinking and learning, and it will eventually sort itself out. If it is becoming too expensive to play for money during this period, then just go and sit behind someone else. Play their hands in your head, and think about what they should do, what their opponents likely have, etc. Then, once you feel less confused about things, you'll probably be ready to do it again with your own money.
Another thing to do is to take notes on specific hands that caused you trouble, and post them here (on the correct forum, of course) for us to analyze. If you do this, be sure to write down ALL the pertinent details, including your opinion of each involved player, and all visible cards. Take a little notebook with you to the room to write down these details immediately after the hand, so you don't forget them. This type of postgame analysis may be beneficial to you.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
FM, again you are right, that's how I feel! Will take your advice, take a notebook, take a breather! You'll hear from me again with a bunch of silly questions I'm sure, meanwhile thanks! C.
I have a question regarding how far to go with a hand in 7 Card Stud. I have read both Ray's Hi/Lo book as well as the green Advanced book by Sklansky/MalMuth/Zee.
The game: 6/12 7CS; I don't recall suits on this hand. I have the bring-in ($2) with A 5/2. xx/Q calls. xx/8 calls. xx/K calls. pot: $8 + $5 antes = $14. Fourth street: me: A 5/2 4; xx/Q 6; xx/8 T; xx/KK; xx/KK opens to a double bet; I call with 4 cards to a wheel and an Ace overcard. xx/Q6 calls; xx/8,T folds. pot: $14 + $36 = $50.
1.) Is a call correct here? I figured I would be heads up and was surprised the xx/Q6 called. I remember reading in the green book that if you have an overcard to a high pair as well as other outs that it's OK to play. The 3s and Aces were live. A 5 was dead.
Fifth street: me: A 5/2 4 A; xx/Q6 3; xx/KK 8; I was concerned that one of my 3s was dead, but I had an Ace on my board and bet into the Kings, hoping to drive out the Queen.
2.) Is being the aggressor correct? Should I have checked or check/raised?
The opposite happened. The xx/Q63 called and the xx/KK8 was cursing me out loud and folded. I assumed that the Queen had two pairs.
3.) If my next cards were bricks should I still be aggressive and bet into my opponent?
My thinking is that I am representing Aces up and want him to fold. Or I could catch the 3 and make my straight or catch another pair and really have Aces up.
Thanks for your insight. Keith O
My opinion is that I would have folded on the double bet from the king. I would not put in 9 more dollars. When most low-mid limit players raise early, they usually (>50%) have what ther represent. Do you think he would have raised if you had an Ace showing?
With only 3 players, I do not believe you will get the correct odds to draw for the wheel. When the King paired his door, how did you get to bet into the King with a 2,4,A showing. Did he check? If he checked, he made a big mistake. What would you have done had he checked raised you? You lucked out here.
Off the top of my head, I believe it is correct to call or raise the K's when you have a pair and an overcard, but with a gut shot(small) straight, and an overcard? Not me. Then to compound things, the K pairs his doorcard. I would say that you were fortunate to not run into trip K's. Good luck.
"My thinking is that I am representing Aces up and want him to fold. Or I could catch the 3 and make my straight or catch another pair and really have Aces up."
If I were in the hand, the last hand I could put you on after the ace showed up is aces up. Although, I've seen stranger things before.
I would have folded on 4, and check raised on 5.
Continue to bet even with bricks.
the Q could be on a flush draw.
could you have check-raised on 5th?
were you checked to?
The Kings checked to me. I put him on kings only or two pair. However the Queen was a loose player and called me all the way to the 7th street. He was drawing to a 6 high straight and made it! The guy with kings was furious. That's when I realized he probably had trip Kings and put me on trip Aces or what? rolled up? Anyway he made me feel like a amatuer, which I am. That's why I read 2+2 and post my mistakes here. I love this game.
See ya at the tables, Keith O
On 4th you are barely getting 2:1 with your 4 very good and 3 marginal outs, your overall prospects are worse if you get an overcall by a solid player but probably about the same if called by a loose player. You may be able to justify a call if (1) The king would have raised with Ks on 3rd and probably raised with any pair on 3rd with the King door card and (2) He'll give up Ks-only when catch scary,. Unfortunately, the "A" isn't scary since it actually makes your hand, so the only scare card is a 2 (which gives you another 3 weak "outs").
I would not call on 4th with that pittence of a pot.
If the Ks checked on 5th by all means bet. Might as well bet on 6th since there is some reasonable chance he'll fold. Check only if your SURE you are beat AND the player is likely to give YOU a free card.
- Louie
The Sands in Atlantic City has a $10-$20-$30 stud game. The ante is $1, low card brings it in for $3, 4th street bets are $10, 5th street bets are $20, and 6th and 7th street bets are $30.
What adjustments should be made for this structure? For example, are more or fewer hands playable on third street? Do drawing hands go up or down in value?
Drawing hands go up in value due to the higher implied odds. More hands should be playable for the $3 bring in.
Therefore, it is crucial to raise and reraise on third street to knock out players with the type of hands that offer implied odds (big pairs and three big cards--even high three flushes like AdJd2d).
Right on Chris. I agree.
Was there ever a time when 5-card stud was offered in California Casinos?
Also, if it used to be played in casinos, why do you think it died? I can understand why 5-card draw(jacks or better)died since there are only two betting rounds, but 5-card stud has as many betting rounds as Hold'em(just one less the 7-stud). So what happened?
-Randy
It offers so little chance to draw out that the fish don't like it. I've never played it but that's the only thing I can think of.
Draw poker was the only legal game in California until about ten years ago (don't know when the law changed exactly.) 5cs has never been a popular casino game in the US because it doesn't suit limit-betting because of the sparse values and lack of drawing hands/straights/flushes.. It had been a rarity in casino play for many years for this reason. It's reputation pre-holdem was as the best big-bet and bluffing game: if Rounders had been made in 1965 they would have been playing 5cs, (and John Malkovich wouldn't have put on that ridiculous accent.)
I've got a few dozen hours into this game now and I'm losing my ass with the paint pairs. The game is very live and there is little leverage available to fold out the weak starters. This causes me to lose significantly much of the time I fail to improve. I know enough to only begin with the biggest pair, totally live and usually live kickers but the suck-out bad lows just make enough to run me down. I'm assuming this wouldn't be such a big problem in tighter games, where a 3rd St raise will fold some of the cheese.
My question boils down to this: If I simply toss these pairs am I giving up too much EV in the very loose games? My results, while only a short run, suggest I should just dump 'em. Any ideas?
While I don't really advocate this strategy, if you are really fed up consider calling and raising if 4th street is favorable.
I wonder who would follow which strategy here.
I raised the pot in a 30-60 game with an ace up and got 5 calls. On 4th I checked (aces) and the bet came from where I suspected it would come. Only one folded and I only called. Now on 5th the guy who bet previously had 3 diamonds showing with a queen for a door card. I checked, next two players (both not very good) checked, the guy with 3 diamonds and a queen for a door card bet, next one folded and it was up to me. I originally put the guy on diamonds and thought he made diamonds (he could have queens). The problem was that I saw 4 diamonds on board and I had two in a pocket for a total of 6 diamonds out that would leave him with only 4 in a deck and two of them must be in his hole cards.
Comments on how to proceed.
If memory serves and he has either a 3 flush or a pair of Queens then its 3:2 in favor of the 3 flush. This number drops drastically the more of his suit you see. I count 21 cards accounted for of which there are only 4 diamonds left and 2 queens. So he must have 2 out of 4 diamonds or 4choose2 = 4*3/2= 6 ways to have diamonds; or one of 2 queens and one of 29 other cards or 2*29=58 ways to have a pair of Queens. So its 38:6 call it 9:1 in favor of Queens (not counting other possible combinations such as pocket pairs and now he has trips).
You are a big favorite vrs this player. Looks like a good time for a raise.
- Louie
Good post but even without seeing any diamonds, I would not fold this hand.
Of course, it depends on how the player with the queen door usually plays but with 5 callers at the start for a raise, and 10 bets in the pot before the double bet on 5th, the options are call or raise,depending on how the players behind me will react. If they both fold and I get reraised, I will still probably call, depending on the player. Just calling is the cheapest but may let one of the players behind you in with a medium pair (if they are really poor players)or funny drawing hand (I just came from Hollywood Park where no one ever folds any hand in 30-60).
There are just too many possible hands for the queen door to have to warrant you folding.
What are your considerations when deciding to call the bring in, or call a raise, or raise yourself(on a semisteal) with a high, live three flush in 7 stud eight or better.
Here are four situations from the Paradise 8/16 game:
1) I have JhAh/3h ,other players show Qd 3c 7c Jd 6h (game is 6 handed at this point)
Action: 3c brings in for $4, 7c calls, Jd folds, 6h folds, I am next to act.
I am thinking that the flush is live, I have two low cards, and I have a live Ace in the hole.
What should I be thinking about doing here?
2) I have KhTh/7h, other players have 6h 6d Tc 7s Kc 5c 5s
Action: 5c brings in for $4, 5s folds I am next.
I threw this away...the hearts were live but the King and ten were not and it's a high only hand.
Suppose the hand had been AhTh/7h is it now worth a call?
3) I have 9s6s/Js others 7d 8d 2h 9c 8c Ah 4d
Action: I've already got my finger on the fold button when 2h brings in for $4, 9c,8c,Ah and 4d ALL FOLD, now I'm thinking of a steal with only two players left to act behind me (well three including the low card) is this a bad thought.
4) I have QsTs/8s others have 3h Jc 2s 4d 6h Qd 2c
Action: 2c brings in for $4, I am next to act(UNDER THE GUN)... I threw it away which was difficult for a hi studplayer like me to do, but I think it was the right decision under the gun
I was recently playing in what seemed to be a tight online 7stud/8 game. I have read Ray Zee's book, played in casino a bit and have a lot of experience with other games and poker theory in general.
I noticed that the loosest player at the table (not even very aggressive, just loose) was steadily winning money, playing rather weak holdings. He seemed to almost always back into a high winner or low winner and make slight profits, which added up after a while. I never saw him scoop a single pot.
Is this just an anomaly, or could this be valid strategy in a tight passive 7cs/8 table?
David
It's an anomaly.
Trying to back into weak 1-way hands is a recipe for disaster in 7s8. You need a hand that can readily go both ways, or a VERY strong 1-way hand to be in +EV territory.
later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Let me say that I've read Ray Zee's book on Stud/8 five or six times and am constantly reading the starting hands chapter and am seeing none of them in live action. I am on tilt.
In my limited experience, you can't possibly play tight enough in this game. This is due to what is politely referred to as 'implicit collusion' or in English, the suckout factor.
This game seems to be populated by weak loose players and a few tight good players. The loose players stay with anything and suck out and the tight players start good and know when to quit or scoop. The only hands you can play when a loose player always stays to the river are two way hands. Small three straights small three flushes and small three straight flushes. These don't come around all that often. Razz hands start to look good. You get boned.
Don't loosen up. You'll end up whining on a poker forum like me. Don't be like me.
David
Hand from a 4-8 Omaha/8 game last night. Game is the usual loose, sometimes very aggressive game with 6-9 people looking at virtually every flop. I'm in the BB with a lovely mess - 9962. No one raises, so I get a free look at the flop of 4-4-3 rainbow.
Seven people see this flop, but to my surprise, it gets checked out. Turn card is a 9! I bet out, UTG calls, and two other callers downstream. River in an off-suit 2. I bet again, and UTG raises, with the comment, " Well, I've got a low." Now this player is normally quite tight in this game, and almost never raises on low hands, so I suppose I should have tweaked to the reverse tell. Player downtable re-raises. Now at this point, I'm down to just over $20 left on the table, and yes, in retrospect, I should have proablably just called, but I capped it with the nut full. UTG of course shows me quad 4's, and the other player had the wheel.
I know the UTG player quite well, and as he's picking up his half the pot, I said to him that I could not put him on quad's on this hand, as IMO he should have bet this hand as fast as possible with the low-draw type flop. Why let the lows in free? He said that he would NEVER bet quad's on the flop in Omaha/8 because he wanted to disguise his hand. I know it cost me one additional bet at the end, but I still maintain that he played the hand poorly by not coming out betting, or at least for sure raising me on the turn to make any low limpers pay double for their draws. Thoughts from the Omaha/8 experts?
By the way, I will remember his little 'angle shot' about making a 'low' on the river. It was my own fault, I admit, falling for such an amateurish move, but that's life, I guess.
I don't think it's a terrible play to not bet quads on the flop. First, a free card allows people to make second-best high hands when they would have folded to a bet. Second, the low draws are going to call even if he bets, so he's only getting half the pot in any case. Third, by waiting until the turn you can make people call two double-sized bets at least, and possibly more. Even on the turn, he might be waiting for a card to hit that will hit more hands - a bet or raise here might only get calls from A2s. Slowplay is rarely correct in any form of Omaha, and least frequently in limit Omaha-8, but this is an instance where it's a viable option. (The game you describe seems fairly soft, and if people are calling too much at all points in the hand then slowplay is probably a mistake, since they'd call a few bets on each street anyway.)
What about slowplay on a trip flop, when you have quads and traping high pairs? Isn't that a good play in Omaha8?
with that flop and all those people in and no bet id think the words quads would pop into ones head. wouldnt someone bet trips and with all those in there, trips or better is for sure. thats the reason for checking quads. people get the free card and cant slow down when they make a big looking hand even though there are clues that it may be no good. take heart we have all done it. although with that flop and so many in, i would have bet the quads hoping to charge low draws that may miss. his comment should have set off an alarm to you.
Reply to Dunc:
Don't worry about this single event. Things like this don't happen often enough to substantially effect your longterm bankroll.
Players (including the UTG in your game) have a right to play a hand anyway they desire. Maybe UTG is a skilled player and as the ability to shift gears during the game; i.e., to prevent others from getting a good read on his style -- give him credit. Or maybe UTG's decision was a slight mental lapse by neglecting to bet the quads out immediately after the flop -- probably the next time a similar thing happens he will bet out. I think most players, when making quick decisions sometimes fail to make the better one. I think UTG made a good decision in this case.
In this case, UTG's decision to give a free turn card turned out to be profitable because he trapped somebody (you) who made a long shot fullhouse (11:1 against). If UTG bets after the flop, you probably would have checked out, assuming you are a reasonably good player at figuring out the pot odds. It it also probable that after the flop, UTG figured that low would get there because of the two babies in the flop. UTG could have bet after the flop and probably got three or four calls in this loose game (as you described). Also with the 4-4-3 flop and eight small bets already in the pot, some players(especially loose players) would have called with an overpair -- I know I have sometimes called the turn with a pair of kings with the hope of picking up a full house (with a cheap turn bet and reasonable good implied pot odds). I would not have called with a pair of aces unless I also had a A-2 wheel draw.
UTG's mentioning that he had a low on the river is a venial sin which is committed on a regular basis in some or many omaha hilo 8 games. A slightly better uttering would have been "low got there"; or best yet -- UTG should not have said anything at all. You implied that UTG did not have a low in this hand in question ; but before the fact -- he could have had a very weak low in addition to his quads but still he should have shut up.
If low didn't get there on the river, you still bet out and get raised. In this case, UTG wins the whole pot, and much more than splitting the pot with the wheel. Raising on the turn would probably have not caused the wheel draw to drop, and caused you to be circumspect the river.
Lets face it -- you got trapped with no wayout no matter how the hand was played after the turn, no big deal. Shut out any negative thoughts and play the next hand as best as you can. Have fun.
A few days ago I was in a game and the following situation occurred:
A really loose action player(having the kill button) raised preflop in a 3-6 game and got six callers. Three aces flopped giving the killer four aces. The killer with the four aces checked. This is a cardinal sin in Omaha HiLo8. The turn was an eight and the killer got three callers. THe killer was lucky for the river was a nine. All average or better Omaha8 players never open the door for another player to make a runner-runner low in a big pot in a situation like this.
Error fix: When holding a pair in Omaha8 with a different pair flopping -- the odds of making a making a set to your pair (full house on the turn) is two changes out of 45; or odds of 21.5:1 (against making).
Im my previous reply -- I was wrong in quoting 11:1
Thanks for the comments. The incident doesn't bother me in the sense that my full house got beat. Those things happen, and I have been on both ends enough to know. When this guy was nattering on about how crazy I must have been to even think about betting out on that flop, it just got me to thinking, "Was he right?"
My own instincts about the game and the texture of the people in it indicated to me that slowplaying in this instance is weak and foolish, not necessarily in that order. From the comments on the forum, I think I was right. No big deal to me if he wants to leave a ton of money on the table. I was P.O.'d though with his angle shot. I'll remember it.
I recently read where Kentucky Hold'em and Mexican poker are being offered in some California casinos. Can anyone briefly explain how they are played? Any strategy to play by? Thanks
Big John plays regularly in the Bike game. He'll get here eventually. Look up his e-mail in the archives and ask him directly.
i mainly play in 1 to 3 or 5 games...usually with a bankroll of 100. i am finding it difficult to play even with a decent hand because half of the table is chasers. what can i do?? i find that i am playing tighter...and not playing hands that i probably should play because of the fear of one of them catching...here is a situation...i have a small pair pocketed with a big kicker...i only played the hand to fifth street...the kicker was live....what should i have done??
Anthony, loose games with a lot of chasers can be profitable, but you have to adapt. Good draws go up in value and pairs go down in value, especially as you have less ability to control how many players will be in the pot. Try throwing away small pairs and medium pairs if there are several overcards behind you. Play agressively with Aces and Kings. Also play straight and flush draws (even low ones) when you can get in unraised and you have live cards.
DJ
Hi Anthony,
The game you describe sounds like a good game. Take DJ's advice and one other thing. $100 bankroll is way to small. It sounds like you're on tilt before you even buy into the game because of limited funds. Gather up about $500 and see how much easier it becomes to make those guys PAY to chase.
Fred M.
IN the situation you describe folding the unimproved small pair/live kicker on fifth street is reasonable. You've missed twice--no need to push the hand forever. Note that in most 7 stud games if you play on fifth street you are usually committed to the river.
The players against you who continually chase are your main source of profit in this game. Just remember that your hands won't hold up as often; as compensation, the pots you do win will be big.
It sounds like $100 is too small a bankroll for this sort of game.
If you have a small pocket pair with a big kicker, you can readily call the $1 bring-in in these games. However, if you catch a blank on 4th street, then be prepared to fold if the maximum bet is made. If you aren't starting with the best hand, then you really only want to call the $1 in these games, and fold to any raises.
As mentioned by others, be more inclined to play drawing hands, especially for $1. If you start with Jh9h8d, with all the tens live, then this is an easy call for $1. If you catch anything other than a T, be prepared to toss it.
Also, all of my advice goes out the window if there is frequent raising/reraising on 3rd street. In that case, you're in a very profitable game that is beaten by simply being more patient than everyone else. Since this is a no-ante game, you can sit back and wait for very little money. If 3 or more people are putting in multiple bets early, you can wait for times when you likely have the biggest pair, or are rolled-up to play.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
in these games how aggresive should i be?? i think my shyness to stay in started a couple of weeks ago when i lost a big pot with fives full of kings. the hand was down to me and one chaser...which i had right where i wanted him....he was calling my raises and he ended up filling up on the river. since then i have been much more careful about playing decent hands with the thought of losing another big pot to someone chasing. since then i have lost almost daily...how should i change to adapt to this?
First, $100 is enough to start. Play good starting cards. You can play a live medium pair if you have a good kicker and ALL your cards are live. Slow play big pair if it is highest card on board and is LIVE. Don't bother with low straights. Forget flushes if there are 3 of your suit out. Stud is about LIVE cards. Holdem is about HIGH cards. Trap the limpers and calling stations. Be patient. I stopped playing 1-3 and 1-5 only because they were too slow. I made money in them 75% of the time.
Anthony: I need to know if there is an ante in your game, and what the bring in bet is. This makes a difference as to how to play your hands on 3rd street.
there is no ante and the bring in is $1.
Anthony: I can tell you that even though this is low limit, it can be a very difficult game to beat, even harder to beat than higher limits. I really would recommend Roy West's book, and after studying it a couple of monthes, Sklansky's book on 7CS for Advanced Players adds several other interesting and unique principles for this game. And read the books in the order I listed. I've played many poker games, and various limits(old pro that I am, haha), but the low limit 7CS is as complex as it gets, IMO. But that is the fun part.
P.S. These books will give you a good idea of what to play on 3rd street and what not to play, how to "narrow the field", trapping opponent's bets, how long to continue with a draw, when to dump hands etc. Learn 3rd street first, as it is the most important street to learn.
I would appreciate advice regarding when/whether it is profitable to call a single preflop bet with hands containing three coordinated big cards and one nearly worthless card (e.g., 2-J-Q-K, A-K-K-9, A-K-Q-8), assuming: 1) there is little risk of a preflop raise, and 2) your post-flop play is considerably better thanm that of most of your opponents (i.e., you don't chase with inadequate odds/draws). Would a suited ace in the above hands make it worth a call? What if the hands were double-suited? Thanks!
Oops, I reversed the Name and Subject fields in my original post.
Given that an Omaha hand contain six two-card combinations, the presence of a useless card kills three of those combinations (AKQ2=AK, AQ, KQ, A2, K2, Q2). My criterion for playing an Omaha hand is that I must have at least four reasonable HoldEm hands contained in my four cards/six two-card combos. Therefore the "one useless card" hands are unplayable in my methods. It seems to be a good policy as far as my own results go. (note that the if the "useless card" is suited with anything but an Ace it is still useless; i.e., I don't play Kx or Qx suited in holdem so that combination I consider worthless in Omaha as well).
The AKQ2 is very playable in Omaha/8. Not so hot in Omaha/high.
Those hands are vastly different than one another. AKK9 actually isn't a bad hand, and is a good hand if the ace is suited. I would usually play this hand even without the ace suited. AKQ8 with a suited ace might be profitable in the rarest cases. (If the 8 was a 4 or a 9, you have a much better hand) You would have to get in for one bet, in good position, in a totally loose-passive game to play this hand. KQJ2 is probably never profitable in any game in any situation, and I might not even play it in the small blind. Think in terms of what potential a hand has to make the nuts and have redraws instead of looking for connections. 9s9h8s8h seems very connected to me, but it's close to the worst possible hand!
assuming your parameters- the akk9 hand is certainly playable and a money maker. the others are junk. with a suited ace i start to see value against the players you are talking about. remember that when you can only win one side of the pot if a low is possible then all one way hands go way down in value. and high hands that are crippled go down on top of that. good luck.
There appears to be agreement that AKK9 is playable. Where would you draw the line with this type of hand: KKQ5, AQQ8, KQQ5, AJJ7? I would imagine these hands are better when there is a good chance you can get head-up by raising...but such opportunities are rare in low-limit games.
Thanks!
A SURVIVAL KIT FOR EVERY DAY OMAHA HI LO 8 PLAYERS
Items Needed: Toothpick
Rubber Band
Band Aid
Pencil
Eraser
Chewing Gum
Mint
Candy Kiss
Tea Bag
Why???
1) TOOTHPICK - to remind you to pick out the good qualities in others: good players, who by emulating their style you can improve your game.
2) RUBBER BAND - to remind you to be flexible, things might not always go the way you want, but it will work out in the long run.
3) BAND AID - to remind you to heal hurt feelings, yours or someone else's; and don't let a bad beat or being check raised bother you.
4) PENCIL - to remind you to list your blessings everyday -- especially on days when you have a big win.
5) ERASER - To remind you that everyone makes mistakes, and its OK for you to misplay a hand now and then. Be easy on yourself.
6) CHEWING GUM - to remind you to stick with it and you can accomplish anything -- another day another deck.
7) MINT - to remind you that you are worth a mint and maybe the other players are worth a small mint to you.
8) CANDY KISS - to remind you that everyone needs a a few wins or a big pot now and then. Kiss off a loss by saying, " Nice hand or nice play to the winner."
9) TEA BAG - to remind you to relax daily and reflect on all the positive things in your life -- always enjoy the game -- win or lose. Especially when you win.
A verbal wound is as bad as a physical one; be courteous at the table.
Friendly fellow Omaha 8 are a very rare jewel, indeed. They make you smile and encourage you to succeed. They lend an ear, share a word of praise and they always open their hearts to us. Except sometimes when you raise with the nut low and they get quartered, but remember to let them know that a quarter is better than no share. Show your friends how much you care but still check raise them on occasion. Let them know that poker is poker -- it is the spirit of the game that counts.
Carl William James:
Friendly fellow Omaha 8 are a very rare jewel, indeed.
Great post. Unfortunately, I have to agree with you that friendly Omaha players seem to be hard to find at times. I'm certainly tired of hearing stud players complaining about the bad table manners of flop game players, but I'm afraid that there's at least some basis for their perception.
SOME basis.. Hell, I could write a dissertation on the bad manners you find in most O8 games :). Seriously, I've always maintained that O8 players are the meanest, most spiteful and small minded people you can ever hope to run across. I mentioned this about a year ago and got some heat from some of our fellow posters, but I'm still sticking to it. If you're looking at the turn card in a HE game and you hear a fight erupt at a table behind you I'll bet you donuts to holes that the rumble is taking place at a 2-4 O8 game, where some clown is screaming about getting quartered in a 44$ pot.
GD:
Seriously, I've always maintained that O8 players are the meanest, most spiteful and small minded people you can ever hope to run across
I would prefer to phrase it slightly differently: you are more likely to run across such people at the O/8 table than anywhere else in the poker room. I've found most O/8 players to be decent enough people, but for some reason I have never quite been able to put my finger on, low limit O/8 seems to be a magnet for the biggest a******s in the cardroom.
Fortunately, their play is usually at least as bad as their manners, which is probably why the rest of us put up with it.
Remember, O/8 has not been called the slot machine of poker for nothing.
I need just a little bit of an explanation on page 125, throwing fast balls. Thanks.
Looks like this is the gist: The opponent catches the ace on 4. If it hits his hand, so that he now has aces up, and you keep betting when he checks on 4 and 5, he'll often check-raise you on 5. The small bet on 4 and the two bets on 5 mean a cost to you of two and a half big bets. On the other hand, if you check along on 4, then he will probably bet on 5. When you call you have now gotten to 6th st. at a cost of one big bet versus the two and a half it cost you before.
Then they go on to point out that if he only has one pair smaller than yours this play only costs you a fraction of a bet (talking in terms of expectation here), while if he has nothing you have induced a bluff. Is that any help?
Yes. I was having a little trouble deciphering the bets and half-bets. It appears that one must have respect for that overcard to your pair if you are up against a good player or a tricky player, who has the patience to check a hand twice, and let the opponent bet into him.
Man, do I need advice today. Played some simple 5-10 7CS last night. Got hammered. The game was tight passive (ugh) I do ot think anyone even spoke. All rocks except one dude to my right who called me every hand and hit on the river every time. I never saw a person get raised on 4th st by a paired door card (me) only to keep calling and catch a straight on the river so often. Fortunately (in a way) they were so passive no one even raised except for me. I really believe only the house made money. No one broke a bill in 4 hrs. No one had a rack full. No pots over $120. Almost all hands were heads up or 2-3 callers. What a shitty game.
So, my question.....How does one approach playing in a tight passive game
With a .50 ante, stealing can still be profitable at a table like this, especially since weak-tight players fold too easily on fourth and fifth when they are defending against your steal. When there's no raising on third a lot of hands will be playable for just the bring-in, although a 10% to $4 rake will make some marginal plays unprofitable. Be *much* more inclined to semibluff when you are against opponents like these who make terrible folds on later streets. Weak-tight games can be very lucrative for an aggressive player. When dealing with players who rarely raise, give more respect to their raises. Tend to keep out of raised pots with drawing hands since the ante is small and its unlikely you'll get multiway action. Or just look for another 5-10 game - in East Coast cardrooms at least the general pattern in 5-10 is loose-passive on third, weak-tight on later streets, and if your particular game isn't like that there should be plenty around that are. Also consider moving up to 10-20, where the rake is less of a factor and the play is more like "real stud."
Thanks for the quick response. My steeling antes is the only thing that kept me from loosing a lot. I had some bad cards too. I lost about $100 in 5 hrs. It could have been much worse. I won most (80%)of the steals with the highest card showing in goo dposition with a raise, but the limpers who "wanted to keep me honest" were a pain in the ass. All in crap.
The 10-20 no smoke games were filled up. the smoking games were nice, but the smoke is too much for me. The Trop was crowded and I did not feel like going to the Taj. I'll try tonight. TY for the reinforcement.
If someone calls you while you're on an ante steal, don't push the hand on 4th. Also, if you raise on third and get callers, don't push the hand. Wait till either you improve or they do not. They started on third with good hands. If you do make a hand, bet out as they will call you to the end with a big pair. Had the game been aggressive, it could have been much worse heh?
You make an excellent point. I realized that and decided to put that into practice. I ran into another tight passive games last night while waiting for a pot limit holdem (1-3 blinds). I waited 4 hrs and played patiently. Results in the 7CS were good but not much (+$95 in 3hrs). I never went to the pot limit. It is very popular--maybe tonight.
Pot-limit holdem at the Trop?
When does the game go, what is the buy-in, and what are the stack sizes like?
Find another game.
Or...Semi-bluff more, value bet less. Call a lot for the dollar in hopes of stealing later on if your hand doesn't improve.
6-12 o8 game.
I limped in late(r) position with a-2-2-10 rainbow after two people limped in front of me. One person came after me and both blinds called.
Flop came 863 of mixed suits. It was checked to me I bet four callers. Turn was a ten, big blind bets (worst player in the game) one caller to my right I just call (not wanting to knock out worse lows) guy to my left raises, big blind raises, other caller drops, and I cap it.
My thinking here was that I could quarter two straights with the nut low, because with my holding two deuces and an ace, there are considerably fewer combinations of A-2 left out there. I sort of felt good about all the action on the turn, whereas normally with the naked a-2 I begin to wonder.
Is my cap appropriate?
Chris - Yes. Good bet.
Since someone probably already has a straight (with 9-7) your prospects for winning are pretty much restricted to low.
In addition, considering the betting, it seems like you very well might quartered for low. But if only one player has A-2, then as long as there are four players you won't lose by getting quartered (although you won't win much either). However, you may not get quartered here.
Both the big blind and the guy to your left easily could have 9-7 (for the straight) plus a re-draw to a better straight or a re-draw to a full house (or a re-draw to a flush - you didn't mention the suitedness of the ten). The fourth player (the one who is not raising after the turn) could have something like A-4-5-X or even something like A-4-6-8 (or worse). Thus it's possible no one else has A-2.
There are only five cards you don't want to see on the river, A-A-A-2-2, and 30 cards that don't hurt you on the river (anything else). Thus it's six to one that you'll like the river card.
If you started with nine opponents, the chance that another of them also held A-2 in this situation (you have A-2-2) is about 25%, down from Hansen’s "about 35%." However, considering the betting it is more likely that someone actually has A-2 (although it's not guaranteed). Let's say it's 50% that someone else has A-2.
You risked $12 to cap it. If it's fifty-fifty that you get quartered, and if no ace or two comes on the river, you will win $12 three times in seven and break even three times in seven. If an ace or a two comes on the river, you will lose the $12 one time in seven. Thus, if the odds are 50-50 that you get quartered, your cap will earn you 36/7 - 12/7 = 24/7, about $3.43 over the long haul. If you don’t get quartered, your cap will earn you 72/7 - 12/7 = 60/7, $8.57 over the long haul.
Good bet.
Buzz
It probably doesn't matter what you did here. Low-limit O/8 players don't normally jam on the turn unless they have the nuts (one way or the other) and plan to reraise. Therefore it's probably safe to assume that the original raiser would have reraised.
About a year ago I saw the following hand at the Horseshoe in Vegas(I'd just cashed out from a 4-8 game). Scotty Nguyen and some Texan were playing head's up potlimit triple draw lowball. Don't know the size of the blinds but they had pretty big stacks of chips. It looked like there was at least $60,000 at the table.
The texan brings it in for $600 or so. Scotty calls. Texan draws two, Scotty stands pat. After the draw the texan bets $1200 or so. Scotty raises the pot (about $5000). The texan calls and doesn't draw. Scotty draws five! I just shook my head and went home. So I don't know how that hand turned out.
No point to this post, just something I witnessed that makes me laugh when I think about it. Thought fellow posters would enjoy the story.
chris
Years ago in Houston--
Player A bets 200, Player B calls. Player B draws 1, Player A stands pat. Player A bets 400, Player B calls. Player B draws 1, Player A stands pat. Player A bets 1200, Player B calls. Player B draws 1, Player A stands pat. Player A bets 2000 and all in, Player B folds.
Player B: "I drew three times and paired three times!"
Player A, turning over his hand: "Do you think I'm gonna to be dealt four jacks and break them up?"
What sort of hands can you call one raise in stud 8 when you are already in for the bring in?
Small pairs with a small kicker?
A2s with an off suit brick?
I realize that many factors go into the equation here. Was it an Ace that raised? If so you probably need a legitimate hand to defend, except if this player always raises an ace in late position. What position did the raise come from? Early raises with low cards/Aces yet to act are usually not steals and need to be given respect. The usual 'liveness' of your hand is also obviously important.
How about when a picture raises? It would seem you can defend pretty aggressively, especially since you will have position unless you catch bad, in which case you'll be mucking soon anyway.
Any thoughts?
Danny
Check a little further down the forum.
I didn't want to lose other players, in case the other A-2 was out there. The bettor in front of me almost certainly had the straight, because when he bet, he had a good hand, when he checked, he had a mediocre hand, and when he raised, he had a great hand--he was totally predictable in that way.
What your saying is that I should try to lose other players here? Because an ace or deuce might come to counterfeit me? Or because the original bettor might have a-2 and I might hit another ten to get the best high?
I play about one hand in 5 or 6 outside the blinds. Is this about right or do I need to loosen up?
I think that's about right...I feel like I play even fewer hands than that, but I think that's the boredom skewing my perception...
~DjTj
It's pretty hard to play too tight in an full Omaha/8 game. However, you can be playing tight and be playing the wrong mix of hands. So perhaps a better way to figure out where you stand is to post some of the hands you have doubts about.
In my experience, if you 'feel' like you're playing one hand every five or six you're probably playing more than that. Your perception of how many hands you play will be skewed by the long dry runs. My 'feeling' is that I play more like one hand in ten, but I know it's more than that.
I haven't played that often in the casino, but in a passive game, I would see a lot more flops than one in ten, or even one in five, probably between 30-45% if the other players are very weak and the preflop betting is not aggressive. Don't you want to see a lot of flops if you have the ability to fold after the flop?
Not that many. I'll loosen up somewhat in a soft game, but there just aren't that many profitable Omaha/8 hands.
Under what parameter conditions(other than the blinds[s]) would solid OM8 players require to see the flop with Ax suited? In general, what other attributes(minimum requirements)should be there to see the flop. Parameters being things like: game quality, position, number of players already calling to see the flop....
On some days(in late position and being slightly bored), I have called the flop with A4 or A5 suited, and essentially never made a winning hand or a good draw.
But on other occasions, I almost cry with I could have scooped a relatively hugh pot with Ax suited(which I did not play). My guess is almost all Omaha 8 players face this dilemma.
Big difference between A4s and, say, A7s. The A4s has a shot at a low, especially if you wind up heads-up or 3-ways against a couple of guys with a high. And once in a while you get those huge flops with A4s that give you a chance to sweep against a big field.
The cardinal rule of Omaha/8 is never play hands that can only win half a pot. Suited Aces without a wheel card in your hand only win the whole pot when no low comes in. So you have to degrade them in value quite a bit compared to Omaha high or Holdem.
In Omaha High, having a suited ace in your hand usually makes it playable, unless the other three cards are total junk, and even then the hand is playable in the softest games. In Omaha/8, you need quite a bit of other strength with your other 3 cards.
In loose low limit O/8 games a suited Ace with no chance for low should be downgraded drastically because about a third of the time the flush is made with a paired board and a full house is present.
Well in 23 orbits I played 38 hands outside the blinds (I counted). I think this was between every 5 and 6 hands because the game was not always full, but was never less than 7 players. Now this is not a large sample size but it seemed I was playing hands at about the same frequency I always do.
I should have posted my main question first. Hands that can win only high, are they always worth playing? I tend to throw away AKJT unsuited, or even if JT is suited, unless I'm in late position w/ no raise. Should I adjust this? Also, I assume A2 suited is playable from anywhere, even against a raise? Is this right? I'm just looking to hone my pre-flop selection. Post flop play is usually obvious.
I think playing high cards is fine. A hand like AKJ10 is not playing for just half the pot because most times that hand makes a good hand there is no low. Nobody wants to play for just half but remember that the pots will be much larger for the high hand if there is a scoop. When the board shows J23210 and youi hold a pair of jacks, you will scoop a giant pot.
You should definitely be playing or raising with AKJT. I will let Badger elaborate. (-:
With the simple point count method for starting hands that I have been EXPERIMENTING with, AKJT unsuited would get 18 points where 25 points are needed to "qualify". Therefore, it is not playable and may explain why I never seem to rake in chips when I play "any four card over nine or higher".
If the Ace is suited in AKJT the hand rates 28 points but gets only 22 points if any of the other cards are suited.
I am also starting to doubt the value of a weak A2, say A29J. We all know how easy it is for that unprotected A2 to get quartered or spiked.
Whoever invented O8 should be drawn (out on) and quartered (with the nut low).
Ok, 20% or less of your starting hands are playable? Sounds about right to me. Of course I have seen some players play far, far more than that and do ok, but the varience for that style of play is enormous. Even playing tight, it's still big.
I think the correct play when you flop top set is to fold at the first opportunity, no? Same if you flop the nut low. Only drawing hands can win (unless I hold them, of course). Can you tell I just had a really bad session?
which of these hands is the lowest ?
7,6,5,2,A or 7,6,4,3,2
I had the hand with the ace, and i didn't get the low.
I'm ashamed to admit that i don't know why.
Thanks.
Lows are counted from the top card down.
Someone posted earlier that a good way to look at it was by just ordering it top-down and looking at the numbers.
76,521 > 76,432
Therefore, your hand was higher and thus lost.
~DjTj
I understand your point--usually with A-2 I worry about being counterfeited or getting quartered, and I wanted extra bodies in the hand to insure that even if I got quartered, I would still make or not lose too much money.
However, better to get quartered and lose a little money than not raise, have an Ace hit on the river, and get chopped up by a crappy low and a straight.
Isn't it sometimes correct with A-2 to let other people in (i.e. to not raise?) If you know you are only going to get half the pot or less and thus want to make sure that your half is sizeable?
I am predominately a hold-em and stud player. A few of the cardrooms I play in also offer omaha (which I enjoy, but often it bores me). Now some are starting to offer pineapple and crazy pineapple.
For those who don't know, this game is structured like hold-em (or more appropriately, tahoe). You get three cards in your hand. There is a five card flop.
There are two variations. The first(regular pineapple), requires you to discard one card from your hand before the flop. The second (crazy pineapple) requires you to discard one card from your hand after the flop. In both cases, the discard occurs after the betting round.
I have read no theory regarding these games, so I feel like I'm applying my hold-em and omaha skills. It tends to work, but I'm wondering what people think of starting requirements and strategies for these games.
Soon they will be spreading lamebrains pete and anaconda
From my experience with home games, the freakier the game, the more advantage a better player normally has. I've seen games where one concept gives you a complete freeroll (Chicago, 7-27), or where a minimal strategy gives a huge return (Anaconda, Guts). Very few of these games are crapshoots, and split-pot games are usually the best of all. I'm not familiar with Crazy Pineapple High/Low, but it seems like there's a lot of potential to destroy loose players in that game.
Pineapple was the #1 game in Washington for quite a long while. Roy Cooke probably grew up on it. Here's a short starting hand strategy guide. Like Omaha, A2, A3 are always playable in reasonably loose games. A4 and 23 can be played late. All other low cards are for the mooks only.
For high hands you need to take your holdem starting guide and play only the top 1/6 of the hands for each position. Early position should be AA, KK, QQ and AKs. Late position pairs down to 99 (88 helps the low when you hit), AK + AQ, Suited aces and paints to maybe QJ.
There's at least on book on the game by Payne. It's ok but he's really tight.
Aces are more key in this game than most. You need to start with three cards that work well together, similar to Omaha8. In my opinion, middle pairs up to jacks are trouble if you don't flop trips. I would much rather start with something like AJ5 with suited A than a pair of J's. I don't play two suited paint cards unless one of them is an A or if I have another paint card like QKJ to increase the possibility of a straight.
You're playing crazy, not me.
If the game is pretty loose, which it probably is, you should think of it more like Omaha even though it seems like holdem. Having AA is good, but hands that make draws at the nuts are almost as good. Suited aces, or runs for straights, can be very profitable.
;-)
Yeah, as I was pressing 'Post' I knew that was too strong. After all, every hand you play is a potential sweeper.
Ah yes. If you play too fast, you run the risk of making hand reading errors due to the blue-shift of hearts and diamonds, making you think they are clubs and spades. Time charges will also kill you due to the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction, making 1 subjective hour longer in the reference frame of the 'house'.
Hi,
I'll be playing in some short-handed home games (4-5 players) with newish players. What games are the most fun/interesting for small groups?
Thanks,
Marc
If you like hi-lo, with 3 or 4 players, a game called zeda is perfect. It is stud 8 or better with only one winner. If there is a low, the best low wins the entire pot, if no 8 low, high wins the entire pot. This is especially exciting with 4 or less players.
Or, you could try a game of In/out. Each player antes a set amount and gets 5 cards. You verbally declare in/out in order. There are 3 community cards that can be used by players that declare "in" but they are not turned over until after declarations. The losers match the pot with the winner taking all the proceeds and the pot remaining the original size, thus players are encouraged to play if others are in. The game continues until only one player enters a pot. This can be played high or low, with high being a little bit more interesting.
Hi Marc, I've got two suggestions: 1) A group I played with called this "Low Todd" after a guy who played it often. It is 5-stud Hi Low, no qualifier for low, and the first 2 dards are dealt face down, each player choosing which to keep as a hole card and turning the other. We played with a pair of Aces being both high and low if all hands at the showdown are paired. 2) 7-Stud High-low with 8 qualifier for low and trips qualifier for high. If there is a qualifying hand for both high and low, the pot is plit. If there is a qualifying hand for neither, the pot is split between the best high and the best low. If there is one qualifying hand (high or low) it sweeps the pot.
Both of these tend to draw a lot of action. Split pots in a short game tend to keep the money evenly spread around the table - good for home games.
Don
I'm in what I consider to be a very good $4/$8 hilo stud game on Paradise Poker. I've made about 190 in an hour at the "table", with some good luck as well as fishy opponents.
I'm dealt (7s 8s) 6d.
2h, a very loose player, brings it in for the full $4. The Jh, also loose, calls. 4d and Td fold, I call, Qc folds, Qs calls, not as loose but definitely weak.
4th street: Opp 1:QsQh bet Bring-in: 2h3c call Opp 3: JhAh call Me: (7s8s)6d9d
I don't like the paired doorcard, but one Q is dead, I can still back into a low plus I'm open ended and noone else is showing aggression. I call.
5th street: Opp 1: QsQhJc Opp 2: 2h3c5d Opp 3: JhAh3d Me: (7s8s)6d9d5c
Queens bet, opponent 2 calls, opponent 3 fold and I raise, queens 3 bet and bring in caps it. Now I figure I'm out lowed and the guy with queens must have the three queens even though one was folded. I get stubborn and call.
Is this a mistake in general? What about knowing that the queens player is very loose and would call with Q23 or KJQ or Q22? And that they would probably raise if they started with queens? These are the sorts of things I'm not fully sure of at stud/8 currently.
6th street: Opp1: QsQhJc8c bet, call Opp 2: 2h3c5d2s raise Me: (7s8s)6d9d5cKs call
I'll leave the rest for later, comments appreciated.
David
678 is not a great hand and definitely shouldn't be played for a full bet.
Once you've played it, you're basically sucked in once you catch good and there really isn't much to do but keep calling - you probably can't fold unless you know the players very well, which is hard to do online.
~DjTj
Actually, Ray Zee mentions 678 specifically as a playable hand in his book. I'm not saying it was great here, and quite possibly should have been mucked at some point, but...
Hmm...I've really got to get my own copy of that book so I know these things - it just seems like that's a hand you want to see another card for if it is cheap, but not for a full bet, which halves your implied odds.
Anyhow, it is a pretty rare situation you got yourself in and you just got screwed over -you can't really help that.
~DjTj
I caught a T on the river, giving me a slightly higher straight ;). It got capped, I called the whole way. Player with open queens had started with KQJ, made Queens and Jacks, and hit his 2 outer on the river to fill up.
You should've folded every step of the way here. 876 non-all-suited is garbage at any form of stud, esp. for a full bet, except for maybe in very specific high ante situations.
On 4th it's apparent that you'll be doing well to get half the(small)pot, and that even if you make your hand, your opponent is drawing for a much stronger hand, classic reverse implied odds situation.
From 5th on you're cold calling double big bets in this same R.I.O. situation, but it's gotten much worse now that it's only three-handed and you have no chance to scoop; the low could even backdoor a flush. I don't have the sad genius poker probe, but I'd like to see the numbers here. 10s, 9s, 8s, and 7s suck at stud hi-lo.
Folding was the play at every juncture here.
A note about my decision to play on 3rd street:
I am playing against only the bring in and a jack so far, with only 2 queens left to act. I really think in retrospect that I should have raised. The bring in could easily have a high card down, and I'd be the only one going low with a hand that also has possibilities of scooping. My cards are basically all live. And, as I mentioned above, Ray Zee specifically mentions 678 as being a playable hand in the right situation, which I think this is.
You're right; you should've raised. I thought you had the 8 up, not the 6. Then when he catches the 3 and you the 9 and the other guys get the paired Q and the suited A, you're done.
I'm sure that Ray (and David, Mason, Doyle and Ciaffone) also writes about drawing at a straight for half the pot against a flush draw and a full house draw... :)
I KNOW (I've got the book, too) that he wrote about 7-Stud hi-lo being a game of strong boards and getting out of poor e.v. hands cheap and early, esp. when your opponents catch perfect, i.e. 2-3 or a suited Ace, and you don't; 6-9 is a trap in this situation. Your board sucked from 4th on, and you dumped 5-7 big bets when you should've only lost one.
Well, I'm not saying I shouldn't have folded, that's why I posted. :) I just wanted to discuss a little more than "678 is bad" :)
Easy call on 3rd with 678. All your cards are pretty live…fives thru nines and spades...only one 4 dead only 2 other low cards out.
On 4th, another easy call. Two observations:
At this point I do not think it likely that QQ has another...one dead and probably would have raised last to act with highest upcard. Players are generally consistent in how they play this though.
When the 23 does not raise on 4th, my guess is that he is not on a wheel draw (why would he not raise with four to a low with the hands out against him...69d, AJh and QQ). If he reduces the field to two or three the likelihood of his scooping is much higher. My guess is that he paired the 3 or has a pair in hole. If he is a wildman, these thoughts may not cross his mind though :).
On 5th, your raise (i think) pretty clearly defines your hand...so the betting sequence is pretty scary. My money is still on QQ having two pair though, mistakenly reading you as something like A2 and not respecting #2. And that gets us to the elusive #2...again, why did he not raise there with his awesome board...and then why did he cap it?
I would cautiously call the raises. You are (i feel) still in the lead for high and you still may have low outs.
On 6th, I'm starting to think there is trouble with #2...he may have filled up here (55 or 23) or even have quads (which would be consistent with his slow playing on 3rd and 4th). QQ is drawing at 2 or 3 live cards to fill up. If #2 is high, you still have low outs...tough situation. $224 in pot, $32 to you with the potential for $192 more.
I think you call the $32, hope QQ realizes he may be behind on the high and call, hope to catch a low card at the end and play the river. If it is capped again on 6th or if you draw a blank on the river, you have to consider dropping...really depends on your read of the players.
Very interesting hand though...thanks!
Is DeadBart your handle on PP?
Chuck
Well, someone has faith in my play at least. :) I'm still not sure, the fact that my opponent put in so much money on a 2 outer and hit makes me think I had a good read on having to call him down, but this time it didn't work out...
No, my name is not DeadBart on Paradise, but if you know where Cornell is I shouldn't be too hard to find...
David
I raise on third street. From 4th street on I'm maybe calling, and definitely not calling raises. You're playing for half the pot here.
I definitely fold when the Q's three bet it. You've already raised into his bet with your 569. He has to know you're not raising a low hand: the other guy has 235 showing.
If I'm the 235 why would I want to play this hand fast? I have two other guys with obvious high hands ramming at each other. Why would I want to drive them out?
The low hand must have either had a weak low and wanted to keep me from drawing into a 6 low, or a low with a wheel draw, I would think. I _should_ be able to tell you but I accidentally deleted the hand summary.
I thought the discussion entitled 'Getting heads-up with a bigger pair in 7cs' was quite useful and I would like to start a discussion about another recommendation in SCSFAP: namely that if you raise with a pair on 3rd street and are reraised by an obvious larger pocket pair, that it is ok to play, because your opponent can't make two pair (except on the river) without you knowing it.
I am not convinced that there is that there is a significant difference between playing against a pocket pair and playing against a split pair. I say this because: 1) the exception about the river is quite important: hands that start with one pair and end up with exactly two pair will have made that second pair on the river 40% of the time; 2) half the time that a split pair hand makes a second pair before the river, that second pair will be an open pair; and 3) a second pair will only be made half the time. When you add this up, about 85% of the time, the two situations seem to play the same.
But even the remaining 15% is not clearly different as a pocket pair hand can make hidden trips (about 2/3 as often as a split pair hand makes a hidden two pair). And hidden trips are more dangerous than a hidden two pair, as you frequently will have absolutely no outs.
Hi Will, I agree that this is a good topic for discussion as pair agaist pair comes up so often.
Some observations: >>it is ok to play, because your opponent can't make two pair (except on the river) without you knowing it>> The question here is how much dead money is in the pot. If there's no ante and no otherscallers before your raise or after, you probably want to wait till the next hand. If there is an ante and it's structured so the bet is only one-half of a full bet and the pot is larger, you can call, or even reraise to make sure it's heads up if necessary.
>> I am not convinced that there is that there is a significant difference between playing against a pocket pair and playing against a split pair>> The advantage here is that when the other guy makes his second pair early, you get out more cheaply. When you make a 2nd pair and he doesn't, he calls to the river.
>> a pocket pair hand can make hidden trips (about 2/3 as often as a split pair hand makes a hidden two pair). And hidden trips are more dangerous than a hidden two pair.>> Assuming that your original raise was with TT or JJ or QQ, AND you are watching dead cards, you should have a pretty good idea when your opponent makes trips.
DJ
What are you doing with this hand in a multiway pot against a pair of aces?
That said, you definitely want to keep playing if your opponent has only a pair of aces, while you definitely want to fold if he's already made his two pair. So my answer is... it depends... on whether you know he would keep betting with only the aces or whether he requires two pair to keep pushing it.
On the other hand, if the pot started out super multiway, your statement that your 2s are live on 5th street implies not only a huge pot, but that you have seen maybe 15-20 cards exposed which were not your 2s, thereby significantly improving your chances of making trips by the river. So I can imagine a situation where you might want to chase with only an underpair, but I'd be a lot more comfortable if all my opponent's cards were dead.
You are about a 2 to 1 underdog on this hand. In a 5-10 game, you could lose 30 more. You will win 30 once and lose 30 twice for a net loss of 30. So there must be 30 in the pot, before he bets just to break even. Counting his 10 bet on 5th then, you need about 4 to 1 pot odds, just to break even. You are also in a position to lose the maximum in future bets, but win the minimum, as you will almost never be such a favorite as to raise. Your hand could do slightly better if the small pair was hidden. I might receive some punishment on this one.
Actually, the underpair will win the max and lose the min, because the underpair will not payoff with one pair while the aces will. Also, if you make trips on the end you can raise. If you make hidden two pair on 6 you can raise. If you make an overpair, your opponent will call with one pair on six or raise with two pair. Assuming he is not capable of bluffing on 6th, you can either fold then, or call looking to fill and fold on the end. The only way for you to lose all 30 is if both players make two pair (or better).
In your example you gave two split pair, one of them being Aces. Aces are different than kings, you cannot make an overpair to aces. The large pair has the same chance of improving as the small pair, and can also make a hidden two pair. He can make two pair the same time the smaller pair does, or even later. If neither improve, the larger pair can back off betting at any time. Now is the small pair going to bet into him? However, if he does bet, at what point does the small pair fold, or continue on? Another senerio is with an Ace up, and betting all the way, a small pair calls to the river, does not make two pair, folds, and the Ace up shows no pair! Or you both make trips on the end. All I can say is, the pot had better have some money in it on 5th, if I'm going to chase Aces. If it were kings and I had an Ace kicker, I might even be correct to chase.
the post has to be giving you 10:1
.
I ran probe against one pair of Aces and then with a pair of threes.
As I thought. With Aces you are about a 2 1/2 to one under dog. If you give the Aces a pair of threes you become >10 to 1 underdog. So, fold!
vince.
it was discussed at length in the archives. it would be worth the trouble to find them if you are truly interested.
Could you please give me a hint. I scrolled through the first archive. It had >1500 posts. What words could I search on? Which archives are they in? I did a search on "remembering dead cards" and got 0 responses.
Okay, I just played this hand and felt like I had to post it given the DeadBart's thread below.
In a typical 2-4 7CS8 game I am dealt (8h7c)6d and bring it in for $1. Jh and Jc fold. 8c calls. 6s folds. Th folds. 9h calls.
I catch the 9d on fourth street. I'm against 8c2h and 9h3d. I'm bet $2 and they both call.
I catch the 7s on fifth - I have (8h7c)6d9d7s and they have 8c2h9c and 9h3d2s. 829 checks and 932 bets - I raise. Is this a good play here? The 829 folds and the 932 calls.
On sixth I catch (8h7c)6d9d7s3s and am aginst 9h3d2s6c. I don't have a good idea of what he has now, but I guess a low draw that may or may not have hit or maybe some low pair. I decide to bet out and he calls.
I feel like I didn't play this hand incredibly well, but any comments on the way I played this hand are welcome.
~DjTj
Other Poker Games
March 2000 Digest is provided by Two Plus Two Publishing and ConJelCo