![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
In stud-8, rarely raise with a 3-flush unless you're in a steal situation. Unless you have all low cards, these are really marginal hands, and you want to preserve your implied odds. In general, you want to play these against a lot of opponents.
1. This is weaker than it looks. You'll probably be facing the bring-in and one low hand. If you catch a heart, that still only puts you at 50-50 for half the pot, and it might take you to the river to get there. If you catch an offsuit low card, your hand might not even be worth continuing with. The live ace adds some value. I might take a card off in a normal structure (with say, a $2 bring-in in 8-16), but I would probably fold here for $4.
hmmmmm
Does anyone know of a webpage with the rules and strategy for Chinese Poker? If not, would someone please post a basic summary of the rules? It sounds like just the sort of thing that would go down well at my home game.
call the gamblers book club
Richard,
I think you played the hand fine if there was an ante. If it was 1-5 stud without ante, you should have folded.
Anyway, betting until he catches a pair was ok. Of course you had to bet the river without both of you improving, too (probably your only chance to win).
The fold was correct when you were pretty sure he had 3 Js.
Regards
M.A.
I would fold with ante...call no ante....
I am convinced that playing and winning at 7CS is easy when you are dealt hands like big pairs on 3rd st, trips, straights, flushes, full houses....you get the picture. Anyway, what makes a real winner and expert is the ability to play subpar hands extremely well.
1. One must be able to successfully play small and medium pairs correctly and early in the hand
2. One must be able to successfully play two pair hands (10 up and lower) correctly which means ocassionally making a player with a better hand fold by you betting attack.
3. One must be able to "put" other players on more than 1 hand. Often we put our oponents better hands than the have or on beter draws than they have.
4. One should study oponents and look for "tells" whenever he/she is out of the hand. Concentration on the game even when you have folded.
Any comments?
I will add something which will of course bring some flak my way. I have found that no matter how much skill I think I may have, one must still be catching some cards. If it is not meant for me to win that day, I ain't gonna. There is a Higher Power involved. Also, if it was meant for me to win that day, I can't be beat. Same Higher Power. Ok, fire away.
This isn't a bad-beat story; just a bad-flop story. So I shouldn't owe Rick N. the full dollar.
Fairly loose 4-8 Omaha-8 game; usually 5-6 players (out of 9) see the flop.
I'm in early-middle position, one caller to me, and I throw in a loose call with 3-3-4-6. (There had been very little pre-flop raising.) Unraised, six of us see the flop.
Now, someone tell me the odds of this: the flop is
3-4-6 three-suited.
It was bet into me, and I chose to fold it. I reasoned that I was probably against a straight already, drawing for only half the pot, with 2 of the cards that could pair the board for me wasted in my own hand.
I would like your opinion on this one. My second thoughts go like this: If the board does pair with a 4 or 6, I get the bigger full house, not just my 3's full; and furthermore, between the turn and river cards, I will have 8 outs to fill/quad, not that bad a draw after all.
Comments?
Dick
Here's what I go by for starting hands of a nature similar to what you have described: Play if I have 3 cards to a wheel or 4 cards to a 6 low. Note you have neither,
Discovered a 1-4-8-8 stud hi/low 8 game at a local casino, without an ante, low card brings it in for a dollar. Ten percent rake to three dollars. Realized I did not have a clue. Bought Wilson stud 8/0. Read super/System section on this subject and ordered Ray Zee's book only to have the casino close the cardroom.
Found out that there is another game at another casino exactly the same, except for a fifty cent ante. How much effect does the fifty cent ante have on this game? I realize that at thirty hands an hour it's fifteen more dollars to play, but does that make the game unbeatable?
You should favor the ante game. The no-ante game is horrible. Good players are going to play *super* tight, and bad players are going lose all their money to the rake before you get a chance at it. With no ante, when you split a heads up pot with the bring-in, you are going to lose $1.50 each to the rake. There is nothing more demoralizing to a poker player than winning a pot, and losing money.
With the $.50 ante, when you split a heads up pot, you'll actually win $.50. Nothing grand, but at least you aren't losing now. This makes a big psychological different to the players.
The other problem with the no ante game is that because the game can be so tight, most of the action will be raked at the full 10%. With a looser ante game the rake will be capped out more often, and the effective rake on the action going into the pot will be more like 5%-7%. Much better.
- Andrew
Dick,
listen to Paul as he is finally turning into a champ. also look in my chapter on playing against steamers where i do give the example of 4456 as a hand that should be rarely played in multiway pots. almost the same hand you justified playing in bad position. again in chapter more specific ideas under concept#1 dont play middle size cards like 4577. similar enough to your hand. find excuses not to play inferior hands not reasons to play them.
what are the odds of the flop you mention?
well there are 2(3)(3) such flops (though they may not be rainbow), and there are 48 C 3 flops.
So its 18/ (48 C3).
I think you should strive to understand why people are saying what they are saying and not just think ," well 2 plus 2 author says," X" is ok to do and therefore do it."
youre objective in a hi lo game is to scoop the pot, you need a very perfect flop to scoop w/ 33 4 6. EVen if an A or 2 falls for you still will pbly be far behind for low.
So you need an A and 2 to fall for this hand to be good... ANd whats the probability fo this happening?
good fold though. you only have 3 outs twice and you may not even be good even if on e of them fall!
In a 3-6 game, I opened the pot with (34)3 for $1, and was called by a J and a 6. On 4th street, I received a 4, and my opponents had: J4 and 6T showing. I bet my two-pair and was called by the 6T (my 3's were still live, along with one 4). On 5th street, I received a 6 and my opponent received an ace. He checked, I bet, and he called. On 6th, I received a Queen and my opponent got a king. Now my opponent bet. I believed he now had kings-up, but I didn't know whether I had sufficient odds to go for my three-outer, so I called. I did not improve on 7th street, and I paid off my opponent who had kings and sixes (just like I suspected). Could I have gotten away from this hand? What do you do with two small pair when you're against an opponent with a likely overpair and overcards?
I think you are trapped. The reason is that it is not a certainty that your opponent has you beat.
If I couldn't fold because my opponent might not have had me beaten, this implies I did not have adequate odds to chase if I my opponent was in fact in the lead. This begs the question: What degree of certainty (that I was beaten) would be needed to justify folding on 6th street?
Nomad, I get into the same situation over and over, where I have marginal hands to suck me in. After losing a lot of money calling on sixth, I have formed the following opinion. take it for what it is worth.
I would have folded when I knew he had me beat (on sixth), especially, if I didn't have an overcard. You had three outs, but so did he! he could match a six or a king just as easy as you match up a three or a four. You could have lost even if you made a boat.
I am not too good with calculating odds, but given the 3-6 limit, I think you needed a larger pot to justify a call. If I did it right, the pot was $27 and it costs you $6 to call? May be a multi way pot would be better with the third person trying for a flush or a straight. May be David or Mason or Ray or any other experienced players can help with the numbers here.
just my rambling advice,
Fish.
This comes up a lot in 7CS. On third, look to see if your side card(4) is a flush card. This is an advantage. If not, you must ask: What am I looking for on 4th? You really have only 5 outs. Three of them are the 3 4's. In this case, 4 outs with the 2 4's. If your opponents will fold, bet. If not, you need a bet from your right, then raise. With two small pair, you must get them out fast, or play it cheap the rest of the way. If can't do either, fold. Sometimes on 4th you can purpose to look at one more card, the fifth street card. But if betting gets heavy on 5th, fold. If I am your opponent with only one overpair, you may find me raising your two small pair, on 4th or 5th. Two small pair are not nearly as good as they look.
It appears that your oppoet played his hand correctly with a pair and overcards. Clearly you should have suspected a pair of sixes o third since he called a J.
For the first time, I tried running Poker Probe simulations of the "draw + joker" game. The confusing results must be attributable to one of three possibilites: 1) I am not entering the hands correctly, 2) the joker is not wild in this game, or 3) Probe has a bug. Possibility #2 seems most likely; am I correct? If so, what is the value of the joker in draw?
Could someone please tell me what stud games are currently being offered in Las Vegas at the 30-60 limit or higher, and where they are. Has there been any special side action (stud/stud 8ob) during the World Series? What have the highest consistant games been?
I have not been there in over 15 months and am planning a trip in the next few weeks and want to plan my bankroll accordingly.
Thanks
Hey Russ, when Mason found out you were coming to town he set up a game at the Casino Sklansky for you, him and Oz. Seems your reputation preceeded you. Wish I could make that game but I wasn't invited.
vince.
Gee, it doesn't seem like that's really a game I want to be in either.
LL 7CS
I have a split pair of Qs (Qs5c/Qd) in 3rd position, no board cards higher than my Q, but there is one other Q out. The next best card is a jack (XX/Js) immediately in front of me who calls the bring in.
I raise, everybody drops except the jack. Now I've played with this person before and know they won't call the raise without something: a pair of js, a smaller or bigger pocket pair, three cards to a flush or straight. Nor would this player necessarily re-raise if having a higher pocket pair. At the time I make the hand for Js, but knowing I might have to adjust.
4th Street comes and XX/Js catches another J. I catch a blank and have nothing else going but the queens, I fold.
Player shows me wired 9s.
Any comments.
I think I would have folded also, since one of your outs was dead. But I think calling is probably wrong. how much did the jack bet on fourth? you might reraise him to see if he has trips, and if he reraises, I would drop. if he is shrewd he will call, which makes it a tougher decision. overall, I think the pot is not giving you favorable odds to chase, even if he had only a two pair. You had three outs only.
Fish
I would say that you have to fold. A paired door card, especially against a fairly tight player, usually means trips. But two pair was a definite, so you folded to the better hand. A call would have probably been appropriate only if your queens were live or if you had a live three flush.
its a fold for sure no matter if your queens were live. and if he raised you back you cant fold unless you know he wouldnt have the nerve to raise back without kings or better. his mistake was showing you his hand.
"If he raised you back you can't fold for sure." I just don't get it! Oh I understand it but I just don't get it!
Vince
Hi Rich, I agree with everybody else. It was a good laydown. You are either a slight dog against two pair or a BIG dog against trips. Not worth it to chase here. I loved Ray's comment about him showing you his cards. Email me. Fred
Assume 1-5 no ante. I am wondering when it is correct to bet or raise in this situation. assume that on fourth 2 of your suit is out, and the best hand showing is a pair of jacks. If i have high cards (e.g., A K) should I bet to force people out hoping to get the game heads up to improve my chances of a backdoor win? if so, when?
I know flushes do better in multi-way, so if most of my flush cards were alive, I would definitely call. but what if I was in the same situation on fifth? Anyone have suggestions?
Regards, Fish
with an open pair that may be trips hurts your 4 flush tons. you may want to fold it if there are not alot of players in or you dont believe he has trips. against regular hands you would be around even money to win the pot.(depending alot on whats out ) and less than 2 to 1 on 5th street. so you have a great hand if the situation is right. most times id go for the multiway action in loose games as they will go far along with bad hands. in tighter games id go for making it headup if i had overcards as the others wouldnt be around for long anyway.
$3-6 stud at Canterbury Card Club, the new poker room in Minnesota. I start out with (Ad2d)5d, with no diamonds and one ace showing. Bring-in is to my right. I consider completing the bet, but limp in instead. There are a few callers until the ace, three seats to my right, makes it $3. Two folds, including the bring-in, and I call. Player on my left, showing a 9, now raises. Two callers, and the ace reraises. I consider folding, but decide to call. The 9 and ace raise back and forth again capping it. There are five players in for five bets apiece. Fourth street, I catch the 4d, absolutely perfect, and no one else catches anything threatening. Ace bets, everyone calls. My fifth street card is a rag. It's checked to the guy on my left, who bets. Everyone calls. On sixth street, I catch the 7d, but the guy on my left now makes an open pair of queens. He bets, two folds, the ace guy calls, I call. Queens bet the river, call, call. He shows down 998 in the hole for a full house. I never saw what the other guy had.
I was really kicking myself after this hand. Calling five bets with a three-flush has to be a mistake, doesn't it? Given that the guy on my left limped and then reraised a raise from an ace, the only thing he can reasonably have is three nines, right? I hadn't played with my left-hand opponent much--he had just sat down--so I didn't have a read on him at all. If he is rolled up, I'm a huge dog. After I catch perfect on fourth street, however, I can't get away from this hand, especially considering the size of the pot. I think I'm getting the right odds to call, especially if I'm capable of folding if he makes an open pair. When he does make his open pair at the same time I make my flush, I call anyway in case I've misread the hands. If I fold the best hand with this big of a pot, it's disastrous. But I have to figure on paying two big bets (at least), and risking $12 to win ~$200 may not worth it in this case.
Say hypothetically that I don't recognize that the guy on my left has trips on third street, but I have some kind of revelation on fourth street. Given that he has trips to my gut-shot straight-flush draw, I believe that I'm getting correct odds to draw. It's about 3:2 against his filling, and I think I have a 63% chance of making a straight or better (all of my diamonds and threes were still live, so it's actually better than that). That makes it less than 2:1 against me, and I'm getting much better odds than that, thanks in part to my mistake on the first round. There is also the small chance that I might make my straight flush and beat his full house. There's also the very, very small chance that I catch my straight flush card, he catches the case nine (neither card ever showed), and I take 20% of the jackpot (probably not a lot of equity there). Once he catches the open pair, I have to get out though.
So I think I made two mistakes. The first was calling the two raises on third street, and the second was calling with my flush when my opponent apparently made his full house. Your comments please.
gee, you were going to fold for such a big pot for 2 more bets. why cant the guys just have big pairs in the hole. you were too far in to fold. what about 4th street with 5 players and you have a st fl draw and didnt raise.if the 9 had trips why didnt he raise on 4th after jamming on 3rd. maybe he didnt have trips and caught on the river. maybe you should have folded on 3rd but i doubt it but you needed to push the hand after you improved. i think you are trying more to save money than make it.
Ray,
Thanks for your input. I considered raising on fourth street, but I figured that the other guys would continue jamming and the rest of us would go along for the ride. I've been to Canterbury four times since it opened, but I had only ever played in home games before. The home game that I've played in for the last five years plays mostly high-low games and has lots of loose, aggressive players. They are usually kind enough to do my betting for me. Lots of jamming in that game. I'm quite capable of getting in and raising myself when the need arises, though. I assumed the nine was going to continue raising. If he raised and the ace backed off, then I could raise myself. I realize now that this thinking was a mistake. In 20+ hours of low-limit stud at Canterbury, that first round was one of exactly two jammed betting rounds I have seen. I've got to do my own betting in this game. The nine's calling on fourth street was apparently intended to throw us off, and it did throw me off, but it probably just cost him a few bets.
I don't think the guy with the nine showing can have a big buried pair. If he has a buried pair of aces with an ace showing, he should probably raise right away to drive people out. He isn't strong enough for a limp-reraise. If he has a buried pair less than aces, I don't think he can reraise the ace for fear of being second-best. Certainly, he can't reraise a second time with, say, kings. It occurs to me that maybe he had a three-card straight flush. That would be consistent with just calling on fourth when he didn't improve. Still, I think the most likely holding is three nines. I don't think that he'd jam third street with (98)9. He was sipping a Leinie's Red (a local beer I've seen discussed on this forum), but he wasn't drunk by any means.
Truthfully, I don't think I could ever throw away a flush, even if the pot were much smaller. It's just too good a hand. In the home game I mentioned, I did once raise with a made 75 low on fifth street only to fold on sixth street in the face of a bet and a raise from 6432 showing. In that case I knew my customer. When he really has a hand, his betting acquires a level of sincerity that it lacks when he's bluffing or just kidding himself. I "knew" he had an ace in the hole, and I was right. But in the case of playing a stranger, no, I couldn't throw away a made flush unless the guy had trips on the board or something.
> i think you are trying more to save money than make it.
Probably a fair statement.
Cheers,
Andy B
7cs 8 or better, lots of really bad players. I'm the bringin with (KT)8, all live. I'm called by an ace, a jack, and a ten.
Fourth street boards: (??)JJ, (??)TJ, me: (KT)8K, (??)A7
Jacks bet, I raise, A7 calls, jacks call. Should I have folded? Fifth: (??)JJ4, (KT)8K2, (??)A79
Jacks bet, I call, A79 calls. Should I have folded? Raised?
Sixth: (??)JJ47, (KT)8K2Q, (??)A793
Jacks bet, I call (think I definitely should have folded), A793 raises, jacks call, I call.
Seventh: I get no help, jacks bet, I fold. Ace calls. Flame away.
fold on 4th.
big pairs is not where the money is in loose 7cs8. i only play them at all if they are wired under a low card or if they are A's.
they are also playable as an attempt on the antes.
that said, i too often get into trouble when my bringin is just called. but remind yourself that a pair of K's on 4th is worse than a pair of K's on 3rd, which is unplayable. so you fold. easier said than done, i know. but it is the right play.
it also pains me to throw away live 3 flushes with an A. but what are you going to do?
scott
fold against open jacks for even one bet. you play way too loose. correct it and start winning thats the way to go.
I have since corrected my play and am currently working on the start winning thing. Thought you'd like to know.
P.S. But I still think it's kind of a silly game. Giving half the pot to the worst hand at the table? I mean, c'mon!
P.P.S. I'm starting to find myself calling the bringin at 7cs high with stuff like A24 unsuited. Of course, I realize that I'm being an idiot about two seconds after my money is in the pot. Anyone else have this problem?
if you keep doing that you wont have to worry about being an idiot in the game for long.
P.P.S. I'm starting to find myself calling the bringin at 7cs high with stuff like A24 unsuited. Of course, I realize that I'm being an idiot about two seconds after my money is in the pot. Anyone else have this problem?
It's not as bad as playing for an hour at a 7 stud high game, winning two pots with good hi/low draw *without* a showdown, then scratching your head trying to figure out why the computer didn't award you half the pot when you hit your 8-low on the river and your opponent had a pair of jacks.
- Andrew
Did this theoretical person think that it was highly unusual that every single pot was being "scooped" ?
Dick
*THIS* actual person didn't really notice it since it was a higher limit game, and most pots didn't go to showdown. He probably should be chastised for not paying attention though.
- Andrew
Did you check the hand history to be sure? Which site?
How do you make money at this game? I play only premium hands, but there's so many people in that things like a low 2pair never seem to scoop. Even more annoying, no one's willing to jam the pot. Is there some magic limit where people start jamming but with lousy hands?
on line 6-12 is the best limit for a tight player. it has a lower proportional ante and the players seem worse than the 4-8 or the 8-16 players.
scott
Niels,
read my book by stealing scotts copy. a low two pair is not a premium hand and wont ever scoop unless headup. what you think is tight is probably way too loose.
You have it all wrong Ray...
Niels owns your book and scott stole his copy. I know this because I've been following your book around...
When it was in New York, I visited scott and read it...then it made its way to Houston so I visited Niels and read it again. Its a good book - maybe I should buy my own copy...nah, the airplane tickets are much cheaper.
Anyhow, as far as the loose, passive Paradise game goes, I've been doing pretty well at it...I think its a simple matter of playing tighter than everyone else - the loose passive 7CS/8 game is really just a matter of being able to show down the best hand so I generally play only good low draws and wait until I back into straights or flushes to scoop.
The 2-4 game is really soft - really loose...4-8 gets quite a bit tighter depending on what time of day it is - the 6-12 game is nice because of the tight structure, but that's a lot of money and I've only played 2 sessions there.
Start by cutting out all the 8 lows and the high pairs and 3-flushes...then tighten up on later streets...
~DjTj
Dj,
You play a little too loose yourself, especially on the later streets.
- Andrew
...good to know somebody is watching...
~DjTj
A pox on thee, sir! That's the first time I'm ever been called loose (unless you count your post right below this).
As for scott, he and AlexB are nothing but a pair of pathetic peripatetics. His book?! Ha!
I was just in New Orleans and played in the Harrah's Casino, where 1/2-1/2 rules, plus a lot of Omaha high only. 1/2-1/2 is one round of HE and one round of Omaha high.
The folks in N.O. love to ram and jam, especially in Omaha, that's for sure. One guy raised on every deal on just about every card. He then built a huge stack over 2 hours by making miracles on the end, and then he lost is twice as quick.
My question: Is there a book about Omaha high only? My play -- tight as it was -- could still use a lot of help.
Mark
Mark The K,
Favorite Links Conjelco buy all your books there Chuck is a great guy and does more than he has to for you. Plus they deliver. I get all my books thru him that Zee pays for as a stipend for me autographing my AAU book that I wrote especially for him per Mason's request. My book is available by entering thru Zee's subterranean outhouse which Rick really likes because of all the room and the elevator in it.
Good Luck Paul
Omaha Hold'em Poker, Bob Ciaffone. New Millenium edition. Omaha is known for its propensity to generate big pots. Sub-titled "The Action Game," it looks at both limit and pot-limit betting structures. There is a chapter on the high-low split form of the game and a chapter on tournament strategy. This book is suitable for anyone who already has a reasonable amount of general poker experience who wants to learn how to play Omaha well. (paper) 106+p . #P35, $20.00, Internet Price: $18.50.
may i add that hfap doesnt cover omaha but the thinking and betting ideas apply and thats what brings home the bacon to bubba.
I live in New Orleans and was probably in that game. Did you play 10-20? Send me an e-mail have several good books. The N.O. game is fantastic!
I just sent you a private message...
and what a fast game it is in N.O.
Mark
I have played a fair bit of limit ring game Omaha high. The general strategy is aim for the nuts with redraws or big (preferably multiple) draws. Should you alter this strategy shorthanded?
With shorthanded HE your hand values don't have to be nearly as strong as in a full ring game. But does this apply to short handed Omaha? The few times I have gotten into a short handed game I've been completely bamboozled as I found it so hard to assess the strength of an opponents hand. Whenever I did lower my calling standards I still ran into the nuts. Was this an aberration or is shorthanded (limit) Omaha still a nuts game?
Any general advice and specific tactics would be much appreciated.
Even in tight or shorthanded games, the winning hand will usually be the nuts or close to it. If four people see the flop, when the flush comes someone will probably have some flush, and when the board pairs at least one person is probably full. (This is especially true in limit Omaha where weaker draws aren't forced out.)
The situation is only very different when the pots are played heads-up (or to a lesser extent 3-handed). Now it's much less than certain that the lock combinations are out there. Two pair or an overpair can be strong in some situations, and non-nut sets, flushes, and fulls can be powerful hands.
In general, put more emphasis on big cards than in a full game, and less on middle straight runs. Lower your standards more for made hands than for drawing hands, and more for betting hands than for calling hands.
Also consider that shorthanded there are many more opportunities to win pots without the best hand, even in limit Omaha. This makes position very important in shorthanded games, and you want to identify which opponents fold too easily when they miss the board.
Few days ago I sat in a 4-8 Stud Hi-Lo game where an interesting hand appeared. I haven't been playing this variant much at all though I read stuff here and there about the general strategy. My first sessions playing it had been very profitable, more thanks to sitting at the right table than good play on my part I think. Anyways, I'd be very grateful if anyone could comment on my play in this hand I mentioned.
There are four people in the hand, player #1 show a 6, #2 call with an 8, #3 raises showing a K. I have AcKc in the hole showing Ah. I then reraise thinking I want to make it tough for the first two to draw for a low. All call.
Next street #1 get a 9, #2 a deuce, #3 a 5 and I catch a king giving me top twopair. I bet out, #1 and #2 both call and #3 reraises. Here I got a bit confused what to do, I got no low and I could be up against trip 5's so I considered to fold since I could be drawing to 3 outs for a 50/50 split.
After some thought I decided to raise since I found it unlikely the raiser would play 55K, the hands he showed so far had been fair. Most likely he had the last K in the hole and bet his pair of kings on first street. I hoped to get at least one of the low's out but they both call and so does #3.
3rd street gives a 7 for #1, a J for #2, a Q for #3 and 5c for me. Even though it only gives me a backdoor flush I like it a lot since it makes it less likely #3 got trips.
Current board:
#1 6,9,7 #2 8,2,J #3 K,5,Q me A,K,5
I bet again, #1 and #2 call, #3 raises me again. *¤&%&&*&¤&% I think to myself and here I get a little scared. I figure if the possible lows hung in there this far they will draw to the end and I for sure wont get #3 of his hand. So I decide to just call it down.
4th street gives a Q for #1, a 3 for #2, an A for #3 and a 9 (non club) for me. All check to #3 who bets, I call, #1 fold and #2 call. On the end I get a blank and check-call again.
I'm not 100 % i got all the action right but potsize was $200 and a few. It shows my read was correct, #2 made a low with the last card and #3 had K5 in hole, everything good except the fact he spiked the last 5 and his 1-outer...
How was my play? Is it a valid reasoning to stop the betting and just call it down? Is it an option to fold?
I apologize if I got to long.
Mattias
With AAKK, I'd just keep raising, especially when the lows keep hitting bricks. AAKK is a super high hand in high low, especially when the low boards are bricking out on 5th street. Fifth street is a turning point for low hands. Unless some of the hands looked flushy, you have to think "the only one with a decent straight draw is #1, and one (maybe 2?) of his 5s are dead, and one of his 8s are dead". You could scoop this thing.
Normally on 5th street a low hand is either free-rolling, or they are drawing to beat you. If you know that they are drawing, you have to make them PAY!!! Two big pair at this point is where you want to be with no made lows. You have a decent chance of scooping, and a small chance of not getting the whole enchilada.
Look at it this way. At 5th street there is a good chance that #1 won't make a low. There is a decent chance that #2 made 2 small pair, and is just praying for either a low or a full house. As for #3, he just *might* might have (55)K, but if he does go ahead and bury yourself. If he's playing (55)K then he is a real fish and giving him positive reinforcement with such a hand is going to help in the future. A more serious threat is (QQ)K which might cause me to back off, but *only* after I re-raised him on 5th street and he capped it.
Did any of the lows make it?
- Andrew
Yeah, #2 caught his low.
I had a little problem with the fact that I had so few ways of improving. In the games I'm usually in the players are much tighter so when player #3 came on so hard I didn't feel confident. I figure it shouldn't take lots of thinking to conclude that my minimum holding is top two. Also I dislike to play a high-only hand in such a game where most players will call everything to the end with a lowdraw. I found I often run into trouble when I play high pairs without a lowout, I guess that's nothing new though...
At least I got a quick revenge, scooped a $130 pot from the same player earlier today and went + $400 for the session. Pokergod is fair to his serfs sometimes!
Mattias
Home game... I kick everone's ass, but lose so much at this stupid friggin game (everyone else's favorite "lets play a real game, I'm dealing Chicago") that I'm lucky to win $50 at the end of the night. Looking for strategy tips, if such a thing exists. Here's how we play the game...
Short handed... 5 of us, give or take one. 7 card stud, pot limit, dealer antes $5 for the table. Highest spade in the hole, and best 5 card poker hand split the pot. We declare after the last betting round, and if you try to scoop, and tie for the poker hand, you lose both sides. Oh, by the way, each player's lowest hole card is wild. So everyone has at least one wild card. And if you start wired with 3's, and your river card is a 2, you only have quad 3's... rarely a winner.
Now, usually, its heads up once the betting starts, and two guys with a lock on one side split a $1000 pot and each win $2.50 after wagering hundreds of dollars and wasting 20 minutes. Obviously, when you have the As, you're there to the end, but I wind up losing too much money when I'm dealt a small pair in the hole, and stay with 2 wilds and an ace, but never improve much. Or whatever. These guys like it, since they get to put hundreds of dollars in the pot with a lock on half of it, but its almost always a split. Its like pissing into the wind.
Now, I do almost always come out a small winner, but I don't make anything at this game, and it takes so long to play a round with guys trying to pretend like they are "thinking" about calling when they have the nuts, that the session changes from "dealer's choice" to "chicago with an occasional round of holdem or follow the queen". And you'll never see the pots get this big for any of the other games.
I don't mind leaving some money on the table, since these are my friends, but I figure if I'm going to sit through this garbage, I might as well try to learn how to play it.
Any suggestions? I mean besides jumping out of the window?
Thanks... B$
In regular Chicago, you just never play without the ace. If you have the king, you can play it if there isn't much action and see if the ace shows up. I would never play for the high hand in this game unless I started with three of a kind. Note that in many home games you can't play optimally, and have to artificially play somewhat looser to not get kicked out of the game!
In your version, I don't think it would often be worth playing for high. If the pots quickly get heads-up, you're on the wrong end of a freeroll, even if you start with two wilds or ace-wild. Only if there would be multiway action for substantial fraction of your stack would it pay to play these hands at all, and then only if you had much the best of it - starting with (2A)2 or something.
Big, In my home game, we play the exact version you play. As far a strategy, I play for the spades, and low pairs in the hole. I throw away hands like qj/T and other straights. I think 5 of a kind or high stratight flushes win such games. and with not knowing what your last hole card is going to be, (if you have medium pair as wild) or what your opponent holds, it is a crap shoot. I fold mostly on third. and play when I get a high spade or a low pair.
I think this game is not worth chasing.
another game you shoudl try (for pot building) is night basesball or auction. These games get big pots for us.
Regards, Fish
It frosts my shorts to even read about such a stupid game! In my home game we used to play this game and variants spread-limit $1 max and got so fed up with it we went to straight stud only .25-.50 just so we could play poker, and quit inviting the maniacs who wanted to deal follow the queen and wild-card games.
That background laid about about my feelings about poker, let me say that if I were willing to put up such an enormous amount of money for such an idiot game I would begin by trying to convince them to play poker (which you obviously have done), play for the mortal nuts only (!), scoop a couple of big pots, and then see if they're willing to quit. If it's usually heads up and a pissing contest, you can fold all your hands except the very best, put on a show about how miserable you are starting or whatever, and wait for it.
If it really takes 20 minutes to play a hand, start a side game with those not involved in the current pot...
I predict that even though you are all friends, you may not stay friends long with wild cards unless it is clearly delineated what the ranking order of every possible hand is. With that much on the line, there will eventually be a dispute as to whose royal beats whose or whose five aces is higher. Then a fight will break out. Some games should not be dealt.
My opinion only
David
In Ray Michael B's book he mentions that he usually has a personal recorder and some work with him so he can get some things done while he isn't in the hand. If you play for the nuts only and do not call the game yourself, you cannot lose. I guess I would look for (A2)2 with the ace of spades and try to scoop;-) -2d
David... You're right about the dispute, but we resolved all that years ago when we used to play for nickles and dimes. 20 minutes is an exaggeration, but it feels like it sometimes.
I used to play in a home game that played a similar game, though I think it was low chicago, low hole card wild. I once started a hand with the 2 of spades and another 2 in the hole, slowplayed, and then got yet another 2 to scoop a gigantic pot with like 5 aces and the low spade... ;-)
I think if I had folded every other hand that lacked the 2s, I would have come out far ahead on this game. I wouldn't even bother trying for high at all, with the possible exception of rolled up (low) trips, as previously mentioned. The nut spade will always be freerolling you no matter how good your hand starts out. Yeah, it's a silly game because the optimal strategy is so obvious... but since most home players don't recognize that, it's actually a profitable game for you. I think the solution is to play super tight if you can get away with it...
I guess you're all just telling me what I already know... Play supertight and deal Holdem! I'll live, but I was hoping someone would offer some obvious strategy tips that I've somehow missed.
Oh, well... thanks, and even though I don't usually say it in poker "wish me luck!"
Strategy tips? Its like asking for strategy in tic tac toe. A game that ridiculous cannot be played any other way. Its tough to move the low spade in the hole off the nuts! Only I can do that.
I am looking for the proper strategy to play hands made up of overcards, such as AKJ or AQJ. When and how should I play these hands? Against how many callers, and in what positions? DO I play them aggressively, or limp in and hope to catch a pair on fourth street?
Currently, I try to play with as few players as possible, and I raise to try to get it heads up. I also try to play with at least two overcards to the entire board, or three overcards to everyone except one player, whom I will raise to get it heads up. I will not play for the bring-in if there are two high cards that I do not have and are otherwise unduplicated, and almost never for a raise,(unless I raise myself) unless there is only one overcard held by a weak player, and I am fairly sure I can get it heads up, or at least knock out most players.
If this strategy is correct on third, how should I play on fourth if I do not pair up? I frequently limp or fold, but rarely raise. The game is a low limit game.If this is not the correct strategy, then what shuld I change?
Any thoughts will be appreciated, as I am sure that this comes up fairly often for most players.
Thanks.
Pat DiCaprio
You can play these cards as straight draw hands when there are a lot of people already in the pot, thus giving you good implied odds on a draw play.Make sure your cards are live.
And you can play them as heads up hands if there is only one limper from early position, it's folded to you in late positon (that is when you're close to the opener's right), and the chances that you can isolate the limper if you raised is pretty high. When you do this, you also have the extra equity of possibly getting away with a steal.
These hands are kinda awkward to play if the situation is somewhere in between these two scenarios.
Hi Ray. I play 1-5 no ante 7cs (the only stud game in town), and usually do pretty well. I was an average player until I read a few poker stratagy books and put in alot of practice. Now I've graduated to being a good player winning about 4 out of 5 sessions. I read many postings about odds in certain situations, and realize that I need to learn this information. What is the best book on the market about poker odds? I'll eventually move on to 4-8 Hold 'em (again, the only game in town), but I want to raise my level of 7cs first. PLUS, I just love that game! Any suggestions? Thanks.
I hope that no ante game at least has a bring-in. My first teachings on Poker Odds came from David Sklansky's book, "Getting the Best of It", You should also read "Theory of Poker" by David also.
Later, CV
Check out the end portion of Doyle Brunson's Super/System. Mike Caro has all sorts of accurate odds for 7-stud and other games there.
Buy them all if you can afford them. In the long run it will save you at least the price of the books.
paul
Are there any good books on pineapple holdem or crazy pineapple.
A debate came up in a game recently.
Another player, an inexperienced poker player who likes to argue, maintained that lowball is a far less complicated game than draw because in lowball "everybody is going for the same thing." By implication, he argued that lowball is easier and was based mostly on luck. Draw, he contended, requires more skill. According to him, he has more options to chose from on a given hand -- i.e., deciding whether to draw 1 to two pair or dump a pair and draw three. He saw lowball and razz as just waiting for that miracle card to complete a 7 low or 8 low.
I disagreed. The fundamental approach is the same -- starting hand selection relative to position, pot odds compared to drawing odds, and game adjustment are all important in both.
Any comments? If I'm wrong, and lowball is a lot easier, let me have it. Otherwise I would love some additional theoretical ammo to verbally bust this guy the next time we play.
Could someone explain the basics of Pineapple, Crazy Pineapple and Kentucky Hold'em? Any sound advise? Thanks
As I play poker in the UK I have never played either of these games, so this question is mainly out of curiosity. What are the differences in strategy between the two forms? Which game requires more skill? Why is Deuce only ever played no limit? Are there any books on 2-7 lowball?
Doyle's Super/System covers it all. 2-7 rules, BTW. I'd rather watch the 2-7 final table than the Big One. This year's was unbelievable.
You have a choice of sitting in one of two seats at an eight-handed (you will be the ninth player) O/8 game. The game is fairly loose and mildly passive. In seat A, you will have the tightest player in the game to your immediate right; he looks like he is roughly even for the night. Five seats to the left of seat A is seat B. To the immediate right of seat B is the loosest player in the game; he's clearly been having a great run of cards and has a big stack in front of him. Which seat do you choose?
The underlying question of this scenario is as follows: In HLPFAP, Zee states that if there is one tight player on the table, it is better to have this player to your right. Caro has repeatedly stated that money flows clockwise and it is better to have a big stack to your right. Both statements are true, but the question is which factor is stronger?
where did i say that please.
Ray, I believe he's refering to page 250 where it starts with "It is helpful for this type of player to be sitting on your right, because when he enters the pot, you will know to get out with all but your very best hands".
iwould want in this case the tight player on my right and the loose player across from me. if you can steal blinds then have the tight player one or two to your left. in omaha 8 a tight player coming in ahead of you will hurt most of the hands you will also play.
Posted By: Ray Zee
In Response To: O/8 Seat position strategy (AX)
"iwould want in this case the tight player on my right and the loose player across from me. if you can steal blinds then have the tight player one or two to your left. in omaha 8 a tight player coming in ahead of you will hurt most of the hands you will also play. "
I, too, like to have the tight player two or three to my left so, if I like my hand, I can 'terrorize' his blinds a little. And, while I enjoy having the maniac 4 or 5 seats away, I can do a lot of 'pulling' when he's on my immediate right OR reraise to try to get him heads up when it suits the situation.
no text
Pot-limit Omaha high. Blinds of 5-10. You have AdKdKcQd and limp in early position. A solid player limps, button makes it a quarter, SB folds, BB calls, you call, limper calls. Pot of 105.
Flop Kh9d3c. Check, you bet 100, limper calls, button folds, SB folds. Pot of 305.
Turn 7d. Check, you bet 300, limper calls. Pot of 905.
River 8d. Limper bets 850 all-in. You have 650 left and the ace-high flush. You should fold!
Consider: to call on the flop with no 2-flush on board and the field left to act, he had to have QJT in hand. You bet into the field on a board with no potential for strong draws, and two players remain to act after him, so its unlikely he has K9. Good players are highly unlikely to call preflop raises with 33 or 99 in hand. And if he had a set, he would raise or fold rather than give a cheap card to K9 (a likely bettor hand) or a straight draw.
Then on the turn, with the flush draw on board now, he's not going to call with just a 9-out straight draw. If he's a good player, he has to have at least some flush draw to call there. The only hand he could have without a flush draw would be the exact hand QJT8.
Now on the river, he bets. If he had QJT8 without the flush, he would check rather than bluff and hope his straight was good. So he has to have QJTx, and at least two diamonds. Better players would not play QJTx with x<7 for a raise preflop. You have the Ad, Kd, and Qd, while the 9d, 8d, and 7d are on board. So he has to have the straight flush, and you can safely fold your ace-high flush!
some times thats exactly right. but in the games with people with imagination it doesnt work. what if he had 99tj. he makes a set and makes 2 crying calls and hopes you are bluffing but doesnt think so. so on the end when the flush card comes and he decided to pay it off he figures he may as well bet as you may lay down 3 kings. or he has qjt and figures to take it away from you if a flush or straight card comes he is getting 2 to 1. i do it.
We'll be moving the forums to a new server shortly. Just before that happens, I'll disable posting on the forums. You'll still be able to read them, but not to post replies or new messages. Once the transfer is complete, I'll re-enable posting.
Sorry, in advance, for any inconvenience that this may cause.
Chuck
Chuck,
Going to a new server knocked out my ability to pick it up on Netscape so I got one of the wizards from downstairs and said that the browser didn't recognize it so I went onto Microsoft Internet Explorer. It opened up everything except the forums. Just thought I'd let you know.
Paul
just to let you know paul, it works just fine on netscape. maybe your computer doesnt like you.
zee that's the norm rather than the exception
Paul,
I am running on a Mac at home with Netscape 4.7 and a G4 at work with Netscape 4.7. Both work and are faster than Explorer. Of course that is no garantee that the stuff will run tomorrow since my ISP sucks, but it is free
Ratso,
How are you. Yeah I just posted it in case someone else was having difficulties. It had something to do with the browser. Some computer glich as the wizard from downstairs said to me that's why he hooked me up on Internet Explorer it works fine, of course I'm sure it has nothing to do with it being a T1!!! It was probably telling me to do more work!!! Yeah Right!! Not easy to tell someone could you fix my gambling network, but I got over it. It was the only part corrupted on my computer.
paul
The 21st century edition names a new game invented by David, 'Poker Challenge' as soon to appear in casinos. Can someone describe the game? Is it played against a house dealer or a machine?
The basic game deals out three random, two card staring hands, after you have made your bet. You now choose one hand which plays against the two you didn't pick. Often the best hand is well over 50% to win. It could be as low as 34% on rare occasions. It averages out to a small dog. However there are also bonuses and double down opportunites. The game is just short of 100% return to good players. A four hand version that allows a bet on the flop is another variation.
Are you going to write a book that will teach us how to beat it?
Are you allowed to view all three hands before you choose? Without taking a lot of time to consider this it seems to good to be true.
The game is just short of 100% return to good players.
How do you sell it to the casinos with that kind of edge?
Yes, you get to see all three hands. The thing that makes David's game much more interesting than regular Video Poker is that a "Good" player can't just play the game with a Cheat Card. There are just too many combinations to think about. So I would suspect the game has a nice edge over the average player.
Later, CV
Its a machine, or a table game?
Sounds like the 'Challenge' will be getting the dealer to correctly read 15 or 18 holdem hands and then pay off correctly.
For the sake of this discussion, let us assume that I am a good player [Whether that actually is the case is best left to another thread] :) The reason I say "good" rather than "tight" or "loose" is that such a player could properly utilize the advantages of either seat i.e. Seat B lets you trap the loose player for extra bets, and Seat A gives you important information prior to making any decisions (as quoted by Burroughs below). An offshoot of this is: does the information advantage actually require a "tight" player, or does he merely have to be highly predictable (e.g. always raises w/Aces, never with Ace-deuce-trey).
Posted this on the beginners forum a couple of days ago but got limited response (thanks Rounder). Wondered if it would do better here. Just started playing Omaha hi\lo 8 or better. Could someone answer an odds question for me as numbers make my head hurt! If I start of with two of my cards 8 or less and my other two are rags, are the odds in favour of me making any kind of low hand by the river, bearing in mind the possibilities of pairing the board etc. I get the feeling that the odds are slightly against. Answers? Goldfish
Uh, I think your question needs some polishing. Don't take this the wrong way, you probably have your reasons, but I don't understand why you would want to know about any 2 low cards to an 8 or Better. You understand that you may make your low, but someone else may have a better low or the same low and you may get none of the pot or only a quarter.
A good essay on the subject is right here on the sight: http://www.twoplustwo.com/dsessay2.html
Later, CV
it's my understandinbg that low only gets there about 60-65% of the time..
Goldfish - I agree with CV.
However, this is an interesting problem. Rephrased it becomes: What are the odds of a bare A-2 qualifying for low in an 8-or-better-for-low-game?
To qualify for low with a bare A-2 you need at least three different cards from the following group: 3,4,5,6,7,8.
The calculation is complicated, not conceptually, but because of duplications. I can see a way to do it, but I can also see that it will take me a long time, hours - maybe days. Maybe I'll start it later tonight, after I have played some Omaha high/low, if I am too wound up to go to sleep.
For now, a ball park estimate of how often a bare A-2 qualifies for low (including times when the ace and/or two is counterfeited but there are three other low cards), is about one time out of three, making the odds about 2 to 1 against a bare A-2 qualifying for low in an 8-or-better-for-low-game.
Translated back to your question, Goldfish, if you start with two of your cards 8 or less and the other two 9 or higher, the odds in favor of you making any kind of low by the river are approximately 2 to 1 against.
Hope this helps.
Buzz
Okay, this was kinda fun - what else am I going to do during Geology lecture?
So, 0.513 of all flops contain a low. 0.245 of all flops are won by A2. i.e. If you hold 2 low cards in your hand, you will make a low about 1/4 of the time. So, the answer to your question is 3 to 1 aaginst.
I did this by adding the number of 3 low card, 4 low card, and 5 low card boards - then adding the 3 low card with pairs/trips and 4 low cards with a pair boards and dividing that all by 52 choose 5...Kind of ugly - can anybody think of a better way to do this?
~DjTj
Thanks for your posts people. All I wanted was a ball-park figure to play with. I think we are looking at somewhere between 2-1 and 3-1 against the low. Thanks, Goldfish
Goldfish - Couldn't get to sleep last night, so I did the calculation. No guarantee the math is correct on the following.
626624/1712304 = 0.366 is probability of A-2-K-K (bare A-2 for low) qualifying for low. 437312/1712304 = 0.255 is probability of A-2-K-K (bare A-2 for low) being the nuts for low.
If my math is correct, then if you hold A-2-K-K (or A-2-Q-J etc.) the board will be such that you will qualify for low about one hand out of three. The odds are about two to one against your making a low.
Also if you hold A-2-K-K (or A-2-Q-J etc.) the board will be such that you will have the nuts for low about one hand out of four. The odds are about three to one against your making the nuts for low.
Buzz
~DjTj -
Sounds like we did the problem about the same way. Actually I made a slight error in my last response to Goldfish.
625344/1712304 = 0.365 is probability of bare A-2 qualifying for low.
424512/1712304 = 0.248 is probability of bare A-2 being the nuts.
We're close on the nuts part but pretty far apart on the qualifying part. Just to check, I dealt about five hundred hands and the 0.365 seems reasonable.
Below is my work. X stands for K,Q,J,T,9. L stands for A or 2. Cards chosen for hand are A-2-K-K.
THREE
678XX 4*4*4*153*20 195840, 195840 NUTS
(Explanation: four ways to get 6,7 and 8, 153 ways to get two cards from the 18 kings, queens, jacks, tens and nines remaining in the deck. That's 18*17/(1*2). Twenty ways to get a three card combination like 678.)
678LX 4*4*4*6*18*20 138240, 6912 NUTS
678LL 4*4*4*15*20 19200, 960 NUTS
6678X, 6778X, 6788X 6*4*4*18*3*20 103680, 103680 NUTS
(Explanation for 6788X: 4 ways to get a six, 4 ways to get a seven, 6 ways to get two eights, 18 ways to get one of (9,T,J,Q,K), *3 since there are three ways to have a pair, sixes, sevens or eights, *20 since there are 20 ways to have a particular three card combination.)
6678L, 6778L, 6788L 6*4*4*6*3*20 34560, 1728 NUTS
66678, 67778. 67888 4*4*4*3*20 3840, 3840 NUTS
66778, 66788, 67788 6*6*4*3*20 8640, 8640 NUTS
FOUR
5678X 4*4*4*4*18*15 69120, 69120 NUTS
5678L 4*4*4*4*6*15 23040, 4608 NUTS
55678 56678 56778 56788 6*4*4*4*4*15 23040, 23040 NUTS
FIVE
34567 4*4*4*4*4*6 6144, 6144 NUTS
In reading your response, I wondered why someone with an obvious interest in numbers was taking the particular physical science where numbers are used the least. None of my business what you take - just a casual observation.
I remember one geology field trip we took to Pala CA. Another guy and I sat in the backseat of someone's car and played heads up poker the whole time. Somebody would find something interesting and we would look up to see what it was and then go back to our game. I got out briefly at one point and picked up a rock to show I was participating. Turned out to be the best mineral specimen anyone found on the trip. I still have it, on the bookcase above my computer.
Buzz
I realize that this is not that interesting of a post but I'm a low limit 7cs player and am thinking of going up to the 5-10 limit games. I'm wondering if anyone can give me some insite on how these games are. Do people still play as loose as in the 1-5? Are there a lot of skilled players? Are raises respected? Am I better off sitting down at a 10-20? Also, on third street if the bring in is 2 dollars as it is at Foxwoods, can someone raise to 7 dollars or can you just complete the bet to 5?
Thanks for any help that anyone can give me.
Mike,
Every game is different. Having said that I've played in loose games and tight games. I only play on the weekends so I don't know much about weekday play at FW. Weekends are a mix of regulars and loose players. If I were you I'd play tight until you get comfortable with the table. See who you can loosen up against and who you can't. If your beating 1-5 7cs I'm sure you can beat 5-10. 10-20 on weekends have much better players IMO then 5-10. Try 5-10 and after beating it for a while try 10-20. Complete to 5.
Good Luck Paul
"Do people still play as loose as in the 1-5?"
They are still loose, but not as loose. Specifically, they tend to limp a lot for the bring-in, but fold a lot easier once there is any action.
"Are there a lot of skilled players?"
Virtually all players at this level are mediocre or worse. The only time you'll see a decent player (other than yourself) in these games is when the lists for everything higher are very long and people just try to get in any game.
"Are raises respected?"
Yes. There are a few steal situations, and raises definitely narrow the field on later streets.
"Am I better off sitting down at a 10-20?"
I think so. The rake is much less significant at 10-20, and the players aren't much better. 10-20 is also a more interesting game - tighter and more aggressive, and more of the "real stud" concepts come into play.
I prefer $10-$20 stud over $5-$10 stud because I can play looser and it's funner to play somewhat loose.
If you want to win consistently in 5-10 stud, you MUST play super TIGHT. The ante is 50 cents, low card brings it in for $2, and the first raiser puts in $5, and not $7. So there's $4 in antes in the pot and the house rakes an exorbitant 10% up to $4.
The rake is crushing, so you must really tighten up on third street. Folding only costs you 50 cents. Don't call for $2 unless you're willing to play for $5. The first raise is TEN TIMES the ante, and is 2.5 times the bring-in. In other forms of stud it's okay to limp in and then fold when raised on third street, but not in $5-$10. Sometimes I only play a few hands per hour.
Tend to raise and not call on third street with playable hands. $5-$10 players are loose enough that they'll cold-call with almost any hand they would have played for $2.
It's mandatory that the other players at your table are loose. You cannot overcome the rake otherwise.
Also, familiarize yourself with Slansky's "Horse Race" concept. Four-way action going into seventh street is fairly common in $5-$10 and you must know how to adapt to playing in multiway pots.
What is Sklansky's Horse Race concept? I have several of his books but have not heard of this. Where can I learn about it?
It is mentioned in SCSFAP21CE.
Good advice from everyone above. I prefer 10-20, but there usually is no "no smoking" games where I play (Trop in AC). I find the 5-10 quite easy to earn 10-15/hr just by playing solid agressive, somewhat tight game. In the 10-20 one can be a little more agressive especially on 3rd st. if one has a high card and good position. I find I can steel a lot of antes in good position in 10-20 but not in 5-10.
If you move up from 1-5 to 10-20, you will probably be uncomfortable at first. I would try the 5-10 and play tightly.
I have played in some incredibly loose 1-5 games at the Sands in AC where every hand was 5-6 way action. Anyone with a picture card played, and many had no idea of the effect of dead cards have. I actually have as good a hourly win in that 1-5 as I do at the Trop's 5-10.
Sklansky's horse race concept is explained not only in their "For Advanced Players" book but was first explained in Sklansky's "Getting the Best of It." Both books are mandatory for serious gamblers.
$5-$10 stud is a goldmine in Atlantic City. I can sit there and play extremely tight and the other players are so bad they don't adjust to their opponents. They not only play too many hands and go too far with them, but they also "miss" value bets that good players make.
But I hate playing so tight. In stud I can justify folding most playable hands in third street. If somebody raises to $5 on third street why bother calling for ten times the ante without very strong holdings?
I have found the 10-20 games are seldom multiway. Most time their spincters are very tight especially after a 3rd street raise and a scary 4th st card shows. Good-bye they say. If they stay, they got.
The 20-40 game is very nice but there are a couple players who really are good, and the variance is too much for me in that game.
I guess I got kinda a wild hair reading a poker article a few years back and decided to start raising with offbeat hands in the omaha/8 games I play in occasionally. These games are loosish $3-6 and $6-12 games at Hollywood Park and Commerce Casino. Usually the $3-6 game takes 6-7 players to the flop with raises before the flop only about once in every 10 hands. The $6-12 tends to be tighter with 4-5 players seeing the average flop. Also, I will only make these raises on the button or one off of it with at least 4 callers in. The blinds almost always call.
Specific hands I do this with are 2345 especially suited(which I only play for backdoor potential), high only hands such as AKQJ, AKQQ, AQJ10, etc always with a suite ace. I have had good results from this. I also think that it tends to add value to my image(similiar to raising preflop in HE with 89s and the like), although this is not really necessary because the players in these games are pretty awful. I do like to portray and overaggressive and unpredictable image though.
My questions is if these really are decent value plays. I am uncertain that these kind of playsreally have a +ev to them. I know I wind up dumping a heck of a lot of them, although I often get to see a free turn and the large pot gives me odds to see a river if I pick up the freebie draw when it is checked to me on the flop.
Sternroolz - Interesting. I wonder when you play?
I'm also playing some 3-6 and 6-12 at Hollywood Park. When I play there the pot is raised much more frequently than one hand in ten. Some regulars in the 6-12 game raise almost every time they enter the action. To a lesser extent, some players in the 3-6 game also raise most of the time when they enter the action. I would say the pot is raised more than half the time in both the 3-6 and 6-12 games during the hours I play.
My experience is that the 6-12 game at Hollywood Park is slightly tighter than the 3-6 game, but not by much. The play seems more aggressive in the 6-12 game. Loose players seem to come and go while tight players seem to play for longer periods in both games.
I don't like 2345 much, although I play it, and even raise with it sometimes. The reasons I don't like it are: (1) you really need to flop an ace to keep going, (2) it has poor high hand potential, and (3) it has poor scoop potential. A suited five doesn't add much value, in my estimation. Some, but not much. You hit a back-door flush about one hand out of twenty two and then (1) either someone else is likely to hold higher flush cards or (2) almost half of the time the board pairs, frequently giving someone a boat. Put that all together and if you hold a suited five, any flush you mike probably wins less than one hand out of a hundred for high. Just a guess. I'd be interested in simulation results or a more expert opinion.
I also play AKQJ (need suited ace or king), AKQQ (suited or not), and AQJ10 (need suited ace). It seems common practice for players to raise with these hands before the flop. Thus a raise before the flop usually either means acey deucy or four cards in the AKQJ range, one or the other. Depends on the player, of course. I also wonder about the +ev of these hands.
Usually when the game is passive with infrequent raising I play the same game, so as to fit in better. Makes for a better time for me than sitting down and going to war with the rest of the table. I find it's pretty hard to lose, even if I mostly give up raising, if my opponents are placid.
Buzz
You feel comfortable with a suited 5 for scoop potential? I'm just learning Omaha, but a suited K worries me when I pick up a flush draw. In the last tourney I played, I had 2 second nut flushes lose in a single round. Needless to say, I was on the rail in no time.
So much for a 5-high "flush". With 6 players taking the turn with you surely one of those 36 2-card combinations features a higher draw.
The main reason to raise is because your hand will win more often than the number of callers. Surely all these hands are significantly better than the average hand someone playing 80% of the time will play. Its a Real Good raise if they check-to-the-raiser DOH!
I like all these hands. 2345 is well on the way to scooping so long as you catch an Ace and a baby (just like AQJT catching a K and a big card).
- Louie
A debate came up in a game recently.
Another player, an inexperienced poker player who likes to argue, maintained that lowball is a far less complicated game than draw because in lowball "everybody is going for the same thing." By implication, he argued that lowball is easier and was based mostly on luck. Draw, he contended, requires more skill. According to him, he has more options to chose from on a given hand -- i.e., deciding whether to draw 1 to two pair or dump a pair and draw three. He saw lowball and razz as just waiting for that miracle card to complete a 7 low or 8 low.
I disagreed. The fundamental approach is the same -- starting hand selection relative to position, pot odds compared to drawing odds, and game adjustment are all important in both.
Any comments? If I'm wrong, and lowball is a lot easier, let me have it. As a beginner, I'm curious to see if these two games are that dissimilar.
Thanks,
Jon I.
First, I'm assuming you mean standard ace-to-five limit lowball versus jacks-or-better to open draw. Lowball is the easier of the two.
This is especially true if the must bet sevens rule is enforced (which is almost always the case). This means that both before the draw and after the draw you do not have the opportunity to sandbag (go for a check raise). Thus your playing decisions are much easier.
s
Here is an interesting hand where I realized I wasn't thinking correctly, at least I learned something.
I'm forced to bring in with (Q,7)2c and am called early by a loose player (?,?)2h one other caller with (?,?)7c.
4th St. I catch (Q,7)2c,2d. First caller catches (??)2h,6h and the last caller catches (??)7c,Js. Seeing an opportunity I make it a Big bet to try to win it right there. If I'm called I have a live Queen Kicker. I know my 2s are dead but I belive that I can win as a semi-bluff enough to make this profitable. the (??)2h,6h cold calls. and the other player folds.
I'm now thinking this person has a 4 flush or a gutshot straight. On 5th and 6th we both catch blanks with me betting and the 2 Flush cold calling.
7th street. Big screw-up I didn't make 2 pair, all I got is a pair of 2's. I check?! The 2 flush checks behind me and I win the showdown with a pair of 2's. I think everyone can tell me that I should have bet eventhough the only hands that would call would be one's that would beat mine. I should have bet just in case the Flush draw had backed into a small pair that they wouldn't have called on the end with. If I was raised I could pretty much be assured that I was beat.
Comments, I'm posting this so I never forget the mistake I made.
CV
cv,
I will assume the loose player had a 4-flush although you don't state it. I think you played the hand well as far as betting or not betting on 7th street do you think he would of called without a pair?? I see your logic that he could of folded a smaller pair but he could of also caught a straight or a flush. To win with a pair of 2's in my book is a great win betting all the way except on 7th. This proves the point once again that pairs are great heads-up which you got it to on 4th street vs a drawing hand. That is where you won the hand in my estimation.
paul the TOURIST
I think that there is a better chance that he made a pair or a Flush then there was of him busting out completely. I roughly figure he would have made a flush 7/32 times and a lone pair 11/32 times. It would be worth it for me to run into a Flush if I could convince him to throw away a single pair.
CV
cv,
I agree with that you should of bet, but I would give yourself some credit for winning a hand with the smallest pair, that had you not been the bring in you wouldn't of even considered playing the hand. Let me ask you a question since you were in the game did he make some gesture that made you not bet on the end. Or did you never win with a pair of 2's on the end so you went negative in your head so you checked. To me it's a mind game and even though you are correct to bet sometimes we don't always do the right thing because of something you saw in the player or it's a situation that you've never been in. I have made the wrong play in situations that I have never been in before and as you say you won't do it again. Even if I lost this hand to a pair of 4's I would still try to look at something positive in the hand and correct the negative in the future.
I don't know if that made any sense but either way I'm going to bed.
paul
It was on-line 4/8 Stud. I was definately happy I won, but I felt I made some mistakes. I'm still pretty new to stud so the last card down makes for some interesting situations that I'm not used too.
CV
cv,
on-line just bet.
paul
A double sized 4th street bet when the bring in pairs the door card LOOKS like a steal to me. A double sized check-raise is a lot more believable. A bet on the end looks VERY suspicious vrs a player clearly on a flush draw. Expect bright types to RAISE if they miss or call if they catch a pair.
You are a significant underdog on 4th when the 3-over card flush draw calls. I'm confident you are also an underdog on 5th. On 6th you are a small favorite unless he's already hit a pair. Betting for straight value on 5th/6th doesn't seem right to me.
But back to your point. It makes no difference if he misses completely. I count 6bb for you to steal. If he improves at all its PROBABLY to a pair. If he'll fold any one even 1/3 of the time then you CLEARLY must bet. Perhaps he'll notice that a pair of Aces is just as good/bad as a pair of 3s.
- Louie
Thanks for the comments Louie, good observations as usual. You bring up some major points that made me post this hand. My Big bet on 4th when, if I really had trip 2's, would have been an automatic Check raise or maybe just a small bet.
I was representing trip 2's or two pair on fourth. A check raise 4th would have just got more money in the pot and I don't think they would have folded. It was either bet big or get out. I also thought the two players I was against weren't too bright and had caught bad on 4th. On 5th and 6th I just couldn't see checking because the weakness I would show, remember that I was trying to represent trip 2's, and the probable flush draw hadn't caught anything.
If the oppostion was stonger or at least more aggressive it would have been a check and fold situation for sure. This is not a play I usually make and I felt thats why it needed to be posted.
Later CV
I am criticized by my friends for being too cautious and tight, yet I have a winning record and have made modest money. Here is 1 example where I did something that I was criticized for. I think I did the right thing. Please tell me what you think, because this or something very similar comes up often in 7CS.
5-10 7CS 8 players, .50 ante.
Seat 1 brings in with a duce;
seat 2 calls with a Jack
seat 3 raises with an Ace (probably has aces)
a 4 calls from seat 4
I fold with split Kings and a 6
Others fold
No Kings out; no Aces out.
Finally on 6th street everyone folds to the A who had Aces and 9’s
I cannot understand why my friends criticize my folding as having “no balls”
Comments please
you do quit early. with so many in with you the kings do have an earn here. plus to make the fold you need to be sure not just suspect he has aces. your real mistake is to let others know that you folded here. how can you expect to have people misread your hands when they know you fold hands that they dream of catching. this may be a reasonb you just make modest money as i think you are a good player. maybe you need to push some more of your marginal hands to confuse your opponents and make them fear you as they will have to play big pots with no idea of where they stand.
Its been my experience that high only hands like split Kings don't do very well with against multiple low draws - its too easy for one of them to back into two pair or a straight - and you have no idea when to continue betting and raising or check-calling.
In High Stud, you usually don't want to play this hand against a lot of opponents, and the same must be true for this game - especially since you're only going for half the pot.
I've been folding my high pairs if there are several limpers - but I play lower limits and there is no real reason to push marginal hands or confuse opponents. Should I be playing these hands more - raising with them on third street? - If this raise is ineffective at limiting the field?
~DjTj
and I thought it was simply because my underware was too tight.
My reasoning here was I was 90+% sure he had Aces. I know how he plays. Had he been 1st or last, I might have been suspect a steal. If I had a low pair like 3's or 4's I would have folded, but Aces beat Kings too, so I cannot see the difference here. I wonder if I am right 70% of the time and that is why I can make some modest safe money. Maybe I should go after that other 30%?
This is a good fold. If you want to tie into the hand, wait for a better kicker, such as a straight flush kicker, or flush, or straight kicker, or of course an overcard kicker to the opponents overpair to your pair. With the straight flush kicker for instance you wouldn't mind more opponents. If you end up with 2 opponents, it is not so necessary to knock out a 3rd opponent, because K's up would most likely beat him, and you would have to improve anyway to beat aces that may go dry. To me, with this hand, it is the kicker that one needs to look at.
Hopefully someone will run a hot-and-cold simulation: xAA vrs KK6 vrs J73s vrs 54h4 to see if you hand really has much "of a win here". Otherwise Ditto Zee especially the part about "probably" not being good enough.
If I were SURE I would fold. Otherwise, Tally-Ho!!
A strategy of being sure you have a good steal or the better hand on 3rd is a GOOD strategy overall. Stick to it until a time comes where you are sure you can push the opponents around with ease.
- Louie
How about raising him here, seeing if he'll re-raise, and driving the deuce and four out to get it heads up with the ace?
Ten dollars is not that much to waste in this spot, with almost twenty in the pot already, and your hand not being that big of a dog to aces at this point.
I am pretty sure that if I raise, he reraises. If others stay with us, the implied odds make the flush draws tag along; not good for 2nd higest pair. If I go heads-up, I have a problem.
I will run the simulation later tonight. I certainly take Ray Zee's point seriously, but I do not think I have developed the skills well enough to play Kings against Aces yet. Someday soon I will.
I think that you want to get it heads up if you are going to play at all, so his re-raising helps, rather than hurts.
However, I also don't think that you lost much EV by throwing the hand away, in 5-10 stud, although I think the penalty is greater in 15-30, and gets worse as you go on up, and sometimes, mere mortals must do things to survive that the gods scoff at.
I used to play a lot of 5-10, and in fact averaged about two big bets an hour at it for some time--and I made an occasional big and early laydown like this myself against a tight player. I think if you want to win bigger, or move to bigger games, you must loosen up, but I have known myself to take that logic to an extreme.
Ray has an interesting point - but using his logic then he would play any split pair against the possible Aces, and I don't think that is wise in a 5-10 game.
Your later discusion about taking the logic too far in larger games seems correct, but remember in the larger games the player may not be as likely to have the Aces.
I too would follow West's advise & throw the split Kings away against the player you described, but I would play burried Kings.
The implied odds with burried Kings makes them playable especially if there are no Kings showing (gives me at least 6-12% better chance). Still, I am the 1.7-2:1 dog, but hitting a King would be sweet.
Let me give you a bit of background before I get to the point....
There's a liquor store in my neighborhood that I patronize occasionally. They're never very busy, and usually the two employees are playing Playstation and smoking cigarettes, even on a Saturday night, when one would expect them to be swamped. I've often thought of asking for a job there, since they seem to have such a good time, but I don't speak Cantonese, or whatever it is they speak there.
Well, I was walking by just now and decided to pick up a bottle of whiskey. Lo and behold, there, right behind the counter, on top of two stacked boxes, one of the employees (owner?) and another guy were playing poker! They didn't even use chips... just a deck of cards and stacks of 20s! Right behind the register!
They were playing heads up, 5 card stud, with either the 4th or 5th card dealt face down. I couldn't tell, because they only got that far a couple of times when I was in the store, and I was trying not to stare. Betting was not structured (when one guy bet $40 on the end the other guy said "only $40?") but was in $20 increments. Couldn't tell if it was PL, NL, or if there was just a maximum bet. I never saw a bet over $40. I asked if they ever played holdem (my best game) and they'd never heard of it, and didn't seem to feel like talking. The owner/employee seemed to be ahead, unless he just put much more money into play than the other guy. He lost while I was in the store.
Needless to say, I was dying to play. But since I only had around $150 on me, and my 5cs experience is limited to watching "The Cincinatti Kid", I cashed in my $9 worth of Big Game tickets, took my bottle, and came home to play Paradise Poker where I know I can make some money.
Now that I know this guy, just two blocks from home, is willing to put close to a grand into play, I'm considering showing up there sometime soon looking for a game. If I can get him to play HE with me, I "know" I can have a nice payday. It seems like anyone playing that game is likely more of a gambler than a player. Anyone who's never heard of holdem has obviously never played in a casino game, and I've never met a home game player who I couldn't beat.
The thing is, I can't show up there unless I'm willing to play his game as well. Although good poker will always win the money, if he plays this game all the time, I'll be at a considerable disadvantage. Money can go fast heads up.
So... the point... Does anyone have any advice, or links to advice, on how to play this game. Heads up is obviously very psychological, but I'd like to have some kind of a foundation. I also figure getting a friend or two to play it with me for small bets before I play for a $20 minimum.
Thanks. B$
5CS is very very random, it is gambling. There really isn't much room for skill other than getting out if you are beat and not chasing foolishly. Your hole card is ultra critical make sure it is paired or else greater than ten. I would play tight.
See if you can get him to play a 5CS stud varient like canadian stud (twopair > four flush > 4 str8 > pair) which has some amount of skill in it.
Perhaps he might like heads up Pai-gow poker, if you memorize the Flamingo Hilton's house way from http://www.thewizardofodds.com you should be able to hold your own.
in my hayday id be in the store showing him how to play whatever my best game was whenever it was slow. no stakes or small stakes so he would be inclined to practice and learn he would of course break even the first time and then get stuck quick from then on and let him steam off his money. when i left id have all the dough and most of the booze.
In your "hayday"... don't you play the unibomber heads up 7cs in some Montana liquor store, even now?
Does anyone here have any thoughts/experiences/warnings about mambo stud. I am planing to introduce it in my local home game. From what I've read on the internet, it seems to be fast, exciting and build large pots even at low limits.
"From what I've read on the internet, it seems to be fast, exciting and build large pots even at low limits."
You must have read that from the game's creators. Mambo stud is a flawed game, and I recommend you don't introduce it. The intention was to improve on 1-5 no-ante stud, with a faster game with more action. In reality, Mambo has minimal skill except for not playing certain terrible starting hands. The river card is way too significant, and basically makes the game a crapshoot. And you don't build huge pots, since there's no real way to figure out where you stand except for the very rare time you get a lock before the last card. A typical Mambo hand - 5-7 people call the bring-in, the hand is checked to the river, and someone bets five, there's one or two callers, and high and low split about $2 after rake. I played it during the first week the game was spread, and even then they were having trouble keeping the game full.
I had read lou Kreiger's article about his trip to AC when they introduced it at the Taj. He seemed positive about it. His strategy made it sound like Open Omaha so I thought I could parley my O/8 skills and come out a winner
I've been trying to find a fast high varience game with out wild cards. What are the starting hands to aviod/keep??
based on my simple analysis
To start with:
A-6 Any suit, A-X double suited, 23-24 any suit, AA,
After the turn:
any A/K flush, any 5-lo, AAX double suited, 6-lo conectors,
On the River:
Ace-hi flush/SF, str8's, Trips, A2X lows, A3X lows,
i wonder if Mason could give his opinion on this, since it was left out of one of his poker essays book, because there weren't very many games. This has changed: there are now 7cs8 games in every big club in Southern California--usually at the 20-40 limit with a three dollar ante and five dollar bring-in.
The games are usually quite loose, with a lot of players playing bad hands like 7-5-3 for low or A-9-7 suited for high. I am no expert at this game, but just by playing tight, it seems like you can grind out a decent win, without too much risk.
Neither of those hands is "bad." They aren't monsters, but are definitely playable in the right spots.
The bankroll requirement will depend a lot on how the game plays. In a tight game, with a lot of pots heads-up by fourth street, the variance will be *way* lower than in a game which frequently has multiway action on later streets and high-low raising wars with people trapped in the middle.
i play 357 and a97 suited quite often especially in loose games with bad players. but im not trying to grind out anything im trying to win the most money for the time i put in. the money is won playing well not playing tight although tight is good. i always figure that anyone stuck 300 top bets is a sure loser at the game. 200 top bets probably one and 100 top bets could be one and favors that side. but if you have other means to replenish your bankroll take flyers at the games and pick your spots.
I will do so, and according to both you and Dan, maybe I better loosen up (a little). Unfortunately, I am trying to grind out a nice little win until my bankroll re-fattens . . . and on top of that, being so new to the game, I figure tighter is better. My image is such that I can steal easily on later streets when my opponents hand has turned into As9s7sKc4h...
I guess the way to loosen up would be to play these and throw them away on fourth street unless you catch well.
Playing a loose ridiculous passive 2/4 Omaha 8 game at Paradise Poker. A game I am still trying to get a grip on.
I am in the big blind with Ah2dQsJs. First two fold and everyone else calls to me. Now I know in Hold’em you should be raising with 88, JTs, ATs, KQ and the like, just to build a pot that you have more than you fair share of. I assume a similar thing applies in Omaha 8. I wondered if any one had opinions as to what range of hands should raise here?
In practise I decided that A2QJs fitted the bill and raised. A happy ending when I flopped the nut low which won half the pot.
I would raise in the blinds with that hand. I don't raise with junk in the blinds, but that's a pretty good hand.
With this hand I would limp in with that many callers. Your hand could be easily duplicated by someone else and you'll likely get quartered.
This is a good question. Usually, I try to see the flop cheaply, as I've had far to many A234s annihaleted on the flop. I try to limit the field with big pairs(AA, or King...plus the others). A 2 way hand appears critical in most tough games. This hand qualifies.
Disagree with limping because I might get quartered. This is a reason to raise with 8 other people in the pot. You want to get as much dead money into the pot in case you are quartered. That way you will still come out ahead if the nut low draw hits.
Raising in early position is a limp for sure. You want as many callers as possible.
Here is a small problem that I have with 7CS. As the low bring in I bet the required minimum and have several other callers with no raises. So I get a free card and pair up my door 2 or 3. I have two bad cards in the hole, but no one else looked to have improved either. I’m now high, should I bet the max (with a pair), half a bet or just check?
I find that a high bet may get one person to fold and the rest will call, and a check will go around. I do know a pair of twos or threes are not very good and someone who got a seven to pair one of their hole card has me beat.
Any advise on a low bring in now high? Maybe the best is to check and fold, which I do most of the time.
Thanks
This happens a lot. It is not a problem in 1-5 no ante games. Simply fold if you are in bad position or your kickers are small or duped. A "no brainer" (I hate that saying). In a 5-10, it could be a factor but it is very dependent on position and live cards. In a 10-20 game with no raisers and $15-20 in the pot, I find it profitable to bet the max if others appear weak (i.e. duplicated cards and none of mine are duped). I know I am not getting the right odds, but pairing the door card with no raisers looks strong. If raised, I would fold but I would "think about it" as if I had a bigger pair.
Scott,
You should always check in that situation. It's really not a good hand to bluff with. Someone who stayed in better. Few are going to think you now have two pairs or trips.
I remember ending up with four deuces in a 1-3 game. I bet two. No one thought I had anything. Luckily several people had full houses, so it was a profitable hand.
Rockhard
Scott,
See C. Vill. thread below where he was the bring in and won with 2'S.
paul
Expanding on my point as I recall something from the green book. Betting the max when you pair your door card even if it is low should slow down most other bettors especially if you do not show weakness. What is nice about betting the max in this case is you might be able to win the pot on 5th street almost as a steal if (1) you get a scary card and others hit blanks (2) you could get another match (3) you can still exert control over others, and if you check on 6th st you might still get checked around because of the fear of a check raise. Of course if someone bets, I would fold the low pair, probably.
Basically, when you pair your door card in $1-3 or $1-5 stud very few care. This is great if you actually have a set, but not so good if you're trying to bluff.
Richard
I think that is why multiway hands are good in 1-3 and 1-5 along with big pairs.
I like it better when someone else gets a low pair, that way I can bet the max off his pair or get a full raise in if he bets. I think it’s a lot easier for someone else other than the person who pairs up to steal with a bet or raise.
That definitely puts the pressure on the low pair. I see this often in 10-20. If the low pair was on a steal, it is usually a good idea for him to abandon ship and save the bet for another good hand. Too often I see the "low pair"ssed and throw a bet in bacause "he has his money in the pot. Bull$#@t, once your money is in the pot, it ain't yours anymore.
Difficult to argue Ray's point especially about playing Kings against Aces as a way to mix up your play and still get some value. It is certainly better to play Kings than, say, fives, just in case the Aces fold later if they do not improve, but back to the main argument. I must say I was surprised with the With respect to a previous post where I wondered if it was correct to fold Kings when I was pretty sure Aces were top hand in 7CS. Further examination turned up this: 1. According to Roy West, it would be equally foolish to chase Aces with Kings as it would be to chase with Aces with duces, since Aces beat both.
2. In Sklansky et. al's. book, it is suggested one folds if "you are positive you are against a bigger pair". The question is what does positive mean. To me that is 95%.
3. The Green Book simulation of 100,000 hands shows A,A,7 vs Q,Q,7 shows the Q,Q as a 2:1 dog (66, 604 vs 33,396).
4. Using Wilson Software simulator gave 59,1000 vs 32,100 with the balance 9,000 split among the others; so an almost 2:1 dog again.
Comments are appreciated
What do you mean by 95% sure? How do you know when you are 95% sure?
Aces in the hole are hard to figure out. Does an Ace on the board make you 95% sure? Or does only an Ace as the top card on third street that the player bets with make you 95% sure? How about the type of player you are against. Does the possibility/probability that he is bluffing reduce your sureness? How about aces on the board but in different peoples hands? Does that make is less likely or more likely that someone has aces?
95% sure is a subjective standard. What I'm asking is exactly when does that little voice in your head say 95%. It is when you havn't been in a hand for a while and your hoping this time is the time?
I guess what your saying is that you probably will always play the Kings, unless the player with an Ace on the board bets repeatedly and you decide not to take the chance that he is bluffing.
This weekend I won with kings, lost with kings, and folded with kings thinking I was against aces when I wasn't. What should I do.
To a perso who works in numbers every day, estimating a probability of 95% is not so difficult. The 95% is not as subjective as you think. Here is what goes into it. (1) no other Aces showing (2) Ace raises when there are still people to speak (3) Ace raises when other picture cards are in view (4) no dupes so cards look live (5) the nature of the player (solid/timid/foolish?) (6) previous experience says that "this" player does not bluff often and seldom raises without top pair when there atre other picture cards to act.
The issue is that you are a 2:1 underdog with Kings against aces. If you want the risk, then go ahead, but I think playing Kings against Aces is useful as a "change of style" just to keep players guessing about you, and sometimes you will win. If you fold them early, your losses will be low. If you press them and go to the river, your losses will be high. If you think you will win consistantly playing Kings against Aces, you are mistaken. It ain't much different playing 5's or Kings against Aces. Aces win. Try it, but bring your Visa.
Your main point is clear.
If your opponent raises with (??)As. How likly is he to have a pair of Aces when he will also raise with a Three Flush with Ace showing and a pocket pair with an Ace showing? What if his Flush cards are out, how likely will he be to have just a pocket pair?
In my experience he would have to be a very Tight and Timid player not to raise with those hands also.
Later, CV
On the contrary, for him to raise with a 3 flush in my opinion is not a good bet. If I have a 3-flush Ace high, I want people in. If I raise, it would be late to get more money in the pot. I probably would not raise on 3rd st anyway at least most of the time. A single Ace with a small pocket pair and a raise in that position sounds like an ante steal to me.
Ratso,
"5-10 7CS 8 players, .50 ante. Seat 1 brings in with a duce; seat 2 calls with a Jack seat 3 raises with an Ace (probably has aces) a 4 calls from seat 4 I fold with split Kings and a 6 Others fold No Kings out; no Aces out."
In the above example there are 5 players even if you just stay for one card assuming all players stay that is $29 in the pot. That's makes K's playable. I think that is what Ray is speaking of but then I could be wrong. Those simulations were all HTH I ass